Shut up until your investment owns a World Series title. Something about them makes me a little nervous. Can't put my finger on it, but I give it until June when Mike D. will begin wishing Andy MacPhail or Don Grenesko or John Madigan still ran the club.
Fuck it. Joe Ricketts will lead Mitt Romney to the White House and then crankily take over the Cubs from his children and within 60 days have them into a 1927 Yankees-esque juggernaut before running for Mayor of Chicago in 2 1/2 years and crushing Rahm in a landslide.
Goddamn it. I like J. Joseph Ricketts the best, and I think he'd lead the franchise to great things. Alas, Tom, Todd, Laura and Pete have only 50% of his DNA.
Not a fan of this WAY OF LIFE crap, either. It's plastered all over the website, the print ad zoomed in on some guy stuffing his face is positively White Soxian, and the announcement over the PA that WGN picked up ("It's not just a ticket to a game, it's a ticket to a WAY OF LIFE") is idiotic. And they have the balls to put ads on the precious bricks, so we know they'll stop at nothing!
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 03:58:51 PM
Not a fan of this WAY OF LIFE crap, either. It's plastered all over the website, the print ad zoomed in on some guy stuffing his face is positively White Soxian, and the announcement over the PA that WGN picked up ("It's not just a ticket to a game, it's a ticket to a WAY OF LIFE") is idiotic. And they have the balls to put ads on the precious bricks, so we know they'll stop at nothing!
Just win the fucking pennant, and leave us the hell alone. I'm sure Tom Ricketts and family are great people, but ....
Quote from: Brownie on April 12, 2010, 04:00:27 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 03:58:51 PM
Not a fan of this WAY OF LIFE crap, either. It's plastered all over the website, the print ad zoomed in on some guy stuffing his face is positively White Soxian, and the announcement over the PA that WGN picked up ("It's not just a ticket to a game, it's a ticket to a WAY OF LIFE") is idiotic. And they have the balls to put ads on the precious bricks, so we know they'll stop at nothing!
Just win the fucking pennant, and leave us the hell alone. I'm sure Tom Ricketts and family are great people, but ....
That would be my "marketing campaign." Chicago Cubs: Fucking Win, Damn It.
DPD. Seriously?
(http://i44.tinypic.com/sv0w1c.jpg)
If they're trying to get people to watch games on TV, it's brilliant.
On second thought, maybe it's a cross-campaign with the health department.
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:02:57 PM
DPD. Seriously?
(http://i44.tinypic.com/sv0w1c.jpg)
If they're trying to get people to watch games on TV, it's brilliant.
Holy fuck, is that real?
That is mind-numbingly awful.
Sadly, yes. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100408&content_id=9141550&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc) I saw it elsewhere first and thought for sure it was a Photoshop parody. Had a good laugh, went to the Cubs website, and ... oh.
Quote from: PenFoe on April 12, 2010, 04:04:26 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:02:57 PM
DPD. Seriously?
(http://i44.tinypic.com/sv0w1c.jpg)
If they're trying to get people to watch games on TV, it's brilliant.
Holy fuck, is that real?
That is mind-numbingly awful.
Is that bologna? Where's the tomato?
The Ricketts don't get it.
Quote from: Brownie on April 12, 2010, 04:09:09 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 12, 2010, 04:04:26 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:02:57 PM
DPD. Seriously?
(http://i44.tinypic.com/sv0w1c.jpg)
If they're trying to get people to watch games on TV, it's brilliant.
Holy fuck, is that real?
That is mind-numbingly awful.
Is that bologna? Where's the tomato?
The Ricketts don't get it.
What has two thumbs as is very, very ashamed of his former employer?
Quote
The ad campaign was developed by Draftfcb
<----- This guy.
Yes, Chipper.
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:02:57 PM
DPD. Seriously?
(http://i44.tinypic.com/sv0w1c.jpg)
If they're trying to get people to watch games on TV, it's brilliant.
On second thought, maybe it's a cross-campaign with the health department.
Al? Is that you?
Quote from: Armchair_QB on April 12, 2010, 04:13:16 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:02:57 PM
DPD. Seriously?
(http://i44.tinypic.com/sv0w1c.jpg)
If they're trying to get people to watch games on TV, it's brilliant.
On second thought, maybe it's a cross-campaign with the health department.
Al? Is that you?
He's already the media-approved Voice of the Cubs Fan, so I'm sure being the mouth is part of the deal. See what happens when you interview Crane Kenney?
(http://media1.suburbanchicagonews.com/multimedia/041210lewB_cst_feed_20100411_14_14_42_39559-116-165.imageContent)
Couldn't find a bigger pic, but I found this to be creepy-as-fuck.
Quote from: Simmer on April 12, 2010, 04:22:13 PM
(http://media1.suburbanchicagonews.com/multimedia/041210lewB_cst_feed_20100411_14_14_42_39559-116-165.imageContent)
Couldn't find a bigger pic, but I found this to be creepy-as-fuck.
Are you sure that's not an ad for rohypnol?
Quote from: Simmer on April 12, 2010, 04:22:13 PM
(http://media1.suburbanchicagonews.com/multimedia/041210lewB_cst_feed_20100411_14_14_42_39559-116-165.imageContent)
Couldn't find a bigger pic, but I found this to be creepy-as-fuck.
I saw this, and thought the same thing. I'm assuming they're running this ad and will soon announce that those under 2 must have a ticket.
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:07:10 PM
Sadly, yes. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100408&content_id=9141550&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc) I saw it elsewhere first and thought for sure it was a Photoshop parody. Had a good laugh, went to the Cubs website, and ... oh.
As in "I don't get this Al Yellon Photoshop"?
Quote from: RedBeard on April 12, 2010, 09:14:43 PM
Quote from: Day Man on April 12, 2010, 04:07:10 PM
Sadly, yes. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100408&content_id=9141550&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc) I saw it elsewhere first and thought for sure it was a Photoshop parody. Had a good laugh, went to the Cubs website, and ... oh.
As in "I don't get this Al Yellon Photoshop"?
Exactly.
I guess one could argue if they REALLY want to make a Way of Life (tm) ad, should it not feature a Chad and/or Trixie?
Quote from: RedBeard on April 12, 2010, 10:15:33 PM
I guess one could argue if they REALLY want to make a Way of Life (tm) ad, should it not feature a Chad and/or Trixie?
I think it should show me urinating in someone's yard.
Quote from: Internet Apex on April 13, 2010, 07:32:27 AM
Quote from: RedBeard on April 12, 2010, 10:15:33 PM
I guess one could argue if they REALLY want to make a Way of Life (tm) ad, should it not feature a Chad and/or Trixie?
I think it should show me urinating in someone's yard.
That would work great!
"W"ater the Vines of Hope!
I saw Tom Ricketts while he was being interviewed on The Score yesterday morning. He's pretty tall. Like 6'3"ish.
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on April 13, 2010, 09:03:01 AM
I saw Tom Ricketts while he was being interviewed on The Score yesterday morning. He's pretty tall. Like 6'3"ish.
And then what did you see? Keep going - I don't want this story to end.
Quote from: Slaky on April 13, 2010, 09:15:40 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on April 13, 2010, 09:03:01 AM
I saw Tom Ricketts while he was being interviewed on The Score yesterday morning. He's pretty tall. Like 6'3"ish.
And then what did you see? Keep going - I don't want this story to end.
Nothing. I blacked out.
As a one-time marketing guy...I'm maybe not as offended by this as most of you guys because there's a tactical value to it. There is a segment out there that really gets into slogans and the like ...probably a larger number than are actively offended by them. From a strict business perspective, this probably makes some sense for the Cubs. Most teams seems to have these slogans or themes...some will refresh them every year. This kind of thing was remarkably absent during the Tribune's time as owners...other than 1995, or whenever it was that McPhail took over and we got that one season of "We're working on it"...which I thought was pretty silly when accompanied by the video footage chronicling the team's on-field incompetence. Maybe I'm an idiot...but I 've always thought that was a pretty good campaign.
This Way of Life thing also annoys me less than the whole "Year 1" thing that also seems to be floating out there in some places. There's nothing "fresh" about this group of Cubs.
I will cheer the Ricketts for getting some cup holders over installed over the troughs though. That pleased me yesterday.
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on April 13, 2010, 11:14:22 AM
As a one-time marketing guy...I'm maybe not as offended by this as most of you guys because there's a tactical value to it. There is a segment out there that really gets into slogans and the like ...probably a larger number than are actively offended by them. From a strict business perspective, this probably makes some sense for the Cubs. Most teams seems to have these slogans or themes...some will refresh them every year. This kind of thing was remarkably absent during the Tribune's time as owners...other than 1995, or whenever it was that McPhail took over and we got that one season of "We're working on it"...which I thought was pretty silly when accompanied by the video footage chronicling the team's on-field incompetence. Maybe I'm an idiot...but I 've always thought that was a pretty good campaign.
This Way of Life thing also annoys me less than the whole "Year 1" thing that also seems to be floating out there in some places. There's nothing "fresh" about this group of Cubs.
I will cheer the Ricketts for getting some cup holders over installed over the troughs though. That pleased me yesterday.
Pen could have come up with something way worse
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on April 13, 2010, 11:16:22 AM
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on April 13, 2010, 11:14:22 AM
As a one-time marketing guy...I'm maybe not as offended by this as most of you guys because there's a tactical value to it. There is a segment out there that really gets into slogans and the like ...probably a larger number than are actively offended by them. From a strict business perspective, this probably makes some sense for the Cubs. Most teams seems to have these slogans or themes...some will refresh them every year. This kind of thing was remarkably absent during the Tribune's time as owners...other than 1995, or whenever it was that McPhail took over and we got that one season of "We're working on it"...which I thought was pretty silly when accompanied by the video footage chronicling the team's on-field incompetence. Maybe I'm an idiot...but I 've always thought that was a pretty good campaign.
This Way of Life thing also annoys me less than the whole "Year 1" thing that also seems to be floating out there in some places. There's nothing "fresh" about this group of Cubs.
I will cheer the Ricketts for getting some cup holders over installed over the troughs though. That pleased me yesterday.
Pen could have come up with something way worse
The only thing better than Pen's slogan are the deals.
I'm surprised they didn't roll out a slogan like, "2010 Chicago Cubs: Now 100% Milton-Free!"
Big shocker. The lemmings are tripping all over themselves to deliver sloppy rim jobs to Tom. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2010/4/13/1418633/tom-ricketts-visits-the-bleachers)
Some of the gems...
Quote from: Lemming #1I just love the Ricketts. They get it and they know how to connect.
Yes, because they walked through the park on Opening Day. Nothing says "regular guy" like a billionaire owner daring to walk amongst the plebes for some photo ops.
Quote from: Lemming #2That's awesome. I hope to meet him someday.
Dare to dream, little man.
Quote from: Lemming #3what a badass. love to meet him
A badass? Really?
Quote from: Lemming #4Unbelievable. So much for the stuffed shirt corporate stiff who hides out in his luxury suite. What a novel approach, talking to fans!
Yes. He's a regular guy! Like us! Only a billion times richer.
Quote from: Longwinded LemmingSo far, so awesome with the Ricketts. I love this guy. It's like having our very own Steinbrenner, except not paranoid or crazy. He's basically doing exactly what you or I would do if all of our dreams came true and we owned the Cubs.
The Ricketts basically bet their entire family fortune on this, and it's going to work out better than anyone could have hoped.
I predict that in 20 years when Tom is handing the reins to one of his kids, Wrigley will be completely rebuilt, the Cubs will have contended in essentially every season, the Ricketts family will be Chicago royalty, and their family name will be as well-known nationally as the Steinbrenners or Reinsdorfs.
The team isn't going to appreciate in value the way it did for the Trib, but I think that's beside the point. The Ricketts family is going to make a huge amount of money every year, and the non-balance-sheet benefits of owning the Cubs are priceless.
I...I got nuthin'...
Quote from: Yet Another LemmingHow often do you think he will stop by the bleachers?
Because I'd like to meet him on July 21, for the Cubs-Astros game.
Yikes. It's starting to get creepy in here, no?
But Al actually responds to that one:
Quote from: King DoucheIt's possible.
Um, thanks for the insight, you dolt.
Quote from: Another In A Seemingly Enldess Line Of LemmingsTom Ricketts is the best prospect the Cubs have.
He's gonna bring this team to glory.
To say these windowlickers are easily impressed would be a vast understatement.
Naturally, nary a dissenting voice could be heard amidst this embarrssing symphony of slavishness.
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on April 13, 2010, 11:14:22 AM
This Way of Life thing also annoys me less than the whole "Year 1" thing that also seems to be floating out there in some places. There's nothing "fresh" about this group of Cubs.
"Way of Life" may not annoy me any less than "Year 1," but I think the latter definitely deserves recognition for also being totally fucking retarded.
Quote from: Dr. Nguyen Van Falk on April 13, 2010, 11:32:06 AM
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on April 13, 2010, 11:14:22 AM
This Way of Life thing also annoys me less than the whole "Year 1" thing that also seems to be floating out there in some places. There's nothing "fresh" about this group of Cubs.
"Way of Life" may not annoy me any less than "Year 1," but I think the latter definitely deserves recognition for also being totally fucking retarded.
Okay...so a couple glaring problems.
1. The images in those ads are a huge turn-off, whether it's a photo of Yeti gorging himself or the roofie ad, they're just totally unappealing.
2. "Way of Life"...The Cubs haven't won a World Series since 1908, let's not celebrate the Cubs' Way of Life here.
You have two things to sell here...either baseball (harder) or Wrigley (easier).
The latter will piss off a lot of residents of dark corners, but it's certainly a viable tactic, and it seems like they sort of went with this approach but took the wrong angles.
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
So if you're going to sell the experience, which is a fair proposition since the baseball hasn't been that "sellable" for the last century, just sell the right aspects of it.
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:28:00 AM
Big shocker. The lemmings are tripping all over themselves to deliver sloppy rim jobs to Tom. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2010/4/13/1418633/tom-ricketts-visits-the-bleachers)
Some of the gems...
Quote from: Lemming #1I just love the Ricketts. They get it and they know how to connect.
Yes, because they walked through the park on Opening Day. Nothing says "regular guy" like a billionaire owner daring to walk amongst the plebes for some photo ops.
Quote from: Lemming #2That's awesome. I hope to meet him someday.
Dare to dream, little man.
Quote from: Lemming #3what a badass. love to meet him
A badass? Really?
Quote from: Lemming #4Unbelievable. So much for the stuffed shirt corporate stiff who hides out in his luxury suite. What a novel approach, talking to fans!
Yes. He's a regular guy! Like us! Only a billion times richer.
Quote from: Longwinded LemmingSo far, so awesome with the Ricketts. I love this guy. It's like having our very own Steinbrenner, except not paranoid or crazy. He's basically doing exactly what you or I would do if all of our dreams came true and we owned the Cubs.
The Ricketts basically bet their entire family fortune on this, and it's going to work out better than anyone could have hoped.
I predict that in 20 years when Tom is handing the reins to one of his kids, Wrigley will be completely rebuilt, the Cubs will have contended in essentially every season, the Ricketts family will be Chicago royalty, and their family name will be as well-known nationally as the Steinbrenners or Reinsdorfs.
The team isn't going to appreciate in value the way it did for the Trib, but I think that's beside the point. The Ricketts family is going to make a huge amount of money every year, and the non-balance-sheet benefits of owning the Cubs are priceless.
I...I got nuthin'...
Quote from: Yet Another LemmingHow often do you think he will stop by the bleachers?
Because I'd like to meet him on July 21, for the Cubs-Astros game.
Yikes. It's starting to get creepy in here, no?
But Al actually responds to that one:
Quote from: King DoucheIt's possible.
Um, thanks for the insight, you dolt.
Quote from: Another In A Seemingly Enldess Line Of LemmingsTom Ricketts is the best prospect the Cubs have.
He's gonna bring this team to glory.
To say these windowlickers are easily impressed would be a vast understatement.
Naturally, nary a dissenting voice could be heard amidst this embarrssing symphony of slavishness.
Holy shit. How much you wanna bet that a significant factor in these mutants deciding that Ricketts is a REGULAR GUY is attributable to him wearing a fleece yesterday?
"Look at that guy, he's dressed kinda like me instead of wearing a suit. HE. GETS. IT!"
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs!
Seriosuly, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on their overpriced food. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepporni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
And if there's anything we don't need around it's portion control.
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepporni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
Meh.
Bacci slices = giant + not very tasty. I'd rather have the Connie's...but that's just me.
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
We get it, you're cheap and fat. You're Marlyn Byrd.
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
You haven't lived until you've had the Deluxe Bratwurst with Mustard Bukkake.
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on April 13, 2010, 11:57:06 AM
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
We get it, you're cheap and fat. You're Marlyn Byrd.
Who's Marlyn Byrd?
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 12:05:45 PM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on April 13, 2010, 11:57:06 AM
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
We get it, you're cheap and fat. You're Marlyn Byrd.
Who's Marlyn Byrd?
You.
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
I liked the bison dog. But then again I'm just one of those suckers who will pony up $5 for the convenience of not cramming a slice of pizza into my fanny pack.
Here's what really made my stomach turn: Ricketts told Sullivan that he's becoming "close" to the players. Close to the players?!? Ed and Vag McCaskey got close to the players until Brian Piccolo died, and then they said never again until they met Walter Payton in 1975. (It could be that they said that only because between the time of Piccolo's death and Payton's drafting, the Bears didn't acquire one solitary player worth a shit, and their best player was busy suing the crap out of Vag's dad.)
Then George and Mugs died, and the McCaskey's were in control again, and Michael roamed the sidelines and played the part of "regular Bears fan..."
He's just loving every second of Beardom, the life of Riley:
(http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/81371250.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54802A80A20F18576C4B607E19C77CB844BF4A51A6AD1832573)
(http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/82887630.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54802E748C0DB08564221B36013AE32778F855DC78315774F71)
(http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/81429962.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54859138B54D6DE9333F7B6A78CBF29A8A9EFB7C572A13EA01B)
(http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/52029767.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=FE1CE9934D1C2A8C1C390A72B46566938C0CC47EDB13786C4DFD300FD04D349D)
(http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/77258769.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF878921E86F5CE8BE5D78FB8B2D1B8C722C8C466597C38AAA147B5B09895F985A7CD8B4)
(http://www.accesshollywood.com/content/images/21/230x306/21117_chicago-fan-jim-belushi-with-bears-chairman-michael-mccaskey.jpg)
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/166/406274177_c6ff89e9c4.jpg)
(http://chicagoist.com/images/2004_09_sports_bears_mccaskey.jpg)
How is one different from the other?
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20100412/capt.fcb641e3246d4f13ab6ddb986dc1905d-fcb641e3246d4f13ab6ddb986dc1905d-0.jpg?x=400&y=264&q=85&sig=7MNjsP9Gai1o1BjmdFoqLA--)
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20100409/capt.8350a07f9420401f85ddc8065270f9f7-43e33016d439420990e70b9226725bb0-0.jpg?x=400&y=245&q=85&sig=zCvW0j2sJgf.StJO6JeZjQ--)
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20100412/capt.8c749850de1049b299230f5131ed7261-8c749850de1049b299230f5131ed7261-0.jpg?x=400&y=278&q=85&sig=vMoTT3Vskpx4MubOnFCTfA--)
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20100412/capt.9fde74a34c324589bfec777862fd1eae-9fde74a34c324589bfec777862fd1eae-0.jpg?x=400&y=306&q=85&sig=p3VU7nJqc9DN00DVOUzzeA--)
Hint: one owner is pictured with actual championship hardware. Which one's reviled again?
