florida marlins rant with chicago references

i stand corrected, I see jessica's post.
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

They go there for a number of reasons, but mainly because they enjoy
themselves... you think the white sox have a monopoly on "good
baseball?" doubtful.

Face it there are more baseball and non baseball fans of cubs than
white sox (In Chicago and the world) There are a lot of reasons for
this; a better stadium is only one of many. Please read my intial post
on my opinions for this.

Even if what you say is true for some of the fans, why would they
like/choose one ball park over the other? Why are some restaurants more
popular/successful than others?
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

100% true
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

well, then you are wrong because in the 40's and 50's, Comiskey Park was
packed most of the time and outdrew the Cubs. How far back do you want to
go?

For 25 years, the Cubs have filled Wrigley, even in bad times, because the
fans there don't go to see good baseball, they go to the party.

--
Richardson/Bayh in 2008
Cause I feel like voting for a democrat this time around.

"boca brian" <bocabrian.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134421013.794755.280090@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> I was certainly not making yoka's point... I was merely pointing out
> the fallacy of his contention....there were plenty of other years that
> the cubs did not draw well, that is just the best example.
>
> if any of what you wrote was true (outside of point 3) would it be so
> popular and consistently ranked among the best? I think you have made
> others point for them when they sox fans have a warped sense of reality
> and an unexplained and irrational inferiority complex.....
>
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

Wrigley was once a solely daylight ballpark when they hit attendance
records. The Cubs were a mediocre team with a mediocre fanbase until they
returned to the big named sluggers Dave Kingman and Andre Dawson. When they
finally reached national recognition, Dallas Green built it into a sound
team defensively with excellent pitching and their sluggers in the right
power positions. Unfortunately, they never met - as expected, the Detroit
Tigers however Wrigley as a result, then became an out of state baseball
fan's primary visitation site while in Chicago.
Comiskey always remained the city's night time ballpark. The flooring always
seemed to sweat during the hot months, which made it seem sticky. But if you
were to ask most fans which park they liked the best, Wrigley was known as
the better daytime park and Comiskey seemed to have more mystique at night.
The winds at Comiskey would swirl more at night, while the upper deck
walkways had a better view of downtown. The U.S. Cellular (although I've
never actually been there but have passed by it), appears more open aired
than old Comiskey. Yet now that the World Series has shown much of the
field, it can be expected to be a larger attraction to all baseball fans
because the design is actually more appealing - without the old I-beams
blocking the fans view, like Wrigley. Also, Comiskey never received much
praised because of the known structural weaknesses that needed a bit of
scrutiny and continuing repairs. .

"boca brian" <bocabrian.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134396776.797184.127150@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I find it amazing that some cant understand the appeal of wrigley...I
> wonder why most new baseball stadiums (camden yards, coors field,
> pacbell, enron/minute maid, miller park, pnc park, jacobs field). I
> say most, guess which idiot owner did not try to copy wrigley?
> Reinsdork and the ball mall. I think that is the only baseball stadium
> built since 1990 that tried to copy busch stadium and not wrigley.
>
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

Also, I've been to Crosley Field years ago and thought it was a bit similar
to Comiskey - except the field seemed closer to the stands. Yet both
northside and southside ballparks had similar field dimensions.
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

I certainly never argued that there weren't more Cub fans than Sox fans.
Cubs went national with their games while the Sox went pay for view. Dumb
move on the part of the Sox. But I've been to both ball parks many times,
living in Chicago, and Wrigley is not a better ball park.

--
Richardson/Bayh in 2008
Cause I feel like voting for a democrat this time around.

"boca brian" <bocabrian DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134425561.108960.281520@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> They go there for a number of reasons, but mainly because they enjoy
> themselves... you think the white sox have a monopoly on "good
> baseball?" doubtful.
>
> Face it there are more baseball and non baseball fans of cubs than
> white sox (In Chicago and the world) There are a lot of reasons for
> this; a better stadium is only one of many. Please read my intial post
> on my opinions for this.
>
> Even if what you say is true for some of the fans, why would they
> like/choose one ball park over the other? Why are some restaurants more
> popular/successful than others?
>
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

Yea, we World Series winning Chicago White Sox fans have an inferiority
complex.

