On Wrigley Field and the Future
Something that hasn't gotten too much play since the Holy Shit Carlos Zambrano No-No is that he said something along the lines of "I wish we could play at a new park all the time." This slagging of Wrigley Field is permissable because The Big Moose is an ace who just made history, but most days fans would be up in arms about such a ... erm, reasonable statement.
I mean, no kidding. Wrigley Field is old. Real old. While I think few Cub fans would advocate that they take a bulldozer to the place, we have to admit that the ballpark is in need of some serious work in order to ensure that the team will continue to play there into its second century.
If and when these renovations take place - and I basically envision them completely taking apart the upper deck and extending the clubhouses a bit - the Cubs will likely play their games in another park for minimally one year, and possibly two or three.
So, let's open it up to discussion and debate. If the Cubs have to play outside of Wrigley, where should they go? Would you rather see them play 2 years in the Cell, or 2 years in Milwaukee? Is Milwaukee even possible, or is it too far away and too much of a stretch on the "Chicago" aspect of the Cubs?
And if the Cubs won their first World Series in a century in a ballpark other than Wrigley, how would you feel? Upset? Uncaring?
Share in the comments.