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 12:27:51 PM
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
I liked the bison dog. But then again I'm just one of those suckers who will pony up $5 for the convenience of not cramming a slice of pizza into my fanny pack.
Or you could just be a normal human being and carry it with your hands.
By the way... Wrigley has bison dongs now? So do some nickels, which George Halas threw around like manhole covers:
(http://www.mikeoliveri.com/pics/bison.jpg)
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 12:34:27 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 12:27:51 PM
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 11:42:12 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 11:38:09 AM
Now, admittedly I haven't been to Wrigley in probably 7 years, but I don't remember the food being very good, at least not compared to say...every other ballpark in baseball.
But they have bison dogs now!
Seriously, though, I can't remember the last time I purchased food for myself at Wrigley. Seing as how they still honor the time-tested tradition of bringing in your own food, I don't get why people would spend their money on Wrigley's overpriced junk. I walked in yesterday with a big ass slice of pepperoni pizza from Bacci. It only cost me 5 bucks. For a dollar more I could have eaten a piece of crap from Connies from the Wrigley concession that would have been an 8th of the size.
I liked the bison dog. But then again I'm just one of those suckers who will pony up $5 for the convenience of not cramming a slice of pizza into my fanny pack.
Or you could just be a normal human being and carry it with your hands.
Yeah RV, your fictional scenario annoys me, too.
Quote from: Brownie on April 13, 2010, 12:37:24 PM
By the way... Wrigley has bison dongs now? So do some nickels, which George Halas threw around like manhole covers:
(http://www.mikeoliveri.com/pics/bison.jpg)
Pretty unapetizing. If they start selling Zison Zogs up in that gay male homosecksual though, I'm filling my motherflipping mouth up!
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
Are you new here?
Quote from: Internet Apex on April 13, 2010, 12:56:49 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
Are you new here?
I'm new-ER.
I don't like the large pictures by the big red sign. But my opinion doesn't count.
Quote from: Brownie on April 13, 2010, 12:32:29 PM
(http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/82887630.jpg?v=1&c=NewsMaker&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54802E748C0DB08564221B36013AE32778F855DC78315774F71)
MYRON BAKER THE TOUCHDOWN MAKER!
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
I'm with CT on this one. Comparing the Rickettseses to the McClaskeys, while amusing, is about as realistic as Huey being able to fit a Bacci slice into the side pocket of his carpenter jorts.
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
I'm with CT on this one. Comparing the Rickettseses to the McClaskeys, while amusing, is about as realistic as Huey being able to fit a Bacci slice into the side pocket of his carpenter jorts. folds of his Tronsuit.
Huey'd.
Quote from: morpheus on April 13, 2010, 01:22:41 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
I'm with CT on this one. Comparing the Rickettseses to the McClaskeys, while amusing, is about as realistic as Huey being able to fit a Bacci slice into the side pocket of his carpenter jorts. folds of his Tronsuit.
Huey'd.
Cut him some slack. It's hard to keep up on memes when you're dead.
I'm as skeptical of the Ricketts as Morph is of Global Warming, but I'm of the opine that the media is playing of the new owners because they think it's decent copy.
If in July, the Ricketts are all over the radio pimping themselves about how they are greeting people in the stands and the Kalfonso Koriano story is on the back burner, then it will be creepy.
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
I'm with CT on this one. Comparing the Rickettseses to the McClaskeys, while amusing, is about as realistic as Huey being able to fit a Bacci slice into the side pocket of his carpenter jorts.
Why isn't it realistic to note that I see some red flags? The Ricketts' are probably better than Andy McKenna, John Madigan, Don Grenesko, Larry Himes, Andy MacPhail, Stanton Cook, Dennis FitzSimons, Sam Zell, Crane Kenney, et. al., but do you want...
... family ownership?
... featuring many siblings?
... a little more politically involved than you might be comfortable with?
... with a son who claims to be an expert because he played in high school and "grew up" with the team (whether in the bleachers or as a ballboy)?
... with family members that has found itself befriending ballplayers? (Great, now the Cubs hold onto Dempster and Theriot because they're great guys, but the guys who don't hang with Tom Ricketts are let go)
... obsessed more about the condition of the stadium than the actual product in said stadium?
That all said, I'll see how it all plays out. I'm more annoyed by the coverage of them, but I am getting Ricketts Fatigue.
Quote from: Brownie on April 13, 2010, 02:08:59 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
I'm with CT on this one. Comparing the Rickettseses to the McClaskeys, while amusing, is about as realistic as Huey being able to fit a Bacci slice into the side pocket of his carpenter jorts.
Why isn't it realistic to note that I see some red flags? The Ricketts' are probably better than Andy McKenna, John Madigan, Don Grenesko, Larry Himes, Andy MacPhail, Stanton Cook, Dennis FitzSimons, Sam Zell, Crane Kenney, et. al., but do you want...
... family ownership?
... featuring many siblings?
... a little more politically involved than you might be comfortable with?
... with a son who claims to be an expert because he played in high school and "grew up" with the team (whether in the bleachers or as a ballboy)?
... with family members that has found itself befriending ballplayers? (Great, now the Cubs hold onto Dempster and Theriot because they're great guys, but the guys who don't hang with Tom Ricketts are let go)
... obsessed more about the condition of the stadium than the actual product in said stadium?
That all said, I'll see how it all plays out. I'm more annoyed by the coverage of them, but I am getting Ricketts Fatigue.
I think that's really all it is. Cubs fans are stupid, newspaper editors know this, the Rickettses know this, so they're playing up the "we love the players!" and the "we love these fans and this ballpark" stuff because the dopes will eat it up like a reasonably priced piece of pizza sold outside the ballpark. I'm sure given enough time we'll have real reasons to hate them. But at this point there's no point to pre-emptively dislike them a la Chuck hating Soriano in 2007 and 2008.
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 02:21:03 PM
Quote from: Brownie on April 13, 2010, 02:08:59 PM
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 01:17:30 PM
Quote from: CT III on April 13, 2010, 12:55:43 PM
Are people really annoyed by Ricketts already? I was planning on at least giving him one season to completely fuck things up before I start calling for Mark Cuban to save us all.
I'm with CT on this one. Comparing the Rickettseses to the McClaskeys, while amusing, is about as realistic as Huey being able to fit a Bacci slice into the side pocket of his carpenter jorts.
Why isn't it realistic to note that I see some red flags? The Ricketts' are probably better than Andy McKenna, John Madigan, Don Grenesko, Larry Himes, Andy MacPhail, Stanton Cook, Dennis FitzSimons, Sam Zell, Crane Kenney, et. al., but do you want...
... family ownership?
... featuring many siblings?
... a little more politically involved than you might be comfortable with?
... with a son who claims to be an expert because he played in high school and "grew up" with the team (whether in the bleachers or as a ballboy)?
... with family members that has found itself befriending ballplayers? (Great, now the Cubs hold onto Dempster and Theriot because they're great guys, but the guys who don't hang with Tom Ricketts are let go)
... obsessed more about the condition of the stadium than the actual product in said stadium?
That all said, I'll see how it all plays out. I'm more annoyed by the coverage of them, but I am getting Ricketts Fatigue.
I think that's really all it is. Cubs fans are stupid, newspaper editors know this, the Rickettses know this, so they're playing up the "we love the players!" and the "we love these fans and this ballpark" stuff because the dopes will eat it up like a reasonably priced piece of pizza sold outside the ballpark. I'm sure given enough time we'll have real reasons to hate them. But at this point there's no point to pre-emptively dislike them a la Chuck hating Soriano in 2007 and 2008.
Okay I laughed.
It's way too early to get worked up about the Ricketts ownership.
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 02:21:03 PM
I think that's really all it is. Cubs fans are stupid, newspaper editors know this, the Rickettses know this, so they're playing up the "we love the players!" and the "we love these fans and this ballpark" stuff because the dopes will eat it up like a reasonably priced piece of pizza sold outside the ballpark. I'm sure given enough time we'll have real reasons to hate them. But at this point there's no point to pre-emptively dislike them a la Chuck hating Soriano in 2007 and 2008.
True. The Ricketts are a cipher. We don't know what kind of owners they will be.
Soriano had a track record of being nothing but a DH when I started hating him.
Ricketts, in his interview on the Score yesterday, talked a lot about the need for the organization to move in a more statistically-inclined direction, mentioning SABRmetrics by name.
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Quote from: R-V on April 13, 2010, 02:21:03 PM
I think that's really all it is. Cubs fans are stupid, newspaper editors know this, the Rickettses know this, so they're playing up the "we love the players!" and the "we love these fans and this ballpark" stuff because the dopes will eat it up like a reasonably priced piece of pizza sold outside the ballpark.
Maybe they
really do love all of it to that odd degree though. Why is that not plausible?? If I woke up one morning and owned the Cubs and the ballpark, I'd think it was pretty fucking cool, too. I'd be out there acting like a little girl on opening day....I won't lie.
I don't really know how much of this shit is real, how much is theater, how much is media, etc, etc But I'm willing to give them more than a week of the regular season before I board the Ricketts HATEmobile. They're the anti-Corporate owner that we've been fucking saddled with for 25+ seasons. If they still spend like a top 5 team...and they do so more wisely (and they need to hire a smarter GM to effectively do that, IMO), then I don't see much downside here.
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
This thread is ghey
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
Seeing it play since 1995 isn't enough?
I think the reason they don't fire Jim is because they like him and he has a contract that runs 2 or 3 more years. They have enough bad debts to worry about without adding Hendry's to the list.
Ironically, as much as they talk about developing talent, it's curious they don't examine Hendry's disastrous record in doing so since he got here.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
Seeing it play since 1995 isn't enough?
I think the reason they don't fire Jim is because they like him and he has a contract that runs 2 or 3 more years. They have enough bad debts to worry about without adding Hendry's to the list.
So you original question was rhetorical?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
Seeing it play since 1995 isn't enough?
I think the reason they don't fire Jim is because they like him and he has a contract that runs 2 or 3 more years. They have enough bad debts to worry about without adding Hendry's to the list.
Ironically, as much as they talk about developing talent, it's curious they don't examine Hendry's disastrous record in doing so since he got here.
Tim Wilkens is starting to develop talent at the minor league level.
I think the Ricketts' want to see with their own eyes how the entire orgainzation runs, and they realize that the only way really see what is going on in a business is to own it.
Also, I think the Ricketts' are savy enough that most fan will give them a grace period for new ownership. If they need to make front office changes, it will give them another grace period, so why use it now?
Can't begrudge them for playing with their very expensive and very new toy right now. And its way way too soon to tell if they are going to behave like the McCaskey's and Bill Wirtz, or more like Rocky (who has made $$, spent $$ and who also hangs out in the stands).
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 03:20:18 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
Seeing it play since 1995 isn't enough?
I think the reason they don't fire Jim is because they like him and he has a contract that runs 2 or 3 more years. They have enough bad debts to worry about without adding Hendry's to the list.
So you original question was rhetorical?
No. I wanted to see if Pen had an opinion.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 03:51:39 PM
Quote from: MAD on April 13, 2010, 03:20:18 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
Seeing it play since 1995 isn't enough?
I think the reason they don't fire Jim is because they like him and he has a contract that runs 2 or 3 more years. They have enough bad debts to worry about without adding Hendry's to the list.
So you original question was rhetorical?
No. I wanted to see if Pen had an opinion.
Intrepid
Reader Banner:
Al"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Again with the penises. Always with the penises.
Quote from: thehawk on April 13, 2010, 03:33:34 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 03:17:53 PM
Quote from: PenFoe on April 13, 2010, 02:58:19 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on April 13, 2010, 02:57:34 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on April 13, 2010, 02:42:44 PM
If he dumps Hendry and brings in a front office that understands the difference between OBP and OBGYN, he could beat his penis on a drum made of a Billy Goat head and I wouldn't care.
Then why hasn't he done so, yet?
Maybe because he wants to see how it all plays out?
Seeing it play since 1995 isn't enough?
I think the reason they don't fire Jim is because they like him and he has a contract that runs 2 or 3 more years. They have enough bad debts to worry about without adding Hendry's to the list.
Ironically, as much as they talk about developing talent, it's curious they don't examine Hendry's disastrous record in doing so since he got here.
Tim Wilkens is starting to develop talent at the minor league level.
I think the Ricketts' want to see with their own eyes how the entire orgainzation runs, and they realize that the only way really see what is going on in a business is to own it.
Also, I think the Ricketts' are savy enough that most fan will give them a grace period for new ownership. If they need to make front office changes, it will give them another grace period, so why use it now?
Can't begrudge them for playing with their very expensive and very new toy right now. And its way way too soon to tell if they are going to behave like the McCaskey's and Bill Wirtz, or more like Rocky (who has made $$, spent $$ and who also hangs out in the stands).
Nice call invoking Rockwell Wirtz. He's always in the stands and talking to fans. He's been the fucking man. Plus he hired McDonough so all the Sox fans can blame everything that goes wrong on him. Pretty clever.
Bump as we wait for the Gary Gaetti statue.
Wow, so we hate the owner down through the GM, we're on the road to hating Quade and we definitely hate all of the players (except Starlin).
Explain to me again why I'm a Cubs fan?
Quote from: Slaky on September 09, 2010, 06:25:43 PM
Wow, so we hate the owner down through the GM, we're on the road to hating Quade and we definitely hate all of the players (except Starlin).
Explain to me again why I'm a Cubs fan?
Because your dad probably hated you
Quote from: Slaky on September 09, 2010, 06:25:43 PM
Wow, so we hate the owner down through the GM, we're on the road to hating Quade and we definitely hate all of the players (except Starlin).
Explain to me again why I'm a Cubs fan?
Because the opposite of love is indifference?
Quote from: Yeti on September 09, 2010, 06:27:06 PM
Quote from: Slaky on September 09, 2010, 06:25:43 PM
Wow, so we hate the owner down through the GM, we're on the road to hating Quade and we definitely hate all of the players (except Starlin).
Explain to me again why I'm a Cubs fan?
Because your dad probably hated you
My dad likes the Sox (I didn't know this until a few years ago) and recently cancelled his company's Cubs season tickets. So I know it's not his fault.
Quote from: Slaky on September 09, 2010, 06:25:43 PM
Wow, so we hate the owner down through the GM, we're on the road to hating Quade and we definitely hate all of the players (except Starlin).
Explain to me again why I'm a Cubs fan?
Don't forget the other fans. I really hate most Cubs fans.
I hate Barney the most already. The ones I like/hate the least are Starlin, Healthy Aramis, Marmol, Soto, SeanBearPig, and Zambrano (now that he's pitching like someone who wants to get traded). I guess Byrd can stay too.
Crane, Hendry, and every one of the Ricketts can die in an upper deck falling concrete accident.
What's wrong with the Rickettses? Did they extend Hendry?
Quote from: JD on September 09, 2010, 07:44:40 PM
What's wrong with the Rickettses? Did they extend Hendry?
They didn't not extend him.
The thing is, none of this stuff is new to me. I hated the Tribune (and it doesn't sound like anybody had much love for PK Wrigley before them), I've hated every GM since Dallas Green was shown the door and most of the managers.
I guess I mostly hate Ricketts because I thought that cutting off the head of the franchise was going to kill all this stupidity, and lead to a fresh start. Yeah, it would take a while to regrow the body, but it would be better this time. Instead they managed to graft another stupid head onto the neck of this idiotic organization, only this one wears Harry Caray glasses.
Fuck.
Quote from: CT III on September 09, 2010, 08:28:45 PM
The thing is, none of this stuff is new to me. I hated the Tribune (and it doesn't sound like anybody had much love for PK Wrigley before them), I've hated every GM since Dallas Green was shown the door and most of the managers.
I guess I mostly hate Ricketts because I thought that cutting off the head of the franchise was going to kill all this stupidity, and lead to a fresh start. Yeah, it would take a while to regrow the body, but it would be better this time. Instead they managed to graft another stupid head onto the neck of this idiotic organization, only this one wears Harry Caray glasses.
Fuck.
I was under the impression that
he gets it and that -- that! -- is what hurts most of all.
The Wall Street Journal took on statues dotting the landscape of college football today (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704644404575481773710740164.html). Alas, Crane saw this:
(http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/WK-AV324_SP_FEA_G_20100909171428.jpg)
and wondered how in the name of everything sacred we don't have a Jerome Walton statue. HE WON ROOKIE OF THE YEAR JUST LIKE JASON WHITE WON THE HEISMAN!
The more I think about Crane Kenney and Rickettseseseses the angrier I get. This isn't good for business.
Quote from: Slaky on September 10, 2010, 10:30:09 AM
The more I think about Crane Kenney and Rickettseseseses the angrier I get. This isn't good for business.
Just think of what kind of stupid things could be in the works now that Todd has participated in Undercover Boss.
Quote from: Waco Kid on September 10, 2010, 10:44:09 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 10, 2010, 10:30:09 AM
The more I think about Crane Kenney and Rickettseseseses the angrier I get. This isn't good for business.
Just think of what kind of stupid things could be in the works now that Todd has participated in Undercover Boss.
Signing Adam Dunn?
Tom Ricketts has great news for you: (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-cubs-cardinals-sept27,0,2605765.story)
- Higher ticket prices!
- A smaller payroll!
- No friggin' idea about the managerial search timeline!
QuoteFor the season, the Cubs drew 3,062,973 fans to Wrigley Field, their smallest total since 2003. But, especially for the last month, there were stretches of empty seats even though the tickets were already counted as being sold. Unlike in past seasons, the bleachers were more empty than full at several night games.
"That's not really true," Ricketts said. "You go back and look at the data. There have been some soft night games in the bleachers in the last few years. The key to filling the park is to put a great product on the field."
Rumors persist the Cubs will raise ticket prices for some dates and categories next year.
"Attendance is down a few percentage points from last year," Ricketts said. "But in terms of ticket pricing for next year, we haven't made any final decisions. What we are doing is a really thorough study of what we're charging for which sections, trying to really understand the value proposition that we're offering people.
"We'll do that study, and we'll come up with a ticket-pricing strategy, keeping in mind that there's a tough economy. And it's ultimately our goal to get more fans in the park."
Among other topics discussed by Ricketts:
On the $145 million payroll: "We haven't made any decisions where payroll goes next year. But I think it will be slightly lower than this year."
On the managerial search ending before the World Series: "We don't really have a time frame on that. It's always good, if you have your decision made, you'd rather do it sooner rather than later so he can start working. But there's no reason to rush it."
On the five-week managing job of Mike Quade: "I don't think there's any doubt that Mike's done a nice job. Obviously, the team has played very well the last few weeks, and that's been encouraging."
Quote from: Brownie on September 27, 2010, 01:11:03 PM
Tom Ricketts has great news for you: (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-cubs-cardinals-sept27,0,2605765.story)
- Higher ticket prices!
- A smaller payroll!
- No friggin' idea about the managerial search timeline!
QuoteFor the season, the Cubs drew 3,062,973 fans to Wrigley Field, their smallest total since 2003. But, especially for the last month, there were stretches of empty seats even though the tickets were already counted as being sold. Unlike in past seasons, the bleachers were more empty than full at several night games.
"That's not really true," Ricketts said. "You go back and look at the data. There have been some soft night games in the bleachers in the last few years. The key to filling the park is to put a great product on the field."
Rumors persist the Cubs will raise ticket prices for some dates and categories next year.
"Attendance is down a few percentage points from last year," Ricketts said. "But in terms of ticket pricing for next year, we haven't made any final decisions. What we are doing is a really thorough study of what we're charging for which sections, trying to really understand the value proposition that we're offering people.