I hear Ecuador has a lady who is 116 years old, so at least someone is
around to remember the last time the Cubs won a series.

Na na na na, hey hey, good bye.

The Cell does have something Miami doesn't - a baseball team after 2007.
Maybe Vegas will build a nice replica of Wrigley field and include the
unemployed, the gays, the drug addicts, the drunks, the necrophiliacs and
the suburban yuppies looking to score.

--
Richardson/Bayh in 2008
Cause I feel like voting for a democrat this time around.

"boca brian" <bocabrian DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134421162.304487.18440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> no inferiority complex? that is exactly the point I am making, it
> takes my than a winning team to generate strong attendance...
>
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

"boca brian" <bocabrian.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134421013.794755.280090@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> I was certainly not making yoka's point... I was merely pointing out
> the fallacy of his contention....there were plenty of other years that
> the cubs did not draw well, that is just the best example.

If there were other years since then, then name them. There haven't been
many, if any.

>
> if any of what you wrote was true (outside of point 3) would it be so
> popular and consistently ranked among the best? I think you have made
> others point for them when they sox fans have a warped sense of reality
> and an unexplained and irrational inferiority complex.....
>

1) When it is ranked the best, it's by fans, not the players.
2) When it is ranked the best, it's by fans on the Cubs bandwagon, not fans
as a whole. I'm not saying that the majority of fans don't like the park,
just that, overall, fans other than Cub fans don't think of it as the
"shrine" that you guys do.
3) What wasn't true about the "decades of beer smell", losing popups to the
upper deck overhang (someone else mentioned this), the concrete falling off
the structure, and the antiquated players' facilities? I'll give you that
the food quality is subject to one's taste.
4) Why the personal attack at the end? I'm just stating my opinion, same as
you. Or are people only allowed to state their opinion if they agree with
you? The fact that you have to resort to a personal attack just shows that
you couldn't find a better argument for your position.
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

"boca brian" <bocabrian RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1134421162.304487.18440@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> no inferiority complex? that is exactly the point I am making, it
> takes my than a winning team to generate strong attendance...
>

Which is what I mentioned in my first post - the Cubs beat the Sox at the
marketing game - big time! They've made a (for the most part) bad team into
lovable losers. And they've turned a classic, but antequated ballpark into
a "shrine". Great marketing! But great marketing doesn't make the team
better, and it doesn't make the park better. It just gets people on the
bandwagon.
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references 

Can you give any facts to back that up? It's a nice, airy, wide open, and
fairly clean stadium. And, in the last few offseasons, it's been spruced up
so that it is no longer such a sterile place.

Look, you don't like the place? Fine - that's your right. But if you're
going to trash the place, at least give some examples as to why.

And, yes, the stadium was ramrodded through Springfield. I'm a Sox fan, not
necessarily a Reinsdorf fan. But you Cubs fans have been getting screwed
with, as well. The team keeps giving you the impression that they're
putting a quality team together, and every year you get disappointed. Why?
Because they're not really trying to put together a first rate team. Why
should they spend that much money? They already sell out most games. They
just have to spend enough to make sure that you keep coming back. Why do
you think that, out of nowhere, they signed two free agents and traded beans
for a center fielder? Because, all of a sudden, everyone's interested in
the Sox. Why do you think that they kept trotting Corey Patterson out
there? He's been a bust since day one - but he was cheap, and they kept
touting how good he'd be once he "matured".

"Jed Taylor" <asbcc.TakeThisOut@offthedial.com> wrote in message
news:lvvrp11id9uan9u7m4a65chi5d72so8jto@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:58:49 -0600, "poka yoke" <a.TakeThisOut@b.c> wrote:
>
> >The Cell is a fine ballpark and will be recognized as such as time goes
on.
>
>
> New Comiskey is a concrete albatross that has been specifically used
> as a the model for what-not-to-build ever since its completion. The
> only thing that will ever make it a "fine ballpark" is a fleet of
> trucks filled with C-4.
>
> It's also a fine testament to how rich owners screw taxpayers out of
> hundreds of millions of dollars. That characteristic, however, hardly
> makes it unique.
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------
> "I am the federal government."
> - Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX)
 >> Stay informed about: florida marlins rant with chicago references