"We'll do that study, and we'll come up with a ticket-pricing strategy, keeping in mind that there's a tough economy. And it's ultimately our goal to get more fans in the park."
Among other topics discussed by Ricketts:
On the $145 million payroll: "We haven't made any decisions where payroll goes next year. But I think it will be slightly lower than this year."
On the managerial search ending before the World Series: "We don't really have a time frame on that. It's always good, if you have your decision made, you'd rather do it sooner rather than later so he can start working. But there's no reason to rush it."
On the five-week managing job of Mike Quade: "I don't think there's any doubt that Mike's done a nice job. Obviously, the team has played very well the last few weeks, and that's been encouraging."
They can't talk seriously to Girardi (face-to-face) until after the Yankees are done. I also think they might want to kick the tires on Joe Maddon, although I have to believe he could be the most expensive guy on the list. So I can see the rationale in that particular part of his answer.
In a vacuum, the price increase would be ridiculous. But when you have 9 figures worth of debt service to pay back, and a willing scalpers market...I assume they'll increase ticket prices 3-5%.
These fuckers need to fire the GM already. That's all I know.
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on September 27, 2010, 01:57:18 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 27, 2010, 01:11:03 PM
Tom Ricketts has great news for you: (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-cubs-cardinals-sept27,0,2605765.story)
- Higher ticket prices!
- A smaller payroll!
- No friggin' idea about the managerial search timeline!
QuoteFor the season, the Cubs drew 3,062,973 fans to Wrigley Field, their smallest total since 2003. But, especially for the last month, there were stretches of empty seats even though the tickets were already counted as being sold. Unlike in past seasons, the bleachers were more empty than full at several night games.
"That's not really true," Ricketts said. "You go back and look at the data. There have been some soft night games in the bleachers in the last few years. The key to filling the park is to put a great product on the field."
Rumors persist the Cubs will raise ticket prices for some dates and categories next year.
"Attendance is down a few percentage points from last year," Ricketts said. "But in terms of ticket pricing for next year, we haven't made any final decisions. What we are doing is a really thorough study of what we're charging for which sections, trying to really understand the value proposition that we're offering people.
"We'll do that study, and we'll come up with a ticket-pricing strategy, keeping in mind that there's a tough economy. And it's ultimately our goal to get more fans in the park."
Among other topics discussed by Ricketts:
On the $145 million payroll: "We haven't made any decisions where payroll goes next year. But I think it will be slightly lower than this year."
On the managerial search ending before the World Series: "We don't really have a time frame on that. It's always good, if you have your decision made, you'd rather do it sooner rather than later so he can start working. But there's no reason to rush it."
On the five-week managing job of Mike Quade: "I don't think there's any doubt that Mike's done a nice job. Obviously, the team has played very well the last few weeks, and that's been encouraging."
They can't talk seriously to Girardi (face-to-face) until after the Yankees are done. I also think they might want to kick the tires on Joe Maddon, although I have to believe he could be the most expensive guy on the list. So I can see the rationale in that particular part of his answer.
In a vacuum, the price increase would be ridiculous. But when you have 9 figures worth of debt service to pay back, and a willing scalpers market...I assume they'll increase ticket prices 3-5%.
These fuckers need to fire the GM already. That's all I know.
When you say willing scalpers market do you mean active buyers and sellers?
I'm pretty sure the scalpers ate a lot of tickets this year. At least the ones that I have spoken to considered it the worst year in a long time and unless the team improves they don't see that market improving.
It was pretty apparent to me even before the All Star break when I couldn't even give several games away. And those were games that in the past people would have paid up for.
Although the Cubs have used the excuse of a strong secondary market to justify price increases in the past, any statement they make along those lines in the current market is a bold faced lie.
On the bright side, putting together a group buy inside the ballpark looks pretty feasible for next season.
Quote from: flannj on September 27, 2010, 02:29:28 PM
When you say willing scalpers market do you mean active buyers and sellers?
I'm pretty sure the scalpers ate a lot of tickets this year. At least the ones that I have spoken to considered it the worst year in a long time and unless the team improves they don't see that market improving.
It was pretty apparent to me even before the All Star break when I couldn't even give several games away. And those were games that in the past people would have paid up for.
Although the Cubs have used the excuse of a strong secondary market to justify price increases in the past, any statement they make along those lines in the current market is a bold faced lie.
Yes, scalpers (while perhaps less than this season) will be a big part of those buyers. Instead of the scalpers market being "insane", next season it might be only "very strong" instead. There will still be a large number of tickets being purchased speculatively because preseason demand will justify it.
As long as this team keeps drawing 3M fans and staying north of 90% capacity, they can keep increasing the prices assuming the overall demand is there.
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on September 27, 2010, 03:15:46 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 27, 2010, 02:29:28 PM
When you say willing scalpers market do you mean active buyers and sellers?
I'm pretty sure the scalpers ate a lot of tickets this year. At least the ones that I have spoken to considered it the worst year in a long time and unless the team improves they don't see that market improving.
It was pretty apparent to me even before the All Star break when I couldn't even give several games away. And those were games that in the past people would have paid up for.
Although the Cubs have used the excuse of a strong secondary market to justify price increases in the past, any statement they make along those lines in the current market is a bold faced lie.
Yes, scalpers (while perhaps less than this season) will be a big part of those buyers. Instead of the scalpers market being "insane", next season it might be only "very strong" instead. There will still be a large number of tickets being purchased speculatively because preseason demand will justify it.
As long as this team keeps drawing 3M fans and staying north of 90% capacity, they can keep increasing the prices.
The scalpers market is not "very strong". It sucks right now and looks like it will continue that way until the product and economy improve.
The Cubs may sell 3M tickets but the resellers market is horrible.
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on September 27, 2010, 01:57:18 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 27, 2010, 01:11:03 PM
Tom Ricketts has great news for you: (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-cubs-cardinals-sept27,0,2605765.story)
- Higher ticket prices!
- A smaller payroll!
- No friggin' idea about the managerial search timeline!
QuoteFor the season, the Cubs drew 3,062,973 fans to Wrigley Field, their smallest total since 2003. But, especially for the last month, there were stretches of empty seats even though the tickets were already counted as being sold. Unlike in past seasons, the bleachers were more empty than full at several night games.
"That's not really true," Ricketts said. "You go back and look at the data. There have been some soft night games in the bleachers in the last few years. The key to filling the park is to put a great product on the field."
Rumors persist the Cubs will raise ticket prices for some dates and categories next year.
"Attendance is down a few percentage points from last year," Ricketts said. "But in terms of ticket pricing for next year, we haven't made any final decisions. What we are doing is a really thorough study of what we're charging for which sections, trying to really understand the value proposition that we're offering people.
"We'll do that study, and we'll come up with a ticket-pricing strategy, keeping in mind that there's a tough economy. And it's ultimately our goal to get more fans in the park."
Among other topics discussed by Ricketts:
On the $145 million payroll: "We haven't made any decisions where payroll goes next year. But I think it will be slightly lower than this year."
On the managerial search ending before the World Series: "We don't really have a time frame on that. It's always good, if you have your decision made, you'd rather do it sooner rather than later so he can start working. But there's no reason to rush it."
On the five-week managing job of Mike Quade: "I don't think there's any doubt that Mike's done a nice job. Obviously, the team has played very well the last few weeks, and that's been encouraging."
They can't talk seriously to Girardi (face-to-face) until after the Yankees are done. I also think they might want to kick the tires on Joe Maddon, although I have to believe he could be the most expensive guy on the list. So I can see the rationale in that particular part of his answer.
In a vacuum, the price increase would be ridiculous. But when you have 9 figures worth of debt service to pay back, and a willing scalpers market...I assume they'll increase ticket prices 3-5%.
These fuckers need to fire the GM already. That's all I know.
Don't know how willing that scalpers' market is. You could buy $9 tickets on Stubhub for the Cardinals game on Friday.
I'm going to guess you see the Cubs make a strong push for partial season ticket plans and tiering the hell out of the single-game prices based on who the visiting team is.
I'm guessing they start clamping down on people bringing in vittles in order to drive their concession sales.
Quote from: Fork on September 27, 2010, 11:36:21 PM
I'm guessing they start clamping down on people bringing in vittles in order to drive their concession sales.
Giants suck.
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 28, 2010, 01:38:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on September 27, 2010, 11:36:21 PM
I'm guessing they start clamping down on people bringing in vittles in order to drive their concession sales.
Giants suck.
I'm hoping this finally ends the Coughlin Era. Of course, last time they sucked this early and I thought Coughlin was on borrowed time, they fucked it all up by winning the Super Bowl.
Quote from: Fork on September 28, 2010, 07:33:17 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 28, 2010, 01:38:27 AM
Quote from: Fork on September 27, 2010, 11:36:21 PM
I'm guessing they start clamping down on people bringing in vittles in order to drive their concession sales.
Giants suck.
I'm hoping this finally ends the Coughlin Era. Of course, last time they sucked this early and I thought Coughlin was on borrowed time, they fucked it all up by winning the Super Bowl.
But alas, we're all a few years older, our beards are little grayer and Eli is no less ghey than he was then.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on September 27, 2010, 04:21:09 PM
Quote from: Lance Dicksons Arm on September 27, 2010, 01:57:18 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 27, 2010, 01:11:03 PM
Tom Ricketts has great news for you: (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-cubs-cardinals-sept27,0,2605765.story)
- Higher ticket prices!
- A smaller payroll!
- No friggin' idea about the managerial search timeline!
QuoteFor the season, the Cubs drew 3,062,973 fans to Wrigley Field, their smallest total since 2003. But, especially for the last month, there were stretches of empty seats even though the tickets were already counted as being sold. Unlike in past seasons, the bleachers were more empty than full at several night games.
"That's not really true," Ricketts said. "You go back and look at the data. There have been some soft night games in the bleachers in the last few years. The key to filling the park is to put a great product on the field."
Rumors persist the Cubs will raise ticket prices for some dates and categories next year.
"Attendance is down a few percentage points from last year," Ricketts said. "But in terms of ticket pricing for next year, we haven't made any final decisions. What we are doing is a really thorough study of what we're charging for which sections, trying to really understand the value proposition that we're offering people.
"We'll do that study, and we'll come up with a ticket-pricing strategy, keeping in mind that there's a tough economy. And it's ultimately our goal to get more fans in the park."
Among other topics discussed by Ricketts:
On the $145 million payroll: "We haven't made any decisions where payroll goes next year. But I think it will be slightly lower than this year."
On the managerial search ending before the World Series: "We don't really have a time frame on that. It's always good, if you have your decision made, you'd rather do it sooner rather than later so he can start working. But there's no reason to rush it."
On the five-week managing job of Mike Quade: "I don't think there's any doubt that Mike's done a nice job. Obviously, the team has played very well the last few weeks, and that's been encouraging."
They can't talk seriously to Girardi (face-to-face) until after the Yankees are done. I also think they might want to kick the tires on Joe Maddon, although I have to believe he could be the most expensive guy on the list. So I can see the rationale in that particular part of his answer.
In a vacuum, the price increase would be ridiculous. But when you have 9 figures worth of debt service to pay back, and a willing scalpers market...I assume they'll increase ticket prices 3-5%.
These fuckers need to fire the GM already. That's all I know.
Don't know how willing that scalpers' market is. You could buy $9 tickets on Stubhub for the Cardinals game on Friday.
I'm going to guess you see the Cubs make a strong push for partial season ticket plans and tiering the hell out of the single-game prices based on who the visiting team is.
The reason there were $9 tickets is precisely because the scalpers market this season WAS strong (as far as scalpers buying from the Cubs, which is the matter on the table). The scalpers get these tickets for weekend games as soon as tickets go on sale, or they buy season ticket packages or large portions from people who don't want 81 games. The "market" is largely set in March..it's not set in September. The fact someone could get a $9 ticket last weekend because the scalpers overvalued the tickets in March isn't bothering the Cubs bottom line.
I am sure this season's result will set demand back somewhat next March. But we also don't know what the team will look like...who will be managing...and I imagine the Yankees series alone will compel scalpers to mantain their season ticket options.
Shouldn't these assholes be paying for this themselves?
November 11, 2010
Dear Season Ticket Holder,
When my family and I took ownership of the Chicago Cubs just about one year ago, we committed to being good neighbors and to preserving Wrigley Field. We're excited to tell you today about an opportunity to achieve both.
As the third largest tourist attraction in Illinois, the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field account for more than $600 million annually in impact to the local economy, including almost $400 million in annual new spending - spending which would not take place but for the team and the ballpark. This spending supports more than 7,000 jobs and generates more than $230 million in annual personal earnings. The Cubs and Wrigley Field also generate nearly $60 million in tax collections each year.
For many years, Wrigley Field has required millions of dollars in annual maintenance and, partly as a result, the team-owned campus around the ballpark has remained largely undeveloped. The Wrigley Field campus development, the centerpiece of our future, has been on hold for nearly a decade.
In the next few weeks the Illinois General Assembly will consider a bill to preserve Wrigley Field. Simply put, the plan allows a portion of future City and County amusement taxes, the 12% currently added to each ticket price, to be invested directly in the preservation of the Friendly Confines.
The plan is fair, simple and focused. Most importantly, it will not increase taxes you currently pay and will not create any new taxes.
This plan will preserve the historic character and tradition of the Friendly Confines for the next generation and will enhance the Lakeview community. If approved, the Cubs will undertake more than $200 million in renovations during the next five years and, in addition, the Ricketts family will invest a comparable amount in neighborhood development. The team will commit to play in Wrigley Field over the long run and to remain in the field during construction so, in this difficult economy, local businesses will continue to enjoy revenues the Cubs help attract.
We understand the importance of community and fan participation in this process. Wrigley Field renovation designs are being developed and we look forward to input on our surveys, discussions in forums and other communications we will send to you int eh weeks and months ahead.
We have an opportunity in this upcoming legislative session to begin the process of renovating and restoring Wrigley Field and securing its continued future. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and hope you, like me, see this as a fair and straightforward way to accomplish our mutual goals. If you would like to support our legislative proposal in the fall session, please contact us at renovatewrigley@cubs.com.
Sincerely,
Tom Ricketts
Executive Chairman
And yes, it is misspelled int eh
Quote from: flannj on November 11, 2010, 01:18:12 PM
Shouldn't these assholes be paying for this themselves?
Why pay for it yourself if you can get your neighbors to pay for it?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 11, 2010, 01:26:10 PM
Quote from: flannj on November 11, 2010, 01:18:12 PM
Shouldn't these assholes be paying for this themselves?
Why pay for it yourself if you can get your neighbors to pay for it?
So I take it the Ricketts family has read the McCaskey / Halas handbook?
BORING.
Win some fucking games. They've got their finger on the pulse of most retarded type of Cub fan.
Quote from: flannj on November 11, 2010, 01:18:12 PMIf approved, the Cubs will undertake more than $200 million in renovations during the next five years and, in addition, the Ricketts family will invest a comparable amount in neighborhood development.
That's an impressively nondescript statement. You could say that $200 is comparable to $200 million if you ignore a few pesky zeroes.
Quote
November 11, 2010
Dear Season Ticket Holder Sucker,
When my dad sold a zillion shares of TD Waterhouse, his life's work, so my family and I took ownership of grossly overpaid for the Chicago Cubs just about one year ago, we committed to being good neighbors and to moved to get at the depleted state treasury for own personal gain under the guise of preserving Wrigley Field. We're excited to tell you today about an opportunity to achieve both.
As the third largest tourist attraction in Illinois, the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field account for more than $600 million annually in impact to the local economy, including almost $400 million in annual new spending - spending which would not take place but for the team and the ballpark. This is obvious as there is nothing else for people to do in this town, and if there were a baseball park in Schaumburg housing the Cubs, no one would go there. And if people didn't want to go watch the Cubs in Schaumburg , they would obviously not spend money anywhere to be entertained. This spending supports more than 7,000 jobs and generates more than $230 million in annual personal earnings. The Cubs and Wrigley Field also generate nearly $60 million in tax collections each year not to mention the millions it contributes to the need for more infrastructure and police and emergency resources 81 days a year.
For many years, Wrigley Field has required millions of dollars in annual maintenance and, partly as a result (the other result being that any cash flows developing the campus would generate would not justify developing it as I'm sure there a bankers out there who would be interested in helping us finance such development, but again I digress), the team-owned campus around the ballpark has remained largely undeveloped. The Wrigley Field campus development, the centerpiece of our future, has been on hold for nearly a decade. As a result, the neighborhood is in economic Hell.
In the next few weeks the Illinois General Assembly will consider a bill to preserve Wrigley Field. Simply put, it would be like the General Assembly seeing all the spending you do in your neighborhood and then deciding that a portion of the taxes others pay (as your spending generates economic activity) go to you so you could put a 1,500-sq. foot addition to your house with some nice furnishings. They wouldn't do that for you, would they? Well, you haven't won a World Series in the past 103 years like we have. Anyway, the plan allows a portion of future City and County amusement taxes, the 12% currently added to each ticket price, to be invested directly in the preservation of the Friendly Confines.
The plan is fair, simple and focused at least in comparison to the bizarro Blago-Zell deal that they were trying to work out before Blago got arrested. Most importantly, it will not increase taxes you currently pay and will not create any new taxes put more money in our pocket so we can buy remaining hot dogs out of our hot dog boxes should any of us ever appear again on Undercover Boss[/b].
Continued...
DPD...
Quote
...
This plan will preserve the historic character and tradition of the Friendly Confines for the next generation and will enhance the Lakeview community. If approved, the Cubs will undertake more than $200 million in renovations during the next five years and, in addition, the Ricketts family will invest a comparable amount (comparable in the same way one might say Ernie Banks and Neifi Perez were comaprable because they both used to play shortstop for the Cubs) in neighborhood development. The team will commit to play in Wrigley Field over the long run as we wouldn't want our big investments in the bathrooms to go to waste and to remain in the field during construction so, in this difficult economy, local businesses will continue to enjoy revenues the Cubs help attract we wouldn't have to worry about luring you to see us play at the Cell or Miller Park. Our owner's suites will be fine -- you'll be inconvenienced by all kinds of construction, but I'm sure you'll happily pay inflated prices for tickets and parking during this time.
We understand the importance of community and fan participation in this process. If you make your amateur state reps who are already scared of Michael Madigan also scared of you, we'll get this passed. We'll be bribing the shit out of Madigan in no time. Wrigley Field renovation designs are being developed and we look forward to input on our surveys, discussions in forums and other communications we will send to you int eh weeks and months ahead. We most of all look forward to the input of your tax money.
We have an opportunity in this upcoming legislative session to begin the process of renovating and restoring Wrigley Field and securing its continued future enriching ourselves. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and hope you, like me, see this as a fair and straightforward way to accomplish our mutual goals. If you would like to support our legislative proposal in the fall session, please contact us at renovatewrigley@cubs.com.
Sincerely,
Tom Ricketts
Executive Chairman[/i]
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
I'm pretty sure the Trib realized it, too, when teh concrete started falling onto people's heads.
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
No matter how much money Yeti gives me, it's still Yeti who's coming over.
Quote from: Oleg on November 12, 2010, 09:00:42 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
No matter how much money Yeti gives me, it's still Yeti who's coming over.
I'll bring the grass
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: Oleg on November 12, 2010, 09:00:42 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
No matter how much money Yeti gives me, it's still Yeti who's coming over.
I'll bring the grass
If TJ's analogy holds, you're probably bringing the hayseed and, possibly, the bologna sandwiches.
Quote from: Oleg on November 12, 2010, 09:32:10 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: Oleg on November 12, 2010, 09:00:42 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
No matter how much money Yeti gives me, it's still Yeti who's coming over.
I'll bring the grass
If TJ's analogy holds, you're probably bringing the hayseed and, possibly, the bologna sandwiches.
Literally grass, dude.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 09:55:37 AM
Quote from: Oleg on November 12, 2010, 09:32:10 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 09:08:51 AM
Quote from: Oleg on November 12, 2010, 09:00:42 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
No matter how much money Yeti gives me, it's still Yeti who's coming over.
I'll bring the grass
If TJ's analogy holds, you're probably bringing the hayseed and, possibly, the bologna sandwiches.
Literally grass, dude.
That's even more disappointing.
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
Your place doesn't drive the economy of a neighborhood.
Quote from: Fork on November 12, 2010, 10:19:27 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
Your place doesn't drive the economy of a neighborhood.
You don't know that.
Quote from: Fork on November 12, 2010, 10:19:27 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 12, 2010, 08:12:39 AM
I agree that they need to put a team on the field that is worth a shit, but at the same time, I appreciate them realizing that the place is mainly a dump and would be improved with some major overhaul (not nickel and dime stuff each year). I'm all for an idea to tear the bitch down and move it somewhere else, but that's not going to happen so if you're stuck with the place, then improve it. Now, transferring the costs to the people going to the game? That's a separate debate, but at least Tommy realizes his park sucks.
Hey look, my place is a dump too. How about you give me your money and I fix it up. And I'll even invite you over to play cards or watch a ball game or something. As long as you bring some beer and some type of food.
Your place doesn't drive the economy of a neighborhood.
But because my place doesn't drive the economy of a neighborhood, I also do not enjoy the economic benefits of driving the economy. And I defy you to suggest that a mere 10th (or even 1 percent) of what the Ricketts are asking for given to me wouldn't drive the Northfield and Northbrook economies.
There's some empty land in the Glen. Build Wrigley II there and maybe the rest of the shops in the strip center here will get leased. Tax revenues will increase!
But, then the restaurants and shops in Lakeview will see their revenue drop. And their taxes as well. So, it nets out? Shit.
Fucking zero sum games!
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I don't care where they move. They just better not go or stay anywhere on my dime.
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 11:14:23 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I don't care where they move. They just better not go or stay anywhere on my dime.
Or what?
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:16:09 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 11:14:23 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I don't care where they move. They just better not go or stay anywhere on my dime.
Or what?
Or there are going to be some politicians who get primary challenges.
Quote from: PANK! on November 12, 2010, 11:18:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
Thank you for your validation. *Tips Hawks Cap*
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 12, 2010, 11:22:49 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:16:09 AM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 11:14:23 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I don't care where they move. They just better not go or stay anywhere on my dime.
Or what?
Or there are going to be some politicians who get primary challenges.
Oh, noes.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I actually wouldn't give two shits if they tore down Wrigley. It's not like there's a history of winning baseball there or something.
I mean, they tore down Yankee Stadium, for fucks sake.
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 11:14:23 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I don't care where they move. They just better not go or stay anywhere on my dime.
I'm not a fan of Wrigley being fixed up on the gubment dime, either. I was offering justification.
They bought a decrepit ballpark, and since they're true fans who GET IT, they knew it was a festering rathole when they bought it.
Besides, if they either a) leave Wrigley in it's deteriorating state, or b) build a new park elsewhere, they lose having Wrigley Field as its own revenue generator (people going to Wrigley to go to Wrigley).
Not to mention, given the current climate vis-a-vis gubment spending, there are certainly better PR moves they can make.
Best thing they can do is shut the fuck up, pay for the capital improvements (which means no payments to revenue sharing), and profit.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 12, 2010, 11:29:12 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I actually wouldn't give two shits if they tore down Wrigley. It's not like there's a history of winning baseball there or something.
I mean, they tore down Yankee Stadium, for fucks sake.
I think they should tear it down and rebuild it, leaving only the scoreboard intact. But moving it out of town is not an option. People will not travel from around the midwest or the nation at large to visit Glen or whatever the fuck. They might do it once, say, "Meh." and never ever come back. Which might not bother the white people in the northern suburbs but th team will miss that revenue and the entire brand will be shot. The Cubs would become the Brewers. I'd probably become a Sox fan.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 12, 2010, 11:02:29 AM
There's some empty land in the Glen. Build Wrigley II there and maybe the rest of the shops in the strip center here will get leased. Tax revenues will increase!
But, then the restaurants and shops in Lakeview will see their revenue drop. And their taxes as well. So, it nets out? Shit.
Fucking zero sum games!
I'm not sure that the drop in Lakeview would equal the pop in Glennview (which is the Ricketts real problem). Wrigelyville is pretty self sustaining without Wrigley at this point. Their better argument is that the City and State are taxing my patrons, using the proceeds to fund my competitors, but not allowing the Cubs to do the same.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:37:26 AM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 12, 2010, 11:29:12 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I actually wouldn't give two shits if they tore down Wrigley. It's not like there's a history of winning baseball there or something.
I mean, they tore down Yankee Stadium, for fucks sake.
I think they should tear it down and rebuild it, leaving only the scoreboard intact. But moving it out of town is not an option. People will not travel from around the midwest or the nation at large to visit Glen or whatever the fuck. They might do it once, say, "Meh." and never ever come back. Which might not bother the white people in the northern suburbs but th team will miss that revenue and the entire brand will be shot. The Cubs would become the Brewers. I'd probably become a Sox fan.
OH NO CAN'T ALIENATE THE OUT OF TOWNERS!
On Boers and Bernstein, someone brought up "Tax Payers against Earmarks" -- http://endingspending.com/
from that website:
QuoteTaxpayers Against Earmarks, Inc. ("TAE") is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating and engaging American taxpayers about wasteful government spending and the misguided practice of earmarks. In this troubled economy, the time is now to regain control of federal government spending, balance the budget, pay down the national debt, and restore fiscal responsibility in Washington, D.C. We believe our elected representatives must end the practice of mortgaging the economic futures of our children and grandchildren to pay for present-day wasteful government spending.
Information is the best tool we have to combat these problems and hold politicians accountable for the policies that impact the financial health of our families and that are bankrupting America. As an initial step, TAE and its community of concerned citizens will work everyday to expose the corrupting and wasteful practice of earmarks. We will use a variety of programs to expose and shame all those who receive, request, sponsor, and advocate for earmarks. We will provide the American taxpayers with information so that they can make sure that Representatives and Senators do not claim to favor fiscal discipline while at the same time requesting earmarks.
Out-of-control government spending is a bipartisan problem with bipartisan origins. While TAE's individual supporters may be Democrats, Republicans, or Independents, TAE is nonpartisan. Its mission is to end wasteful government spending and eliminate the corrupting practice of earmarks. TAE will work to build broad coalitions on this issue so that we can end the broken earmarking system and stop the misue of taxpayer dollars.
TAE is organized as a nonpartisan corporation and has filed its application for tax exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions to Taxpayers Against Earmarks, Inc. are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
The Chairman of Taxpayers against Earmarks is Joe Ricketts. Papa Ricketts. Is this irony? I honestly don't know.
Quote from: Ivy6 on November 12, 2010, 11:45:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:37:26 AM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 12, 2010, 11:29:12 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I actually wouldn't give two shits if they tore down Wrigley. It's not like there's a history of winning baseball there or something.
I mean, they tore down Yankee Stadium, for fucks sake.
I think they should tear it down and rebuild it, leaving only the scoreboard intact. But moving it out of town is not an option. People will not travel from around the midwest or the nation at large to visit Glen or whatever the fuck. They might do it once, say, "Meh." and never ever come back. Which might not bother the white people in the northern suburbs but th team will miss that revenue and the entire brand will be shot. The Cubs would become the Brewers. I'd probably become a Sox fan.
OH NO CAN'T ALIENATE THE OUT OF TOWNERS!
On Boers and Bernstein, someone brought up "Tax Payers against Earmarks" -- http://endingspending.com/
from that website:
QuoteTaxpayers Against Earmarks, Inc. ("TAE") is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to educating and engaging American taxpayers about wasteful government spending and the misguided practice of earmarks. In this troubled economy, the time is now to regain control of federal government spending, balance the budget, pay down the national debt, and restore fiscal responsibility in Washington, D.C. We believe our elected representatives must end the practice of mortgaging the economic futures of our children and grandchildren to pay for present-day wasteful government spending.
Information is the best tool we have to combat these problems and hold politicians accountable for the policies that impact the financial health of our families and that are bankrupting America. As an initial step, TAE and its community of concerned citizens will work everyday to expose the corrupting and wasteful practice of earmarks. We will use a variety of programs to expose and shame all those who receive, request, sponsor, and advocate for earmarks. We will provide the American taxpayers with information so that they can make sure that Representatives and Senators do not claim to favor fiscal discipline while at the same time requesting earmarks.
Out-of-control government spending is a bipartisan problem with bipartisan origins. While TAE's individual supporters may be Democrats, Republicans, or Independents, TAE is nonpartisan. Its mission is to end wasteful government spending and eliminate the corrupting practice of earmarks. TAE will work to build broad coalitions on this issue so that we can end the broken earmarking system and stop the misue of taxpayer dollars.
TAE is organized as a nonpartisan corporation and has filed its application for tax exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions to Taxpayers Against Earmarks, Inc. are not tax deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
The Chairman of Taxpayers against Earmarks is Joe Ricketts. Papa Ricketts. Is this irony? I honestly don't know.
I'm gonna go ahead and approve this as irony.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:37:26 AM
I think they should tear it down and rebuild it, leaving only the scoreboard intact. But moving it out of town is not an option. People will not travel from around the midwest or the nation at large to visit Glen or whatever the fuck.
The Glen is like a little piece of Scottsdale plunked down in the north suburbs.
Without the awesome Taco Bell.
Quote from: PANK! on November 12, 2010, 11:18:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
There's only room for two people on the hobo seat. Whose lap would Oleg sit on?
And who is going to get primaried? Mike Madigan? That would be funny.
Granted I'm just a simple caveman who fondly remembers Illinois politics benefiting my team, but I don't really see the issue with them asking for some dough. The timing of said request, however, is curious.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/02/sports/white-sox-are-safe-at-home.html
Quote from: R-V on November 12, 2010, 12:31:00 PM
Quote from: PANK! on November 12, 2010, 11:18:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
There's only room for two people on the hobo seat. Whose lap would Oleg sit on?
And who is going to get primaried? Mike Madigan? That would be funny.
I'm moderately offended that I'm not lumped into the metrosnobbery club.
How bad can this plan be? Phil Rogers supports it! (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-wrigley-field-castro-lee.html)
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 01:44:39 PM
How bad can this plan be? Phil Rogers supports it! (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-wrigley-field-castro-lee.html)
Warning: Rock-solid analysis ahead:
QuoteI also am one of those guys who believes cities should invest in ballparks, and not a guy who begrudges teams' owners a shot at tax money because they are, in theory, billionaires who could afford to do it themselves. I spend a lot of time in American cities and ballparks, and the cities I most enjoy are the ones where ballparks have brought a vitality to downtown. I've never done my own economic study but I believe that ballparks/arenas built the right way, and in the right places, either pay for themselves or so enrich a town that they are worth an investment.
Also, "I spend a lot of time in American cities" is the blandest declaration I've ever read.
Quote from: Eli on November 12, 2010, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 01:44:39 PM
How bad can this plan be? Phil Rogers supports it! (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-wrigley-field-castro-lee.html)
Warning: Rock-solid analysis ahead:
QuoteI also am one of those guys who believes cities should invest in ballparks, and not a guy who begrudges teams' owners a shot at tax money because they are, in theory, billionaires who could afford to do it themselves. I spend a lot of time in American cities and ballparks, and the cities I most enjoy are the ones where ballparks have brought a vitality to downtown. I've never done my own economic study but I believe that ballparks/arenas built the right way, and in the right places, either pay for themselves or so enrich a town that they are worth an investment.
Also, "I spend a lot of time in American cities" is the blandest declaration I've ever read.
The idea of Phil doing his own economic study is intriguing. Especially if he's going to incorporate his +/- system.
Quote from: PhildoI also am one of those guys who believes cities should invest in ballparks, and not a guy who begrudges teams' owners a shot at tax money because they are, in theory the abstract, billionaires who could afford to do it themselves.
Meme'd
Quote from: Eli on November 12, 2010, 01:51:18 PM
I've never done my own economic study but I believe that ballparks/arenas built the right way, and in the right places, either pay for themselves or so enrich a town that they are worth an investment.
This may be the gold standard in dumbassery.
Quote from: Eli on November 12, 2010, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 01:44:39 PM
How bad can this plan be? Phil Rogers supports it! (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-wrigley-field-castro-lee.html)
Warning: Rock-solid analysis ahead:
QuoteI also am one of those guys who believes cities should invest in ballparks, and not a guy who begrudges teams' owners a shot at tax money because they are, in theory, billionaires who could afford to do it themselves. I spend a lot of time in American cities and ballparks, and the cities I most enjoy are the ones where ballparks have brought a vitality to downtown. I've never done my own economic study but I believe that ballparks/arenas built the right way, and in the right places, either pay for themselves or so enrich a town that they are worth an investment.
Also, "I spend a lot of time in American cities" is the blandest declaration I've ever read.
Holy mother of Thor. How is this man employed?
I've never taken a math class but I believe that two plus two equals glorph.
Quote from: CT III on November 12, 2010, 01:54:46 PM
The idea of Phil doing his own economic study is intriguing. Especially if he's going to incorporate his +/- system.
Maybe someone can scrape together some funding for Phildo's study. It'd be worth it to see an economic analysis of ballparks built the right way and their effect on cities vs. ballparks built the wrong way (i.e., upside down) and their disastrous economic implications.
Quote from: R-V on November 12, 2010, 12:31:00 PM
Quote from: PANK! on November 12, 2010, 11:18:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
There's only room for two people on the hobo seat. Whose lap would Oleg sit on?
And who is going to get primaried? Mike Madigan? That would be funny.
Sara Feigenholtz would be a start. And TJ could go after Dan Biss.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 12, 2010, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: R-V on November 12, 2010, 12:31:00 PM
Quote from: PANK! on November 12, 2010, 11:18:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
There's only room for two people on the hobo seat. Whose lap would Oleg sit on?
And who is going to get primaried? Mike Madigan? That would be funny.
Sara Feigenholtz would be a start. And TJ could go after Dan Biss.
I could go after Dan Biss, but I doubt that me running in the Dem primary would be seen as anything but a Rovian-esque GOP dirty trick that would get the likes of Rich Miller (also in the Al Yellon-Phil Rogers camp, albeit on a little more solid reasoning (http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2010/11/12/two-excellent-editorials-today-by-the-chicago-tribune-and-a-totally-unrelated-development/)) up in arms.
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 02:37:09 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 12, 2010, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: R-V on November 12, 2010, 12:31:00 PM
Quote from: PANK! on November 12, 2010, 11:18:35 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
Apex' conversion to metrosnobbery is now complete. Go sit next to RV and Oleg.
There's only room for two people on the hobo seat. Whose lap would Oleg sit on?
And who is going to get primaried? Mike Madigan? That would be funny.
Sara Feigenholtz would be a start. And TJ could go after Dan Biss.
I could go after Dan Biss, but I doubt that me running in the Dem primary would be seen as anything but a Rovian-esque GOP dirty trick that would get the likes of Rich Miller (also in the Al Yellon-Phil Rogers camp, albeit on a little more solid reasoning (http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2010/11/12/two-excellent-editorials-today-by-the-chicago-tribune-and-a-totally-unrelated-development/)) up in arms.
Alvin Greene is avaiable.
"Alvin Greene might run for president.
Greene, the unlikely Democratic Senate nominee in South Carolina who lost overwhelmingly to Republican Sen. Jim DeMint last week, called the state Democratic Party on Tuesday to ask how much it would cost to run for president.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44895.html#ixzz156YYqJIR"
Quote from: Slaky on November 12, 2010, 01:57:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on November 12, 2010, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: Brownie on November 12, 2010, 01:44:39 PM
How bad can this plan be? Phil Rogers supports it! (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/your-morning-phil-wrigley-field-castro-lee.html)
Warning: Rock-solid analysis ahead:
QuoteI also am one of those guys who believes cities should invest in ballparks, and not a guy who begrudges teams' owners a shot at tax money because they are, in theory, billionaires who could afford to do it themselves. I spend a lot of time in American cities and ballparks, and the cities I most enjoy are the ones where ballparks have brought a vitality to downtown. I've never done my own economic study but I believe that ballparks/arenas built the right way, and in the right places, either pay for themselves or so enrich a town that they are worth an investment.
Also, "I spend a lot of time in American cities" is the blandest declaration I've ever read.
Holy mother of Thor. How is this man employed?
I've never taken a math class but I believe that two plus two equals glorph.
+ glorph
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/cubs-accidentally-damage-harry-caray-statue.html (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/cubs-accidentally-damage-harry-caray-statue.html)
QuoteIt's been a rough year for Harry Caray.
First came the move of his statue, and now comes the news that the Cubs accidentally damaged it while making over the ballpark for the Nov. 20 Northwestern-Illinois football game.
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 13, 2010, 07:43:13 AM
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/cubs-accidentally-damage-harry-caray-statue.html (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/cubs-accidentally-damage-harry-caray-statue.html)
QuoteIt's been a rough year for Harry Caray.
First came the move of his statue, and now comes the news that the Cubs accidentally damaged it while making over the ballpark for the Nov. 20 Northwestern-Illinois football game.
The Cubs themselves did it? I can just imagine Carlos throwing down his work gloves and going full retard on the turd who did it - Bobby Scales most likely. So now, it's mid-November and this Cubs offseason is already officially fun-bad.
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 13, 2010, 07:43:13 AM
QuoteIt's been a rough year for Harry Caray.
First came the move of his statue, and now comes the news that the Cubs accidentally damaged it while making over the ballpark for the Nov. 20 Northwestern-Illinois football game.
Harry's been dead for 12 years. I don't think it's getting any better or worse for him.
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
Damn you, Tom Ricketts!
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
I'm surprised they were able to fit the field at all. Didn't the football field go right up to the wall before they added the new seats?
Quote from: Tony on November 13, 2010, 01:21:26 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
I'm surprised they were able to fit the field at all. Didn't the football field go right up to the wall before they added the new seats?
(http://i.imgur.com/MFhy9.jpg)
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 13, 2010, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on November 13, 2010, 01:21:26 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
I'm surprised they were able to fit the field at all. Didn't the football field go right up to the wall before they added the new seats?
(http://i.imgur.com/MFhy9.jpg)
Which is the opposite direction from the way the field is running next week.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 01:50:29 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 13, 2010, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on November 13, 2010, 01:21:26 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
I'm surprised they were able to fit the field at all. Didn't the football field go right up to the wall before they added the new seats?
(http://i.imgur.com/MFhy9.jpg)
Which is the opposite direction from the way the field is running next week.
[shakes fist in direction of Ricketts family]
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 13, 2010, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on November 13, 2010, 01:21:26 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
I'm surprised they were able to fit the field at all. Didn't the football field go right up to the wall before they added the new seats?
(http://i.imgur.com/MFhy9.jpg)
Both endlines at the back of each endzone look a little ummm, sketchy, let alone Arena football-like in the walls' proximities.
Still better than Chicago Stadium 1932 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Playoff_Game,_1932), which was even less regulation.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 13, 2010, 01:30:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on November 13, 2010, 01:21:26 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
I'm surprised they were able to fit the field at all. Didn't the football field go right up to the wall before they added the new seats?
(http://i.imgur.com/MFhy9.jpg)
That's awesome. I can barely make out BC.
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/snug-spots-unavoidable.html (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/snug-spots-unavoidable.html)
QuoteA spot near the southwest corner of the field is about 6 feet from a padded brick wall.
Cubs president Crane Kenney called that a "pinch point" and said the team could not bulldoze it down to create more space.
"The brick wall is a landmarked feature," he said, "so that's not coming down."
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 15, 2010, 03:37:13 PM
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/snug-spots-unavoidable.html (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/snug-spots-unavoidable.html)
QuoteA spot near the southwest corner of the field is about 6 feet from a padded brick wall.
Cubs president Crane Kenney called that a "pinch point" and said the team could not bulldoze it down to create more space.
"The brick wall is a landmarked feature," he said, "so that's not coming down."
A pox on all the Rickettses houses!
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:37:26 AM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 12, 2010, 11:29:12 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 12, 2010, 11:13:05 AM
You guys talking about moving the Cubs to the suburbs should be shot in the face with a ball of your own shit. Even if you're joking, I don't care.
I actually wouldn't give two shits if they tore down Wrigley. It's not like there's a history of winning baseball there or something.
I mean, they tore down Yankee Stadium, for fucks sake.
I think they should tear it down and rebuild it, leaving only the scoreboard intact. But moving it out of town is not an option. People will not travel from around the midwest or the nation at large to visit Glen or whatever the fuck. They might do it once, say, "Meh." and never ever come back. Which might not bother the white people in the northern suburbs but th team will miss that revenue and the entire brand will be shot. The Cubs would become the Brewers. I'd probably become a Sox fan.
It's win-win!
My God these people are so fucking stupid it's starting to hurt.
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/joe-ricketts-wrigley-field-taxpayers-against-earmarks-tom-20101115
QuoteLast week, Tom Ricketts and Co., new owners of the Cubs, went public with a request that Illinois taxpayers take one -- or really, take $300 million -- for the team.
But the message is undermined by a YouTube video from Joe Ricketts, who founded "Taxpayers Against Earmarks," a group that is urging lawmakers to control government spending.
"I think its a crime for our elected officials to borrow money today, to spend money today and push the repayment of that load out into the future, onto people who aren't even born yet," Joe Ricketts says in the video.
Oof.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 16, 2010, 01:27:02 PM
My God these people are so fucking stupid it's starting to hurt.
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/joe-ricketts-wrigley-field-taxpayers-against-earmarks-tom-20101115
QuoteLast week, Tom Ricketts and Co., new owners of the Cubs, went public with a request that Illinois taxpayers take one -- or really, take $300 million -- for the team.
But the message is undermined by a YouTube video from Joe Ricketts, who founded "Taxpayers Against Earmarks," a group that is urging lawmakers to control government spending.
"I think its a crime for our elected officials to borrow money today, to spend money today and push the repayment of that load out into the future, onto people who aren't even born yet," Joe Ricketts says in the video.
Oof.
DRLP. (http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=7307.msg231038#msg231038)
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 16, 2010, 01:34:10 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 16, 2010, 01:27:02 PM
My God these people are so fucking stupid it's starting to hurt.
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/joe-ricketts-wrigley-field-taxpayers-against-earmarks-tom-20101115
QuoteLast week, Tom Ricketts and Co., new owners of the Cubs, went public with a request that Illinois taxpayers take one -- or really, take $300 million -- for the team.
But the message is undermined by a YouTube video from Joe Ricketts, who founded "Taxpayers Against Earmarks," a group that is urging lawmakers to control government spending.
"I think its a crime for our elected officials to borrow money today, to spend money today and push the repayment of that load out into the future, onto people who aren't even born yet," Joe Ricketts says in the video.
Oof.
DRLP. (http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=7307.msg231038#msg231038)
Fuck.
What the hell's going on out there? (http://chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2010/11/madigan-says-ricketts-have-scrapped-request-for-wrigley-aid.html)
Quote
House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, told reporters in Springfield Tuesday afternoon that the team's owners, the Ricketts family, withdrew its proposal to finance a $200 million stadium renovation with a state bond sale that would be repaid with the anticipated growth in the 12 percent amusement tax levied on tickets sold at Wrigley Field.
A spokesman for the Ricketts family denied that the family had scrapped its amusement-tax plan.
I haven't seen such bad management of this team since someone told Scott Boras "You tell your client to suck it because we signed Randy Myers, Candy Maldonado and Jose Guzman today!"
Quote from: Brownie on November 16, 2010, 05:29:32 PM
What the hell's going on out there? (http://chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2010/11/madigan-says-ricketts-have-scrapped-request-for-wrigley-aid.html)
Quote
House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, told reporters in Springfield Tuesday afternoon that the team's owners, the Ricketts family, withdrew its proposal to finance a $200 million stadium renovation with a state bond sale that would be repaid with the anticipated growth in the 12 percent amusement tax levied on tickets sold at Wrigley Field.
A spokesman for the Ricketts family denied that the family had scrapped its amusement-tax plan.
I haven't seen such bad management of this team since someone told Scott Boras "You tell your client to suck it because we signed Randy Myers, Candy Maldonado and Jose Guzman today!"
Don't forget Dan Plesac!
DPD.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
In case anyone's yet to see a visual of this:
(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg408/scaled.php?tn=0&server=408&filename=5ys.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Where's your Bronco Nagurski now?!?!
Tommy boy was interviewed on Chicago Tonight last night.
The interviewer asked some pretty direct questions, you guys can debate the sincerity and feasibility of his answers.
Or not.
15 minutes of annoyance. (http://www.wttw.com/main.taf?p=42,8,80&player=Chicago-Tonight&pid=zJm9G_Dui_L__xuBW69yNXvTJd_jJBd6)
Quote from: PANK! on November 17, 2010, 05:58:55 AM
DPD.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
In case anyone's yet to see a visual of this:
(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg408/scaled.php?tn=0&server=408&filename=5ys.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Where's your Bronco Nagurski now?!?!
Will those lousy Rickettseses never learn?!?!?!
Quote from: flannj on November 17, 2010, 07:41:33 AM
Tommy boy was interviewed on Chicago Tonight last night.
The interviewer asked some pretty direct questions, you guys can debate the sincerity and feasibility of his answers.
Or not.
15 minutes of annoyance. (http://www.wttw.com/main.taf?p=42,8,80&player=Chicago-Tonight&pid=zJm9G_Dui_L__xuBW69yNXvTJd_jJBd6)
Ricketts acts like he doesn't understand discounted cash flow and time value of money. Maybe he doesn't understand it. But that would be very strange. (http://www.incapital.com)
The city will get only $16MM or so every year for the next 35 years, but the city will be the big loser if we see any inflation.
He should set up a holding company for Wrigley Field separate from the Cubs (something like Wrigley Field Proeprties, LLC), and then sell preferred stock or a bond to raise the $300MM. What kind of coupon rate would make such a bond attractive? Supposing that Tom Ricketts is right and Wrigley Field will be the moneymaking machine, these added cash flows could service interest on the bond and maybe even pay for some players.
Quote from: PANK! on November 17, 2010, 05:58:55 AM
DPD.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
In case anyone's yet to see a visual of this:
(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg408/scaled.php?tn=0&server=408&filename=5ys.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Where's your Bronco Nagurski now?!?!
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
By the time they use padding, they're too old for Yeti.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
I would imagine a lot of impacts in football are not too pleasant.
Quote from: Bort on November 17, 2010, 10:40:04 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
I would imagine a lot of impacts in football are not too pleasant.
Your mom isn't too pleasant in the mornings
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:48:56 AM
Quote from: Bort on November 17, 2010, 10:40:04 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
I would imagine a lot of impacts in football are not too pleasant.
Your mom isn't too pleasant in the mornings
I haven't spoken to her in over a decade. How is she doing? Is she back on her meds? Drinking?
Quote from: Bort on November 17, 2010, 10:51:16 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:48:56 AM
Quote from: Bort on November 17, 2010, 10:40:04 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
I would imagine a lot of impacts in football are not too pleasant.
Your mom isn't too pleasant in the mornings
I haven't spoken to her in over a decade. How is she doing? Is she back on her meds? Drinking?
She lives in Horner Park
Quote from: Bort on November 17, 2010, 10:51:16 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:48:56 AM
Quote from: Bort on November 17, 2010, 10:40:04 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
I would imagine a lot of impacts in football are not too pleasant.
Your mom isn't too pleasant in the mornings
I haven't spoken to her in over a decade. How is she doing? Is she back on her meds? Drinking?
Pretty good. A freak in the sack, but just a little fussy in the morning. Strip, not gross, DiP.
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
So you
have spent time in an asylum.
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2010, 11:09:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
So you have spent time in an asylum.
I spent about a week in one when I was 17. No padded room for me. But one kid tried to break his wrist on a tile floor and they put him in a quiet room for a while. No word on the padding that I can recall but both wrists were intact when he came out. /sadsackapex
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 17, 2010, 11:15:28 AM
Quote from: R-V on November 17, 2010, 11:09:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 17, 2010, 10:12:45 AM
Quote from: Yeti on November 17, 2010, 10:06:11 AM
Irony that the "You're in good hands with Allstate" logo is right where some player is going to die from hitting the wall?
You realize that's padding, right?
You ever inadvertently ran into padding on a wall? It's not too pleasant.
(but "die" is an exaggeration. I'll give you that)
So you have spent time in an asylum.
I spent about a week in one when I was 17. No padded room for me. But one kid tried to break his wrist on a tile floor and they put him in a quiet room for a while. No word on the padding that I can recall but both wrists were intact when he came out. /sadsackapex lived in Indiana.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
Yes, Pat Fitzgerald has noted this: (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/nu-players-sample-wrigley-field-eye-candy.html)
Quote
Fitzgerald told WMVP-AM 1000 that he will have separate game plans for each end.
"We talked already about (having a) 'going-east red-zone game plan', (and a) 'going-west red-zone game plan,'" he said. "You have to adjust to it. It's kind of like having the elements, whether it's rainy or snowy or windy.
"I don't think we're going to be trying to run a lot of go routes (to the east end zone). It's a recipe for disaster."
I suppose the other problem is going to the west end zone during sunset. The sun does poke through the stands down the 3rd base line. Going west could be a problem for the QB. They should have made it a night game but for the damn ordinance.
Quote from: Brownie on November 18, 2010, 01:27:48 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 13, 2010, 12:46:34 PM
They had a shot of the field at Wrigley and the goal posts at the right field end of the field are mounted on the right field wall. The back line of the end zone is right up against the wall.
No deep posts at that end of the field next week.
Yes, Pat Fitzgerald has noted this: (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/nu-players-sample-wrigley-field-eye-candy.html)
Quote
Fitzgerald told WMVP-AM 1000 that he will have separate game plans for each end.
"We talked already about (having a) 'going-east red-zone game plan', (and a) 'going-west red-zone game plan,'" he said. "You have to adjust to it. It's kind of like having the elements, whether it's rainy or snowy or windy.
"I don't think we're going to be trying to run a lot of go routes (to the east end zone). It's a recipe for disaster."
I suppose the other problem is going to the west end zone during sunset. The sun does poke through the stands down the 3rd base line. Going west could be a problem for the QB. They should have made it a night game but for the damn ordinance.
Damn the Ricketts family. Damn them all to hell.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
Damn those Rickettses for wanting to further monetize one of their primary assets!
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
If it helps them sign Juan Cruz, I'd support it.
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 18, 2010, 01:59:08 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
If it helps them sign Juan Cruz, I'd support it.
I'm actually all for this game, and I'd support the Cubs hosting a couple bowl games in there: the Jimmy John's Bologna Bowl Sponsored by BCB Nation for the 6th place SEC West team and the 7th Place PAC 10 team and then the TD Ameritrade Money Talks Bowl in which the top two teams in the country spurn the BCS Championship Game for a Mega Payout at Wrigley Field in the cold weather. I'd be for them moving a couple Bear games to Wrigley as well as a couple more hockey games. If they could figure out how to do it, I think the Breeders Cup, America's Cup and Formula 1 would be perfect for Wrigley. Especially if it means monetizing the asset, thereby eliminating the need for tax money.
Quote from: Brownie on November 18, 2010, 02:26:01 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 18, 2010, 01:59:08 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
If it helps them sign Juan Cruz, I'd support it.
I'm actually all for this game, and I'd support the Cubs hosting a couple bowl games in there: the Jimmy John's Bologna Bowl Sponsored by BCB Nation for the 6th place SEC West team and the 7th Place PAC 10 team and then the TD Ameritrade Money Talks Bowl in which the top two teams in the country spurn the BCS Championship Game for a Mega Payout at Wrigley Field in the cold weather. I'd be for them moving a couple Bear games to Wrigley as well as a couple more hockey games. If they could figure out how to do it, I think the Breeders Cup, America's Cup and Formula 1 would be perfect for Wrigley. Especially if it means monetizing the asset, thereby eliminating the need for tax money.
At first I didn't swee what you did there. Then I read on and I laughed.
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
Every year? The Cubs already do that 81 times a year.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 18, 2010, 02:37:34 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
Every year? The Cubs already do that 81 times a year.
Zing.
Quote from: Brownie on November 18, 2010, 02:26:01 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 18, 2010, 01:59:08 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
If it helps them sign Juan Cruz, I'd support it.
I'm actually all for this game, and I'd support the Cubs hosting a couple bowl games in there: the Jimmy John's Bologna Bowl Sponsored by BCB Nation for the 6th place SEC West team and the 7th Place PAC 10 team and then the TD Ameritrade Money Talks Bowl in which the top two teams in the country spurn the BCS Championship Game for a Mega Payout at Wrigley Field in the cold weather. I'd be for them moving a couple Bear games to Wrigley as well as a couple more hockey games. If they could figure out how to do it, I think the Breeders Cup, America's Cup and Formula 1 would be perfect for Wrigley. Especially if it means monetizing the asset, thereby eliminating the need for tax money.
I think DePaul and Loyola should restart their football programs and play all their home games at Wrigley.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 18, 2010, 11:22:19 PM
Quote from: Brownie on November 18, 2010, 02:26:01 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 18, 2010, 01:59:08 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
If it helps them sign Juan Cruz, I'd support it.
I'm actually all for this game, and I'd support the Cubs hosting a couple bowl games in there: the Jimmy John's Bologna Bowl Sponsored by BCB Nation for the 6th place SEC West team and the 7th Place PAC 10 team and then the TD Ameritrade Money Talks Bowl in which the top two teams in the country spurn the BCS Championship Game for a Mega Payout at Wrigley Field in the cold weather. I'd be for them moving a couple Bear games to Wrigley as well as a couple more hockey games. If they could figure out how to do it, I think the Breeders Cup, America's Cup and Formula 1 would be perfect for Wrigley. Especially if it means monetizing the asset, thereby eliminating the need for tax money.
I think DePaul and Loyola should restart their football programs and play all their home games at Wrigley.
Hey, let's convince DeVry to start a football program!
Quote from: FrankS on November 19, 2010, 02:35:19 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on November 18, 2010, 11:22:19 PM
Quote from: Brownie on November 18, 2010, 02:26:01 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on November 18, 2010, 01:59:08 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 18, 2010, 01:55:32 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ct-spt-1117-around-town--20101116,0,7737755.column)
Quote
Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts would like the Northwestern-Illinois game at Wrigley Field to become a tradition.
"If everything goes smoothly we would love to make it an annual event," he said Tuesday on Chicago Tribune Live. "The field looks great and it should be a tremendous game to watch."
Nothing like a battle between two mediocre teams, for around fifth place, in a lousy venue for football, but hey lets do it every year.
If it helps them sign Juan Cruz, I'd support it.
I'm actually all for this game, and I'd support the Cubs hosting a couple bowl games in there: the Jimmy John's Bologna Bowl Sponsored by BCB Nation for the 6th place SEC West team and the 7th Place PAC 10 team and then the TD Ameritrade Money Talks Bowl in which the top two teams in the country spurn the BCS Championship Game for a Mega Payout at Wrigley Field in the cold weather. I'd be for them moving a couple Bear games to Wrigley as well as a couple more hockey games. If they could figure out how to do it, I think the Breeders Cup, America's Cup and Formula 1 would be perfect for Wrigley. Especially if it means monetizing the asset, thereby eliminating the need for tax money.
I think DePaul and Loyola should restart their football programs and play all their home games at Wrigley.
Hey, let's convince DeVry to start a football program!
Or PenFoe's beloved University of Phoenix.
UIC Football. You know you want it.
I'm waiting for them to return the Chicago Maroons to the Big Ten. And if they need a place to play, I know of a rich alum who owns a football-baseball stadium in town.
Quote from: Brownie on November 19, 2010, 08:34:13 AM
I'm waiting for them to return the Chicago Maroons to the Big Ten. And if they need a place to play, I know of a rich alum who owns a football-baseball stadium in town.
Toyota Park is for sale, too.
Hopefully none of you fags are sitting in the right field bleachers. You won't get to catch any field goals anymore
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on November 19, 2010, 10:17:22 AM
Hopefully none of you fags are sitting in the right field bleachers. You won't get to catch any field goals anymore
Fucking Rickettses.
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncf/news/story?id=5824661 (http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncf/news/story?id=5824661)
QuoteOnly one end zone will be used at Wrigley Field on Saturday for the Illinois-Northwestern game because of safety concerns, Illinois sports information director Kent Brown said Friday.
QuoteWhen a team is on offense Saturday, it will be positioned to head to the west end zone.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 19, 2010, 10:18:59 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on November 19, 2010, 10:17:22 AM
Hopefully none of you fags are sitting in the right field bleachers. You won't get to catch any field goals anymore
Fucking Rickettses.
You know how much footballs cost?
Quote from: Fork on November 19, 2010, 10:20:14 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 19, 2010, 10:18:59 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on November 19, 2010, 10:17:22 AM
Hopefully none of you fags are sitting in the right field bleachers. You won't get to catch any field goals anymore
Fucking Rickettses.
You know how much footballs cost?
Slightly less than drywall, but expensive as piss.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 19, 2010, 10:18:59 AM
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on November 19, 2010, 10:17:22 AM
Hopefully none of you fags are sitting in the right field bleachers. You won't get to catch any field goals anymore
Fucking Rickettses.
You can't see me, but I'm shaking my head in disappointment. At the Rickettses.
Oh man. What will those loser yellonesque ballhawks do now?
I just have visions of INTs being whistled dead, players being turned around, and the play resuming.
Quote from: Fork on November 19, 2010, 10:51:51 AM
I just have visions of INTs being whistled dead, players being turned around, and the play resuming.
I have visions of some dopey Northwestern d-back going for a pick 6 and then trying to jump onto the goalpost and climb into the bleachers and instead falling and hurting himself.
Quote from: PANK! on November 19, 2010, 10:58:36 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 19, 2010, 10:51:51 AM
I just have visions of INTs being whistled dead, players being turned around, and the play resuming.
I have visions of some dopey Northwestern d-back going for a pick 6 and then trying to jump onto the goalpost and climb into the bleachers and instead falling and hurting himself.
I have visions of me forgetting to watch any of this stupid game.
What about a punt out of the east end zone?
Quote from: Brownie on November 19, 2010, 11:43:00 AM
What about a punt out of the east end zone?
There's still an end zone there.
I have a feeling we'll see some end-zone confusion in this game, either players or cameramen. Should be fun.
Quote from: PANK! on November 19, 2010, 10:58:36 AM
Quote from: Fork on November 19, 2010, 10:51:51 AM
I just have visions of INTs being whistled dead, players being turned around, and the play resuming.
I have visions of some dopey Northwestern d-back going for a pick 6 and then trying to jump onto the goalpost and climb into the bleachers and instead falling and hurting himself.
Northwestern kids aren't athletic enough to jump that high.
Quote from: Brownie on November 19, 2010, 11:43:00 AM
What about a punt out of the east end zone?
since they're already doing "loser's walk", they're just going full alley-ball and using "going or throwing" on 4th downs.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 19, 2010, 11:57:30 AM
I have a feeling we'll see some end-zone confusion in this game, either players or cameramen. Should be fun.
Are you expecting defensive backs to think they're receivers because they're facing the wrong way?
Confused QBs throwing the ball backwards to befuddled running backs wondering where the linebackers went as they score 6 for the other team?
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 19, 2010, 12:00:59 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 19, 2010, 11:57:30 AM
I have a feeling we'll see some end-zone confusion in this game, either players or cameramen. Should be fun.
Are you expecting defensive backs to think they're receivers because they're facing the wrong way?
Confused QBs throwing the ball backwards to befuddled running backs wondering where the linebackers went as they score 6 for the other team?
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 19, 2010, 12:14:00 PM
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
If Gil's wrong, nothing happens! He goes to jail - peacefully, quietly. He'll enjoy it! But if he's
right, and we
can stop this thing... Lenny, you will have saved the lives of millions of registered voters.
Now with Crane Kenney update.
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/only-one-end-zone-to-be-used-at-wrigley-field-game.html (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/only-one-end-zone-to-be-used-at-wrigley-field-game.html)
QuoteThe last-minute rules changes, however, caught the Cubs off guard.
"The Chicago Cubs are surprised by the Big Ten's last-minute statement regarding changes for tomorrow's Northwestern-Illinois football game at Wrigley Field," Cubs president Crane Kenney said in a statement. "Let there be no doubt: the safety of the student-athletes has been - and remains - the number one priority since the concept of this game was first discussed more than a year ago, and all parties have gone to complete lengths to ensure student-athlete safety for this contest. "
My outfield seats got significantly worse for scoring, so I'm hoping for some defense.
Also, it looks like one of the back corners of the West end zone is pretty close to the CBOE wall. Wouldn't it be ironic (don't you think?) if someone got hurt by that wall?
Quote from: Indolent Reader on November 19, 2010, 12:49:47 PM
My outfield seats got significantly worse for scoring, so I'm hoping for some defense.
Also, it looks like one of the back corners of the West end zone is pretty close to the CBOE wall. Wouldn't it be ironic (don't you think?) if someone got hurt by that wall?
Not on my watch.
Quote from: CT III on November 19, 2010, 12:55:03 PM
Quote from: Indolent Reader on November 19, 2010, 12:49:47 PM
My outfield seats got significantly worse for scoring, so I'm hoping for some defense.
Also, it looks like one of the back corners of the West end zone is pretty close to the CBOE wall. Wouldn't it be ironic (don't you think?) if someone got hurt by that wall?
Not on my watch.
The IRONIBITER!!
Quote from: Waco Kid on November 19, 2010, 12:36:22 PM
Now with Crane Kenney update.
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/only-one-end-zone-to-be-used-at-wrigley-field-game.html (http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/11/only-one-end-zone-to-be-used-at-wrigley-field-game.html)
QuoteThe last-minute rules changes, however, caught the Cubs off guard.
"The Chicago Cubs are surprised by the Big Ten's last-minute statement regarding changes for tomorrow's Northwestern-Illinois football game at Wrigley Field," Cubs president Crane Kenney said in a statement. "Let there be no doubt: the safety of the student-athletes has been - and remains - the number one priority since the concept of this game was first discussed more than a year ago, and all parties have gone to complete lengths to ensure student-athlete safety for this contest. "
No Cub fuck-up is complete without a word from Crane. I hear he planned to have a priest bless the right field wall in order to make it safer.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on November 19, 2010, 01:32:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on November 19, 2010, 12:55:03 PM
Quote from: Indolent Reader on November 19, 2010, 12:49:47 PM
My outfield seats got significantly worse for scoring, so I'm hoping for some defense.
Also, it looks like one of the back corners of the West end zone is pretty close to the CBOE wall. Wouldn't it be ironic (don't you think?) if someone got hurt by that wall?
Not on my watch.
The IRONIBITER!!
Iron-biter?
(http://i.imgur.com/AS6hO.jpg)
Why doesn't Ricketts just put himself on the broadcasts permanently?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 04:06:10 PM
Why doesn't Ricketts just put himself on the broadcasts permanently?
Don't give him any ideas.
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
You sold your Ricketts-hating soul for two seats to a blowout. For shame. You hear that, Ricketts? I CAN'T BE BOUGHT!!!! Probably.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:08:42 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
You sold your Ricketts-hating soul for two seats to a blowout. For shame. You hear that, Ricketts? I CAN'T BE BOUGHT!!!! Probably.
It's not just the tickets, man. We got t-shirts too.
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 07:32:08 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:08:42 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
You sold your Ricketts-hating soul for two seats to a blowout. For shame. You hear that, Ricketts? I CAN'T BE BOUGHT!!!! Probably.
It's not just the tickets, man. We got t-shirts too.
That son of a bitch.
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
Al Yellon says this is completely unfair to bleacher season ticket holders and if the Cubs are going to do this they have offer all the seats for free. Why do they only mark down/give away BLEACHER tickets?!? DAMN YOU RICKETTS!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:36:17 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 07:32:08 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:08:42 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
You sold your Ricketts-hating soul for two seats to a blowout. For shame. You hear that, Ricketts? I CAN'T BE BOUGHT!!!! Probably.
It's not just the tickets, man. We got t-shirts too.
That son of a bitch.
Pex sold his Ricketts-hating soul for a dose of Cubbie PASS(10)N.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 30, 2011, 10:38:52 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:36:17 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 07:32:08 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:08:42 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
You sold your Ricketts-hating soul for two seats to a blowout. For shame. You hear that, Ricketts? I CAN'T BE BOUGHT!!!! Probably.
It's not just the tickets, man. We got t-shirts too.
That son of a bitch.
Pex sold his Ricketts-hating soul for a dose of Cubbie PASS(10)N.
Wow. Up until I read this post I had no idea what that damn shirt said. Heh. PASS(||)N.
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 11:17:33 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 30, 2011, 10:38:52 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:36:17 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 07:32:08 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 30, 2011, 07:08:42 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on May 30, 2011, 06:52:27 PM
So today, TPex and I thought it would be nice to head out to the old ballpark for a Memorial Day Matinee. We didn't really move quickly enough on our morning to do list so we ended up deciding not to go. We watched the first inning on TV and decided to head down to The Darkhorse for a salad (once the least surprising something something) and a brew or two. As we walked down Sheffield during the third inning we watched some of the game through the glory hole and then walked another 20 paces when we were stopped by one of the Wrigley Ambassador dudes. In a very thick Baastin accent he asked us where we were headed. We told him and he asked if we'd like to go into the game. I said, yes. He pulled two RF bleacher tickets out of an envelope and escorted us right into the ballpark (we scored a free Santo shirt on the way) and all the way to our seats, then told us to enjoy the game.
Well, we tried but Rodrigo Lopez and Jeff Samardjiza wouldn't allow it. Nor would the dumbass suburbanites in queer shorts who spent zero seconds watching the game and about an hour yelling at Hunter Pence, who never once acknowledged their existence.
Anyway, that 20+ we spent on water, beer and brats could have gone to one of the local establishments. Instead the Cubs got that money. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!!
In all seriousness. That was a beautiful day at the ballpark and we both loved it. Credit where it's due for once.
You sold your Ricketts-hating soul for two seats to a blowout. For shame. You hear that, Ricketts? I CAN'T BE BOUGHT!!!! Probably.
It's not just the tickets, man. We got t-shirts too.
That son of a bitch.
Pex sold his Ricketts-hating soul for a dose of Cubbie PASS(10)N.
Wow. Up until I read this post I had no idea what that damn shirt said. Heh. PASS(||)N.
It's probably PASS(T0)N. Like 'passed on' but only spelled incorrectly. DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!!!
Aisle 424 sums it all up. (http://www.obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/cubs-are-bleeding.html)
QuoteThis all means much less revenue than the Ricketts projected when they made the decision to keep Crane and his merry men, and that has trickled down to the decisions about spending more time trying to find additional revenue streams while simply attempting to tread water competitively in a weak division.
All of the decisions since haven't amounted to much. Quade sticking too long with a starter, batting Ramirez fourth come hell or high water, not playing Colvin much, leaving Brett Jackson in the minors, missed hit-and-runs, dollar hot dogs, discounted seats and all of the other nonsense going on down at Clark and Addison all stem from the one monumental decision by the Ricketts to not rock the boat when they took control of the team.
Quote from: R-V on May 31, 2011, 10:00:01 PM
all stem from the one monumental decision by the Ricketts Selig and cronies to not rock the boat when they took control of the team when the tribune sold the the team.
[/quote]
Fix'd.
Quote from: BBM on May 31, 2011, 10:25:45 PM
Quote from: R-V on May 31, 2011, 10:00:01 PM
all stem from the one monumental decision by the Ricketts Selig and cronies to not rock the boat when they took control of the team when the tribune sold the the team.
Fix'd.
[/quote]
Not really. Ricketss was the high bidder in terms of cash to the Trib.
Quote from: R-V on May 31, 2011, 10:00:01 PM
Aisle 424 sums it all up. (http://www.obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/cubs-are-bleeding.html)
QuoteThis all means much less revenue than the Ricketts projected when they made the decision to keep Crane and his merry men, and that has trickled down to the decisions about spending more time trying to find additional revenue streams while simply attempting to tread water competitively in a weak division.
All of the decisions since haven't amounted to much. Quade sticking too long with a starter, batting Ramirez fourth come hell or high water, not playing Colvin much, leaving Brett Jackson in the minors, missed hit-and-runs, dollar hot dogs, discounted seats and all of the other nonsense going on down at Clark and Addison all stem from the one monumental decision by the Ricketts to not rock the boat when they took control of the team.
You read OV? You sellout.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 31, 2011, 10:29:38 PM
Quote from: BBM on May 31, 2011, 10:25:45 PM
Quote from: R-V on May 31, 2011, 10:00:01 PM
all stem from the one monumental decision by the Ricketts Selig and cronies to not rock the boat when they took control of the team when the tribune sold the the team.
Fix'd.
Not really. Ricketss was the high bidder in terms of cash to the Trib.
[/quote]
YOU CAN'T ALTER MY OPINION. I want to blame Bud and Jerry Reinsdorf protecting their respective interests by not making a veritable goliath in their respective backyards.
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
Quote from: Bort on June 02, 2011, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
just keep SKO out of them.
Quote from: Fork on June 02, 2011, 01:37:30 PM
Quote from: Bort on June 02, 2011, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
just keep SKO out of them.
The last time I was in a Wrigley Field men's room there was a guy cluelessly peeing in a sink. There is no amount of capital improvement that is going to help that.
Quote from: CBStew on June 02, 2011, 03:34:02 PM
Quote from: Fork on June 02, 2011, 01:37:30 PM
Quote from: Bort on June 02, 2011, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
just keep SKO out of them.
The last time I was in a Wrigley Field men's room there was a guy cluelessly peeing in a sink. There is no amount of capital improvement that is going to help that.
I wasn't clueless. I was hammertime and didn't want to wait in line.
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on June 02, 2011, 03:56:03 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 02, 2011, 03:34:02 PM
Quote from: Fork on June 02, 2011, 01:37:30 PM
Quote from: Bort on June 02, 2011, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
just keep SKO out of them.
The last time I was in a Wrigley Field men's room there was a guy cluelessly peeing in a sink. There is no amount of capital improvement that is going to help that.
I wasn't clueless. I was hammertime and didn't want to wait in line.
Fuck it. I laughed.
Quote from: CBStew on June 02, 2011, 03:34:02 PM
Quote from: Fork on June 02, 2011, 01:37:30 PM
Quote from: Bort on June 02, 2011, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
just keep SKO out of them.
The last time I was in a Wrigley Field men's room there was a guy cluelessly peeing in a sink. There is no amount of capital improvement that is going to help that.
Drunk people at a facility that serves alcohol? Who knew?
Quote from: Yeti on June 02, 2011, 04:40:09 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 02, 2011, 03:34:02 PM
Quote from: Fork on June 02, 2011, 01:37:30 PM
Quote from: Bort on June 02, 2011, 01:30:01 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 01:17:22 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 02, 2011, 01:06:30 PM
Quote from: BH on June 02, 2011, 10:26:24 AM
Apex is tom ricketts. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column)
"Tom Ricketts was asked what was wrong with his team that ranked among the worst in baseball, and he answered -- are you sitting down? -- "Nothing. Just a lot of injuries.''"
You seem to be having trouble getting this meme off the ground. Anything I can do to help?
Think we're good. Thanks.
And the bathrooms look great.
just keep SKO out of them.
The last time I was in a Wrigley Field men's room there was a guy cluelessly peeing in a sink. There is no amount of capital improvement that is going to help that.
Drunk people at a facility that serves alcohol with depressingly unwatchable baseball? Who knew?
DPD. I'm rooting for the Mavs to come back and win the Finals so they'll take in a crapton of money that Cuban will use to buy the Cubs from the Ricketts. RIGHT THAT WRONG
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 02, 2011, 09:22:48 PM
DPD. I'm rooting for the Mavs to come back and win the Finals so they'll take in a crapton of money that Cuban will use to buy the Cubs from the Ricketts. RIGHT THAT WRONG
IT'S NOT GONNA HAI
So I arrive home yesterday afternoon after a delicious shoutlunch and I find a small FedEx package waiting for me.
Wondering who this could be from I glance at the return address... 1060 W. Addison St. Chicago, IL.
Now what could the Cubs have sent me?
Crane Kenney's severed ear I hope!
Opening the box I find an OFFICIAL MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL inside of a clear plastic cube.
And inscribed upon that baseball is...
Tyler Colvin's autograph.
I resist the urge to take the baseball outside and bounce it off of the blacktop driveway and remove the cube from the box.
And discover another inscription on the ball...
60 day DL occupant Andrew Cashner's autograph.
Maybe I'll just leave the ball in the yard before the next rainstorm where it will eventually be run over by the lawnmower.
I turn the cube over and find another autograph in handwriting that appears to have been produced by an 8 year old with Parkinsons...
Starlin Castro.
Now what am I supposed to do with this thing? Will Wite-Out work on a baseball?
Looking in the box it came in I find... nothing.
No letter from the Cubs thanking me for my continued support.
No indication at all as to why they sent this out.
So in another brilliant move by the Cubs marketing department I have a baseball with one mildly interesting autograph and two autographs that emphasise how shitty their team is. And no attempt to actually, you know, market to me.
I can't wait too see what they send out in September.
Yesterday I read an interview with John McDonough about the state of the Blackhawks and couldn't help but wonder what life would be like if he had never left the Cubs.
While I'm so, so glad the Hawks are now a top notch organization it's quite clear that since he left the Cubs have become even more of an embarrassment, something I didn't think was even possible.
Quote from: flannj on June 03, 2011, 10:05:54 AM
60 day DL occupant Andrew Cashner's autograph.
So, Tom and "the family" make Cashner sign 20,000 baseballs for season ticket holders and then they blame the bad season on his arm injuries?
Cause and effect, guys.
Quote from: flannj on June 03, 2011, 10:05:54 AM
I can't wait too see what they send out in September.
A bologna sandwich and a visor.
Quote from: Fork on June 03, 2011, 10:26:42 AM
Quote from: flannj on June 03, 2011, 10:05:54 AM
I can't wait too see what they send out in September.
A bologna sandwich and a visor.
But what of the adult diaper? DAMN YOU RICKETTS!!!
Quote from: flannj on June 03, 2011, 10:05:54 AM
So I arrive home yesterday afternoon after a delicious shoutlunch and I find a small FedEx package waiting for me.
Wondering who this could be from I glance at the return address... 1060 W. Addison St. Chicago, IL.
Now what could the Cubs have sent me?
Crane Kenney's severed ear I hope!
Opening the box I find an OFFICIAL MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL inside of a clear plastic cube.
And inscribed upon that baseball is...
Tyler Colvin's autograph.
I resist the urge to take the baseball outside and bounce it off of the blacktop driveway and remove the cube from the box.
And discover another inscription on the ball...
60 day DL occupant Andrew Cashner's autograph.
Maybe I'll just leave the ball in the yard before the next rainstorm where it will eventually be run over by the lawnmower.
I turn the cube over and find another autograph in handwriting that appears to have been produced by an 8 year old with Parkinsons...
Starlin Castro.
Now what am I supposed to do with this thing? Will Wite-Out work on a baseball?
Looking in the box it came in I find... nothing.
No letter from the Cubs thanking me for my continued support.
No indication at all as to why they sent this out.
So in another brilliant move by the Cubs marketing department I have a baseball with one mildly interesting autograph and two autographs that emphasise how shitty their team is. And no attempt to actually, you know, market to me.
I can't wait too see what they send out in September.
They offered that to season ticketholders who paid for their seats by check. I opted to use credit card. Those Amex points can buy me something much more valuable - like a $10 Red Lobster gift certificate.
This isn't really related to flannj's autographed baseball, but somewhere in my parent's house there are a couple Lloyd McClendon autographed baseballs. His brother was incarcerated at the correctional facility that my dad worked at. So that was cool.
Quote from: Tony on June 03, 2011, 04:46:28 PM
This isn't really related to flannj's autographed baseball, but somewhere in my parent's house there are a couple Lloyd McClendon autographed baseballs. His brother was incarcerated at the correctional facility that my dad worked at. So that was cool.
That was?
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2011, 05:38:28 PM
Quote from: Tony on June 03, 2011, 04:46:28 PM
This isn't really related to flannj's autographed baseball, but somewhere in my parent's house there are a couple Lloyd McClendon autographed baseballs. His brother was incarcerated at the correctional facility that my dad worked at. So that was cool.
That was?
It was cool for everyone except Lloyd's brother.
Quote from: Tony on June 03, 2011, 05:55:54 PM
Quote from: Oleg on June 03, 2011, 05:38:28 PM
Quote from: Tony on June 03, 2011, 04:46:28 PM
This isn't really related to flannj's autographed baseball, but somewhere in my parent's house there are a couple Lloyd McClendon autographed baseballs. His brother was incarcerated at the correctional facility that my dad worked at. So that was cool.
That was?
It was cool for everyone except Lloyd's brother.
(||)
Cubs should hire a buttload of BoSawx people? (http://mobile.boston.com/art/22//sports/baseball/articles/2011/06/12/in_an_overhaul_cubs_should_try_to_put_sox_on?single=1)
That the camera-loving Ricketts is a "private" owner is new to me. It's especially cruel to mention Friedman like that's a real possibility.
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So what if Crane Kenney is baseball stupid? He GETS IT."
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Crane's job is to make sure that the fans and players don't forget the real reason we're all here: to get revenge on that cursed goat.
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
You don't need a baseball guy! What do you think we're running here, a baseball team?
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Also what it means - if Kenney doesn't need to watch over the baseball guys, then Ricketts, doesn't need to watch over his baseball guys.
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 08:47:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Also what it means - if Kenney doesn't need to watch over the baseball guys, then Ricketts, doesn't need to watch over his baseball guys.
Huh?
Quote from: PANK! on June 16, 2011, 08:51:31 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 08:47:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Also what it means - if Kenney doesn't need to watch over the baseball guys, then Ricketts, doesn't need to watch over his baseball guys.
Huh?
Draw a pyramid - then figure it out. The baseball responsibility ends with Hendry apparently, per Ricketts.
If Kenney isn't responsible, then how can little old Ricketts be responsible? He's just the owner, dude.
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 09:02:30 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 16, 2011, 08:51:31 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 08:47:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Also what it means - if Kenney doesn't need to watch over the baseball guys, then Ricketts, doesn't need to watch over his baseball guys.
Huh?
Draw a pyramid - then figure it out. The baseball responsibility ends with Hendry apparently, per Ricketts.
If Kenney isn't responsible, then how can little old Ricketts be responsible? He's just the owner, dude.
I built a beeramid to try and understand this and I'm
still confused.
DPD. Glad to get some confirmation (http://dailyherald.com/article/20110615/sports/706159712/#ixzz1PRpk3Lih) that the Cubs are in the tourism business.
QuoteHe disagrees with comments that Wrigley Field is a "dump," calling it instead the "third largest tourist attraction in the state" while knowing it can be improved.
Quote from: R-V on June 16, 2011, 09:08:22 AM
DPD. Glad to get some confirmation (http://dailyherald.com/article/20110615/sports/706159712/#ixzz1PRpk3Lih) that the Cubs are in the tourism business.
QuoteHe disagrees with comments that Wrigley Field is a "dump," calling it instead the "third largest tourist attraction in the state" while knowing it can be improved.
I'm assuming Excalibur is #1, what's #2?
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 09:16:42 AM
Quote from: R-V on June 16, 2011, 09:08:22 AM
DPD. Glad to get some confirmation (http://dailyherald.com/article/20110615/sports/706159712/#ixzz1PRpk3Lih) that the Cubs are in the tourism business.
QuoteHe disagrees with comments that Wrigley Field is a "dump," calling it instead the "third largest tourist attraction in the state" while knowing it can be improved.
I'm assuming Excalibur is #1, what's #2?
U.S. Cellular Field.
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 09:02:30 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 16, 2011, 08:51:31 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 08:47:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Also what it means - if Kenney doesn't need to watch over the baseball guys, then Ricketts, doesn't need to watch over his baseball guys.
Huh?
Draw a pyramid - then figure it out. The baseball responsibility ends with Hendry apparently, per Ricketts.
If Kenney isn't responsible, then how can little old Ricketts be responsible? He's just the owner, dude.
Let's go the other way: If Hendry doesn't need a guy over him, why does Fleita need Hendry over him? Why do the scounts need Fleita over them? Hell, why do the players need a manager over them? Wait, skip that last one. Quade's not really managing.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on June 16, 2011, 09:20:39 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 09:02:30 AM
Quote from: PANK! on June 16, 2011, 08:51:31 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 08:47:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on June 16, 2011, 08:27:21 AM
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
"So, Mr. Ricketts, you and your siblings all have management experience. You all have people whose counsel you must trust more than Crane Kenney. Why is he employed, and what are his accountabilities? To watch the baseball guys?
Also what it means - if Kenney doesn't need to watch over the baseball guys, then Ricketts, doesn't need to watch over his baseball guys.
Huh?
Draw a pyramid - then figure it out. The baseball responsibility ends with Hendry apparently, per Ricketts.
If Kenney isn't responsible, then how can little old Ricketts be responsible? He's just the owner, dude.
Let's go the other way: If Hendry doesn't need a guy over him, why does Fleita need Hendry over him? Why do the scounts need Fleita over them? Hell, why do the players need a manager over them? Wait, skip that last one. Quade's not really managing.
Do tell, Chuck. What is he really doing?
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
That would imply that Rogers even cares enough to watch baseball.
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
DAY SHOULD TRADE HIM TO DA YANKEES FOR JE-TAH! HE'S A GAMER!
Quote from: Armchair_QB on June 16, 2011, 01:09:23 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
DAY SHOULD TRADE HIM TO DA YANKEES FOR JE-TAH! HE'S A GAMER!
What, does Huey have a cousin named Sully from Southie?
Quote from: Bort on June 16, 2011, 01:07:53 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
That would imply that Rogers even cares enough to watch baseball.
Well, that and the fact that he thinks Sandoval's last name is Escobar.
Quote from: BH on June 16, 2011, 07:53:17 AM
Bump (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-says-hendry-and-quade-are-safe-20110615,0,2356555.story).
"Some believe the Cubs should bring in a seasoned baseball executive to replace president Crane Kenney at the top of the front office food chain. "I've never bought into the (idea) that I should have a baseball guy to watch my baseball guy and his baseball guys," he said. "Then what do you get, a baseball guy to watch the baseball guy who's watching your baseball guys? I trust Jim to do the best he can to get the best team on the field. I trust Mike to manage those guys effectively and give us the amount of wins that he can. And so, I really haven't thought about an extra baseball guy, and I'm not regretting having an extra baseball guy at all.""
Here's my problem right here. I don't think anyone thinks that Hendry isn't doing the best he can, it's just that his best is not good.
God, I hate these damn Ricketessess
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Rogers is dumber than gum. Ramirez isn't going anywhere because that $16MM option that the Cubs aren't going to exercise kicks in automatically if he's traded.
Quote from: CT III on June 16, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Rogers is dumber than gum. Ramirez isn't going anywhere because that $16MM option that the Cubs aren't going to exercise kicks in automatically if he's traded.
I guess it's possible that Phil is actually smart and knows this but is just trying to push people's buttons.
NAAAAHHHHHH....
Quote from: Armchair_QB on June 16, 2011, 09:56:51 PM
Quote from: CT III on June 16, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Rogers is dumber than gum. Ramirez isn't going anywhere because that $16MM option that the Cubs aren't going to exercise kicks in automatically if he's traded.
I guess it's possible that Phil is actually smart and knows this but is just trying to push people's buttons.
NAAAAHHHHHH....
That's not even remotely possible.
Quote from: CT III on June 16, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Rogers is dumber than gum. Ramirez isn't going anywhere because that $16MM option that the Cubs aren't going to exercise kicks in automatically if he's traded.
And gum is smarter than Ramirez because by saying he won't waive his no trade clause, he's kissing away $14 million ($2mm buyout vs. $16mm if traded).
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on June 16, 2011, 10:56:42 PM
Quote from: CT III on June 16, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Rogers is dumber than gum. Ramirez isn't going anywhere because that $16MM option that the Cubs aren't going to exercise kicks in automatically if he's traded.
And gum is smarter than Ramirez because by saying he won't waive his no trade clause, he's kissing away $14 million ($2mm buyout vs. $16mm if traded).
Oh, God. Chuck is sort of right?
There's no way the Cubs or anybody else are going to pick up that $16m for next year, clearly. If Ramirez knows what's good for him, he'll ask the Cubs for his two mil now, and nail down a four-year, thirty-two million deal with whoever he's traded to (SF, natch) before he signs the no-trade waiver. Otherwise, from next year on, he's on one-year deals for progressively less money for the rest of his career, which won't be long.
Quote from: Tonker on June 17, 2011, 02:34:47 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on June 16, 2011, 10:56:42 PM
Quote from: CT III on June 16, 2011, 08:43:07 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 16, 2011, 12:55:53 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 16, 2011, 10:52:53 AM
Phil Rogers's response to this interview is mind-blowing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-your-morning-phil-hendry-pierzynski-big-z-20110616,0,182289.story
I did get a chuckle out of his suggestion about sending Ramirez to the Giants. Does Rogers make any effort to look at the rosters of the teams that he thinks are trading partners? The Giants love Sandoval, whether it is rational or not.
Rogers is dumber than gum. Ramirez isn't going anywhere because that $16MM option that the Cubs aren't going to exercise kicks in automatically if he's traded.
And gum is smarter than Ramirez because by saying he won't waive his no trade clause, he's kissing away $14 million ($2mm buyout vs. $16mm if traded).
Oh, God. Chuck is sort of right?
There's no way the Cubs or anybody else are going to pick up that $16m for next year, clearly. If Ramirez knows what's good for him, he'll ask the Cubs for his two mil now, and nail down a four-year, thirty-two million deal with whoever he's traded to (SF, natch) before he signs the no-trade waiver. Otherwise, from next year on, he's on one-year deals for progressively less money for the rest of his career, which won't be long.
Aramis is blocking Vitters shot at the big leagues. Get rid of him.
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 17, 2011, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
No hard feelings here. Besides, it was a good article.
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 09:28:04 PM
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 17, 2011, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
No hard feelings here. Besides, it was a good article.
It was well-written, though I think you were quick to credit Wally Cleaver's business acumen. Just sayin'.
Quote from: PANK! on June 17, 2011, 09:47:06 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 09:28:04 PM
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 17, 2011, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
No hard feelings here. Besides, it was a good article.
It was well-written, though I think you were quick to credit Wally Cleaver's business acumen. Just sayin'.
Thanks, and thanks. It just struck me that, you don't get to were Ricketts has gotten - and my understanding is that it wasn't on daddy's coat tails - without knowing a whole lot about running a business. The only thing I'm still a little nervous about is whether he knows how to separate his logical, rational business side from the I-own-a-team-with-crazy-loyal-passionate-fans-who-deserve-a-fucking-contender-whatever-the-cost side.
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 17, 2011, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
Actually, Ace, from what dad said, the business took a long time to be successful. As Joe said when they bought the team about InCapital, "He loves it and it's just starting to do well now. He's been at it 10 or 15 years."
We really have no idea of how good of a businessman Tom is. InCapital is privately held. No financial statements are available for you and I to review. And dad said that it took 10 to 15 years to get really going.
You said, "The guy plain knows how to make wise investments and run a business." We don't really know that to be the case.
You wonder if InCapital would have survived 10 to 15 years without dad's backing. Maybe it would have, maybe not. But based on public information, I don't think your statement is backed by much more than opinion.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on June 18, 2011, 10:43:06 AM
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 17, 2011, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
Actually, Ace, from what dad said, the business took a long time to be successful. As Joe said when they bought the team about InCapital, "He loves it and it's just starting to do well now. He's been at it 10 or 15 years."
We really have no idea of how good of a businessman Tom is. InCapital is privately held. No financial statements are available for you and I to review. And dad said that it took 10 to 15 years to get really going.
You said, "The guy plain knows how to make wise investments and run a business." We don't really know that to be the case.
You wonder if InCapital would have survived 10 to 15 years without dad's backing. Maybe it would have, maybe not. But based on public information, I don't think your statement is backed by much more than opinion.
Who's basing it solely on Incapital? The younger Ricketts' professional background extends back much further than 1999, when he founded Incapital. I think you're underestimating his prior success - completely unrelated to TD Ameritrade, at Mesirow and ABN.
Even if we look only at Incapital - which is not what the article does - if you are suggesting that Joe Ricketts (a man so devoted to the idea that his children make it on their own that he forbade them to work at TD Ameritrade until they were 30) would prop up an unsuccessful venture for 12 years, I think I'll choose my opinion over yours.
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 18, 2011, 11:30:30 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on June 18, 2011, 10:43:06 AM
Quote from: AceCubbie on June 17, 2011, 07:21:57 PM
Quote from: Slaky on June 17, 2011, 04:28:32 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
Holy shit - that's the same dude who started the gay porn wars of aught-three! Or whatever the fuck year it was. Holy shit!
To be fair, I didn't participate in that business. It just happened to start because of a (stupid) disagreement (which was my fault) about Nomar Garciaparra (about which I was wrong). Other people went a little overboard.
Actually, Ace, from what dad said, the business took a long time to be successful. As Joe said when they bought the team about InCapital, "He loves it and it's just starting to do well now. He's been at it 10 or 15 years."
We really have no idea of how good of a businessman Tom is. InCapital is privately held. No financial statements are available for you and I to review. And dad said that it took 10 to 15 years to get really going.
You said, "The guy plain knows how to make wise investments and run a business." We don't really know that to be the case.
You wonder if InCapital would have survived 10 to 15 years without dad's backing. Maybe it would have, maybe not. But based on public information, I don't think your statement is backed by much more than opinion.
Who's basing it solely on Incapital? The younger Ricketts' professional background extends back much further than 1999, when he founded Incapital. I think you're underestimating his prior success - completely unrelated to TD Ameritrade, at Mesirow and ABN.
Even if we look only at Incapital - which is not what the article does - if you are suggesting that Joe Ricketts (a man so devoted to the idea that his children make it on their own that he forbade them to work at TD Ameritrade until they were 30) would prop up an unsuccessful venture for 12 years, I think I'll choose my opinion over yours.
You don't get it, Ace. You see, Chuck watched a video. (http://ivychat.blogspot.com/2010/11/friend-alerted-ivy-chat-to-speech-joe.html) He has a Doctorate in Rickettsology.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac6h2wczxGA#t=3m28s
QuoteTom's got his dream job. He started his own business and he loves that business. It's a bond business, unique in its market segment. He went through all the hell that, generally, a business owner has when he starts a new business and, so, he loves it and it's just starting to do well now. He's been at it, oh, 10 or 15 years.
JUST STARTING TO DO WELL AFTER 10-15 YEARS!
JUST STARTING TO DO WELL!HE'S BEEN AT IT FOR 10-15 YEARS!Everything Joe Ricketts knows about his son's capabilities as a businessman is summarized in those two sentences. Damning.
And now Chuck has his two-sentence foothold in a narrative about Tom being a shitty businessman and he'll be sticking to it. Forever. (As Chucks are wont to do.)
So how does all this factor into whether or not they PLAY THE KIDS?
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
The comments are disturbing. Jebus. Go Cubs fans.
"These women think b/c they have T&A that they are worth millions if they feel slighted in any way. I say good riddance, glad these women were fired.
These weak sexual harassment claims are getting ridiculous. I hire men for my business because they get the job done, don't miss many work days, show up on time and don't cry when they feel slighted. Only exceptional women who can take it are hired by my company."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How do you determine what's sexual harrassment? If a woman has on a mini and her boobs are about pop out, of course a guy is gonna make lewd comments. No, means no when you're talking about the actual act of having sex. But, if you put the goods on display, guys are gonna give you the attention you were obviously expecting when you put on the plunging neckline blouse and mini skirt."
Quote from: BH on June 23, 2011, 10:08:48 AM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
The comments are disturbing. Jebus. Go Cubs fans.
"These women think b/c they have T&A that they are worth millions if they feel slighted in any way. I say good riddance, glad these women were fired.
These weak sexual harassment claims are getting ridiculous. I hire men for my business because they get the job done, don't miss many work days, show up on time and don't cry when they feel slighted. Only exceptional women who can take it are hired by my company."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How do you determine what's sexual harrassment? If a woman has on a mini and her boobs are about pop out, of course a guy is gonna make lewd comments. No, means no when you're talking about the actual act of having sex. But, if you put the goods on display, guys are gonna give you the attention you were obviously expecting when you put on the plunging neckline blouse and mini skirt."
I've added another to my internet comment-reading cult. Outstanding!!
Quote from: BH on June 23, 2011, 10:08:48 AM
["These women think b/c they have T&A that they are worth millions if they feel slighted in any way. I say good riddance, glad these women were fired.
These weak sexual harassment claims are getting ridiculous. I hire men for my business because they get the job done, don't miss many work days, show up on time and don't cry when they feel slighted. Only exceptional women who can take it are hired by my company."
Worst. Hooters. Ever.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
Quote from: CBStew on June 23, 2011, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
I couldn't stay mad at you.
Nixon's penis, however...
If it means Tom will stop inviting himself onto the broadcasts, I'm pulling for these two women to win the Cubs in the suit.
How about Riggleman to replace Quade?
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 12:20:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 23, 2011, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
I couldn't stay mad at you.
Nixon's penis, however...
So wait, are you, Gil, mad at Nixon's penis? And if so, why?
Quote from: morpheus on June 23, 2011, 05:00:52 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 12:20:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 23, 2011, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
I couldn't stay mad at you.
Nixon's penis, however...
So wait, are you, Gil, mad at Nixon's penis? And if so, why?
No, I mean...
I think I better stop.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 05:09:01 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 23, 2011, 05:00:52 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 12:20:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 23, 2011, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
I couldn't stay mad at you.
Nixon's penis, however...
So wait, are you, Gil, mad at Nixon's penis? And if so, why?
No, I mean...
I think I better stop.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7ibz1ioSF1qdoghio1_500.png)
Quote from: Bort on June 23, 2011, 05:54:45 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 05:09:01 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 23, 2011, 05:00:52 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 12:20:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 23, 2011, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
I couldn't stay mad at you.
Nixon's penis, however...
So wait, are you, Gil, mad at Nixon's penis? And if so, why?
No, I mean...
I think I better stop.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7ibz1ioSF1qdoghio1_500.png)
Bar! What's the name of the man?
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 23, 2011, 09:03:47 PM
Quote from: Bort on June 23, 2011, 05:54:45 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 05:09:01 PM
Quote from: morpheus on June 23, 2011, 05:00:52 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 23, 2011, 12:20:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on June 23, 2011, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 22, 2011, 05:28:20 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 22, 2011, 05:16:47 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on June 22, 2011, 05:11:03 PM
Joe Ricketts sued for sexual harassment (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Av5r_9djFUkLVj0OONsgh9ERvLYF?slug=ap-chicagocubs-ownersued)
Does this mean we aren't signing Prince Fielder?
Depends on how Joe's dick looks in the twitpics.
Not as good as a Chicago Bears "NIXON" license plate, I'd imagine.
I see the resemblance between Nixon's nose and a penis. (forgive me. I know not what I do.)
I couldn't stay mad at you.
Nixon's penis, however...
So wait, are you, Gil, mad at Nixon's penis? And if so, why?
No, I mean...
I think I better stop.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l7ibz1ioSF1qdoghio1_500.png)
Bar! What's the name of the man?
I'm not getting involved, George.
Rosenthal is a moran, since Hendry was fired last year, but sounds like Ricketts might be considering a change. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/some-GMs-may-wind-up-elsewhere-as-trade-deadline-approaches-071811)
"Jim Hendry, Cubs: Speculation persists that owner Tom Ricketts might hire Hall of Fame inductee Pat Gillick as club president. In theory, Gillick could retain Hendry, and the two could work together to fix the club. But the entire idea seems far-fetched; Cubs fans want change, and both Hendry and manager Mike Quade seem likely to be replaced.
The real intrigue would begin once Ricketts began his search for a new GM.
White Sox assistant GM Rick Hahn is generally regarded as the game's leading GM candidate, but many in the industry believe that the Cubs' job also might draw interest from some of the game's top current GMs."
Quote from: BH on July 19, 2011, 10:16:12 AM
Rosenthal is a moran, since Hendry was fired last year, but sounds like Ricketts might be considering a change. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/some-GMs-may-wind-up-elsewhere-as-trade-deadline-approaches-071811)
"Jim Hendry, Cubs: Speculation persists that owner Tom Ricketts might hire Hall of Fame inductee Pat Gillick as club president. In theory, Gillick could retain Hendry, and the two could work together to fix the club. But the entire idea seems far-fetched; Cubs fans want change, and both Hendry and manager Mike Quade seem likely to be replaced.
The real intrigue would begin once Ricketts began his search for a new GM.
White Sox assistant GM Rick Hahn is generally regarded as the game's leading GM candidate, but many in the industry believe that the Cubs' job also might draw interest from some of the game's top current GMs."
Intrepid Reader Internet Apex: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So some GMs who already have jobs as well as some who don't would be interested in an open position with the Cubs. How insightful.
Quote from: BH on July 19, 2011, 10:16:12 AM
Rosenthal is a moran, since Hendry was fired last year, but sounds like Ricketts might be considering a change. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/some-GMs-may-wind-up-elsewhere-as-trade-deadline-approaches-071811)
"Jim Hendry, Cubs: Speculation persists that owner Tom Ricketts might hire Hall of Fame inductee Pat Gillick as club president. In theory, Gillick could retain Hendry, and the two could work together to fix the club. But the entire idea seems far-fetched; Cubs fans want change, and both Hendry and manager Mike Quade seem likely to be replaced.
The real intrigue would begin once Ricketts began his search for a new GM.
White Sox assistant GM Rick Hahn is generally regarded as the game's leading GM candidate, but many in the industry believe that the Cubs' job also might draw interest from some of the game's top current GMs."
If he does hire someone like that as team president, I really hope they let Gillick (or whomever) hire the manager. Ricketts choosing is the kind of intrigue I don't want to see. Crane Kenney and Al Yellon, your new co-managers! The "GET IT" Guys!
Don't worry, Pex. Quade will make a great addition to the Kyardnulls pre and postgame shows. Can't wait to hear the nicknames.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2011, 06:47:45 PM
Quote from: BH on July 19, 2011, 10:16:12 AM
Rosenthal is a moran, since Hendry was fired last year, but sounds like Ricketts might be considering a change. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/some-GMs-may-wind-up-elsewhere-as-trade-deadline-approaches-071811)
"Jim Hendry, Cubs: Speculation persists that owner Tom Ricketts might hire Hall of Fame inductee Pat Gillick as club president. In theory, Gillick could retain Hendry, and the two could work together to fix the club. But the entire idea seems far-fetched; Cubs fans want change, and both Hendry and manager Mike Quade seem likely to be replaced.
The real intrigue would begin once Ricketts began his search for a new GM.
White Sox assistant GM Rick Hahn is generally regarded as the game's leading GM candidate, but many in the industry believe that the Cubs' job also might draw interest from some of the game's top current GMs."
If he does hire someone like that as team president, I really hope they let Gillick (or whomever) hire the manager. Ricketts choosing is the kind of intrigue I don't want to see. Crane Kenney and Al Yellon, your new co-managers! The "GET IT" Guys!
Don't worry, Pex. Quade will make a great addition to the Kyardnulls pre and postgame shows. Can't wait to hear the nicknames.
He'll be coaching somewhere.
http://deadspin.com/5824988/a-dejected-tom-ricketts-rides-the-train/gallery/1
Quote from: CT III on July 26, 2011, 07:09:26 PM
http://deadspin.com/5824988/a-dejected-tom-ricketts-rides-the-train/gallery/1
(http://i.imgur.com/t8Kt4.jpg)
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on July 26, 2011, 10:55:02 PM
Quote from: CT III on July 26, 2011, 07:09:26 PM
http://deadspin.com/5824988/a-dejected-tom-ricketts-rides-the-train/gallery/1
(http://i.imgur.com/t8Kt4.jpg)
Bravo sir... Bravo. Got a caption? Care to submit it? (http://bigcheyenne.tumblr.com/submit)
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2011, 06:47:45 PM
Quote from: BH on July 19, 2011, 10:16:12 AM
Rosenthal is a moran, since Hendry was fired last year, but sounds like Ricketts might be considering a change. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/some-GMs-may-wind-up-elsewhere-as-trade-deadline-approaches-071811)
"Jim Hendry, Cubs: Speculation persists that owner Tom Ricketts might hire Hall of Fame inductee Pat Gillick as club president. In theory, Gillick could retain Hendry, and the two could work together to fix the club. But the entire idea seems far-fetched; Cubs fans want change, and both Hendry and manager Mike Quade seem likely to be replaced.
The real intrigue would begin once Ricketts began his search for a new GM.
White Sox assistant GM Rick Hahn is generally regarded as the game's leading GM candidate, but many in the industry believe that the Cubs' job also might draw interest from some of the game's top current GMs."
If he does hire someone like that as team president, I really hope they let Gillick (or whomever) hire the manager. Ricketts choosing is the kind of intrigue I don't want to see. Crane Kenney and Al Yellon, your new co-managers! The "GET IT" Guys!
Don't worry, Pex. Quade will make a great addition to the Kyardnulls pre and postgame shows. Can't wait to hear the nicknames.
Hopefully this Al and Crane regime hires Ned Coletti and Ryne as GM and Manager so I can be so apathetic that I focus strictly on my studies.
(http://i.imgur.com/t8Kt4.jpg)
I know he'd be a good broadcaster for the family, dad. But Omaha is just too far for him to come interview.
Quote from: BBM on July 27, 2011, 06:49:51 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on July 19, 2011, 06:47:45 PM
Quote from: BH on July 19, 2011, 10:16:12 AM
Rosenthal is a moran, since Hendry was fired last year, but sounds like Ricketts might be considering a change. (http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/some-GMs-may-wind-up-elsewhere-as-trade-deadline-approaches-071811)
"Jim Hendry, Cubs: Speculation persists that owner Tom Ricketts might hire Hall of Fame inductee Pat Gillick as club president. In theory, Gillick could retain Hendry, and the two could work together to fix the club. But the entire idea seems far-fetched; Cubs fans want change, and both Hendry and manager Mike Quade seem likely to be replaced.
The real intrigue would begin once Ricketts began his search for a new GM.
White Sox assistant GM Rick Hahn is generally regarded as the game’s leading GM candidate, but many in the industry believe that the Cubs’ job also might draw interest from some of the game’s top current GMs."
If he does hire someone like that as team president, I really hope they let Gillick (or whomever) hire the manager. Ricketts choosing is the kind of intrigue I don't want to see. Crane Kenney and Al Yellon, your new co-managers! The "GET IT" Guys!
Don't worry, Pex. Quade will make a great addition to the Kyardnulls pre and postgame shows. Can't wait to hear the nicknames.
Hopefully this Al and Crane regime hires Ned Coletti and Ryne as GM and Manager so I can be so apathetic that I focus strictly on my studies.
While we're righting wrongs let's do it right. Looking forward to the brilliant roster assembled for RYNO by new Cubs GM STEVE STONE.
Cubs 'doing everything we can' (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-in-peoria-cubs-doing-everything-we-can-20110804,0,1965278.story)
"Many fans saw a different side of the Ricketts family last fall.
Ricketts' youngest brother, Todd, was featured on the CBS program "Undercover Boss." He went in disguise for a week during the 2010 season doing various jobs around Wrigley Field trying to find out what the club could do to help those who worked at the park.
"Todd did a very nice job. It was a big commitment," said Ricketts. "He had to take off a week of his life, grow a beard and stay away from the park a month before the filming. He took one for the team. I still walk around the park every home game and someone will say, 'I loved you on Undercover Boss.' I'm, like, it wasn't me." "
Quote from: BH on August 05, 2011, 08:30:22 AM
Cubs 'doing everything we can' (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-in-peoria-cubs-doing-everything-we-can-20110804,0,1965278.story)
"Many fans saw a different side of the Ricketts family last fall.
Ricketts' youngest brother, Todd, was featured on the CBS program "Undercover Boss." He went in disguise for a week during the 2010 season doing various jobs around Wrigley Field trying to find out what the club could do to help those who worked at the park.
"Todd did a very nice job. It was a big commitment," said Ricketts. "He had to take off a week of his life, grow a beard and stay away from the park a month before the filming. He took one for the team. I still walk around the park every home game and someone will say, 'I loved you on Undercover Boss.' I'm, like, it wasn't me." "
Holy shit are these morons tone deaf. Surely with our combined brain power we can come up with a plan to trick them out of this team and give it to someone who knows their ass from their elbow.
Quote from: R-V on August 05, 2011, 08:37:05 AM
Quote from: BH on August 05, 2011, 08:30:22 AM
Cubs 'doing everything we can' (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-in-peoria-cubs-doing-everything-we-can-20110804,0,1965278.story)
"Many fans saw a different side of the Ricketts family last fall.
Ricketts' youngest brother, Todd, was featured on the CBS program "Undercover Boss." He went in disguise for a week during the 2010 season doing various jobs around Wrigley Field trying to find out what the club could do to help those who worked at the park.
"Todd did a very nice job. It was a big commitment," said Ricketts. "He had to take off a week of his life, grow a beard and stay away from the park a month before the filming. He took one for the team. I still walk around the park every home game and someone will say, 'I loved you on Undercover Boss.' I'm, like, it wasn't me." "
Holy shit are these morons tone deaf. Surely with our combined brain power we can come up with a plan to trick them out of this team and give it to someone who knows their ass from their elbow.
Prove to me that our losing isn't tied to the facilities in the Dominican Republic.
Quote from: BH on August 05, 2011, 08:30:22 AM
Cubs 'doing everything we can' (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-in-peoria-cubs-doing-everything-we-can-20110804,0,1965278.story)
"Many fans saw a different side of the Ricketts family last fall.
Ricketts' youngest brother, Todd, was featured on the CBS program "Undercover Boss." He went in disguise for a week during the 2010 season doing various jobs around Wrigley Field trying to find out what the club could do to help those who worked at the park.
"Todd did a very nice job. It was a big commitment," said Ricketts. "He had to take off a week of his life, grow a beard and stay away from the park a month before the filming. He took one for the team. I still walk around the park every home game and someone will say, 'I loved you on Undercover Boss.' I'm, like, it wasn't me." "
Tom is just tweaking us at this point. He has to be. Right?
Also, there are problems we need to get rid of on this team. He's looking at you, Kerry.
Quote"Some days are slightly less fun than others, perhaps, but it's been terrific," said Ricketts. "Obviously we're disappointed with the season. We've got some wood to chop and we've got to win more games. But away from that, the first year-and-a-half has been exciting and rewarding.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 05, 2011, 09:36:47 AM
Quote from: BH on August 05, 2011, 08:30:22 AM
Cubs 'doing everything we can' (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-in-peoria-cubs-doing-everything-we-can-20110804,0,1965278.story)
"Many fans saw a different side of the Ricketts family last fall.
Ricketts' youngest brother, Todd, was featured on the CBS program "Undercover Boss." He went in disguise for a week during the 2010 season doing various jobs around Wrigley Field trying to find out what the club could do to help those who worked at the park.
"Todd did a very nice job. It was a big commitment," said Ricketts. "He had to take off a week of his life, grow a beard and stay away from the park a month before the filming. He took one for the team. I still walk around the park every home game and someone will say, 'I loved you on Undercover Boss.' I'm, like, it wasn't me." "
Tom is just tweaking us at this point. He has to be. Right?
Also, there are problems we need to get rid of on this team. He's looking at you, Kerry.
Quote"Some days are slightly less fun than others, perhaps, but it's been terrific," said Ricketts. "Obviously we're disappointed with the season. We've got some wood to chop and we've got to win more games. But away from that, the first year-and-a-half has been exciting and rewarding.
Is that why Ted Lilly was mystified at why the Cubs didn't want to re-sign him?
So, the Bears were supposed to have their annual family night at Soldier Field tonight, but it was called it off at last minute because the field was unplayable.
On August 5th. It sounds like they re-sodded the field after the Chicago Fire/Manchester United game last week. And then the Park District didn't water the sod and nobody looked at the field until 35 minutes before the team was scheduled to practice on it.
Your move, Ricketts.
(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/Ivychat/save_hendry.png)
Quote from: CT III on August 05, 2011, 07:59:19 PM
So, the Bears were supposed to have their annual family night at Soldier Field tonight, but it was called it off at last minute because the field was unplayable.
On August 5th. It sounds like they re-sodded the field after the Chicago Fire/Manchester United game last week. And then the Park District didn't water the sod and nobody looked at the field until 35 minutes before the team was scheduled to practice on it.
Your move, Ricketts.
How could the Cubs fuck up a football field like that?
(http://www.thehotglove.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/nu.jpg)
(http://i52.tinypic.com/241shn4.png)
Yayyyyyyy.....
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 13, 2011, 10:17:20 PM
(http://i52.tinypic.com/241shn4.png)
Yayyyyyyy.....
So no source, no nothing.
Yep, it's just stated as fact. But it's Bob freaking Nightengale, man. Take that to the bank.
Apparently, Chuck Garfien has a bone to pick with Ricketts. (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3a4421c8c9-9169-48b9-89be-46c99c94da15&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest) (Note the comments.)
That's the only Chuck G. I could think of...
What's the over/under on him saying we just had a few injuries. And that this season sucked because of Zambrano. (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6864881/source-chicago-cubs-chairman-tom-ricketts-speak-team-future)
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
What's the over/under on him saying we just had a few injuries. And that this season sucked because of Zambrano. (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6864881/source-chicago-cubs-chairman-tom-ricketts-speak-team-future)
6.
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
What's the over/under on him saying we just had a few injuries. And that this season sucked because of Zambrano. (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6864881/source-chicago-cubs-chairman-tom-ricketts-speak-team-future)
I'll take the over on "yes," I suppose.
Quote from: Eli on August 16, 2011, 09:47:27 AM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
What's the over/under on him saying we just had a few injuries. And that this season sucked because of Zambrano. (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6864881/source-chicago-cubs-chairman-tom-ricketts-speak-team-future)
I'll take the over on "yes," I suppose.
He's going to announce that the delicious bison dogs will now be available in foot-long form.
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 09:19:30 AM
What's the over/under on him saying we just had a few injuries. And that this season sucked because of Zambrano. (http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6864881/source-chicago-cubs-chairman-tom-ricketts-speak-team-future)
He's back to dicuss the future and the Cubs, too. Or he's discussing Back to the Future II and the Cubs.
Either way, just four more years, thanks to some exclusive video of 2015 Todd Ricketts got from his crystal ball! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnmw6K1H-gQ)
Yes. It's going to be awesome. By 2015, they'll have cured Parkinson's!
If Hendry gets fired, Yeti will have redemption. A few years off doesn't matter.
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
DAT LAHAIR KID NEEDS TO BE UP HERE PLAYING EVERYDAY!
Quote from: CT III on August 16, 2011, 01:28:54 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
DAT LAHAIR KID NEEDS TO BE UP HERE PLAYING EVERYDAY!
If our class A park were better (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-ricketts-pans-boises-minor-league-park-20110816,0,6001109.story), our prospects would be better.
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
Thank you for typing out all my Cubs rage today so I didn't have to. Much more enjoyable to sit back and read it.
This front office has AIDS in the portion of its brain responsible for making decisions.
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 02:54:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Wasn't sure either. I'm not saying that Colvin shouldn't play over Reed Johnson. Despite the fact that Colvin sucks, give him the rest of the season to be shitty on a daily basis and then we can all move on.
I'm more concerned with the obscene amount of Darwin Barney love and the fact that he gets lumped with Castro sickens me.
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 02:54:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Wasn't sure either. I'm not saying that Colvin shouldn't play over Reed Johnson. Despite the fact that Colvin sucks, give him the rest of the season to be shitty on a daily basis and then we can all move on.
I'm more concerned with the obscene amount of Darwin Barney love and the fact that he gets lumped with Castro sickens me.
How can you say that? They're a dynamic duo. Darwin's the Rey Sanchez to Castro's Sandberg. You can't split up a pair like that.
Quote from: SKO on August 16, 2011, 03:26:33 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 02:54:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Wasn't sure either. I'm not saying that Colvin shouldn't play over Reed Johnson. Despite the fact that Colvin sucks, give him the rest of the season to be shitty on a daily basis and then we can all move on.
I'm more concerned with the obscene amount of Darwin Barney love and the fact that he gets lumped with Castro sickens me.
How can you say that? They're a dynamic duo. Darwin's the Rey Sanchez to Castro's Sandberg. You can't split up a pair like that.
A Daily Double for a new generation.
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 02:54:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Wasn't sure either. I'm not saying that Colvin shouldn't play over Reed Johnson. Despite the fact that Colvin sucks, give him the rest of the season to be shitty on a daily basis and then we can all move on.
I'm more concerned with the obscene amount of Darwin Barney love and the fact that he gets lumped with Castro sickens me.
That was my point. There aren't many kids worth playing, but there is no point in playing Johnson. But I don't hate Colvin like everyone else, mainly because my meathead brother hates him so much that it somehow forced me into liking him.
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 04:03:22 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 02:54:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Wasn't sure either. I'm not saying that Colvin shouldn't play over Reed Johnson. Despite the fact that Colvin sucks, give him the rest of the season to be shitty on a daily basis and then we can all move on.
I'm more concerned with the obscene amount of Darwin Barney love and the fact that he gets lumped with Castro sickens me.
That was my point. There aren't many kids worth playing, but there is no point in playing Johnson. But I don't hate Colvin like everyone else, mainly because my meathead brother hates him so much that it somehow forced me into liking him.
I realize that such concepts are rather un-hip, but I think having shitty defenders on the field who don't hit adds stress to your pitching staff and to me personally. So I'm all against it. No matter what their birth certificate says.
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 04:31:09 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 04:03:22 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 03:21:31 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 16, 2011, 02:54:36 PM
Quote from: Tony on August 16, 2011, 02:15:26 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 16, 2011, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2011, 12:07:43 PM
Hopefully Levine explains this all on his ESPN chat (http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chicago/chat/_/id/39774)today.
QuoteThat's a great question because nobody seems to know that answer right now. Quade does believe in player development. He's also managing to retain his own job. That can only usually be quantified in wins. Time will tell as to how he will decide playing time for vets and young players.
This is all well and good but unless we're talking about Colvin, who stinks, all the young players are already playing. There aren't any young players that are major league ready. What's the debate? When people keep screaming for Quade to "play the youngsters" do they just mean Colvin? Dolan has already hammered home the fact that he's the same age as Blake DeWitt. I don't hear anyone screaming for DeWitt to get more playing time. Oh, that's right - we need upcoming superstar Darwin Barney to play every day. Because Darwin Barney's OPS+ of 87 is so much better than DeWitt's of 85.
ALSO DARWIN BARNEY IS TWO MONTHS OLDER THAN DEWITT.
You are right......but Colvin is a lot younger than Reed Johnson.
And Bruno Mars is younger than Ghostface Killah. What's your point?
Wasn't sure either. I'm not saying that Colvin shouldn't play over Reed Johnson. Despite the fact that Colvin sucks, give him the rest of the season to be shitty on a daily basis and then we can all move on.
I'm more concerned with the obscene amount of Darwin Barney love and the fact that he gets lumped with Castro sickens me.
That was my point. There aren't many kids worth playing, but there is no point in playing Johnson. But I don't hate Colvin like everyone else, mainly because my meathead brother hates him so much that it somehow forced me into liking him.
I realize that such concepts are rather un-hip, but I think having shitty defenders on the field who don't hit adds stress to your pitching staff and to me personally. So I'm all against it. No matter what their birth certificate says.
Another good thing about not living in Chicago is not having to listen to people complaining about the Cubs not playing their young players when they don't have any good, ready ones who aren't playing.
Or having to read any of these idiot media people who may be trying to further this message.
LSA (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/8/18/2364649/tom-ricketts-chicago-cubs-statement-future). Al's take on what he wants to get out of the announcement. Hint - it's all about clubhouse culture.
Quote from: BH on August 18, 2011, 11:38:04 AMLSA (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/8/18/2364649/tom-ricketts-chicago-cubs-statement-future). Al's take on what he wants to get out of the announcement. Hint - it's all about clubhouse culture.
QuoteI was watching the Diamondbacks/Phillies game on ESPN Wednesday night, and the game announcers made a point of stating that most people affiliated with the Diamondbacks franchise believe that one of the reasons -- not the only one, of course, but a significant one -- for their unexpected first-place showing is, as they put it, "culture change" in the clubhouse. They mentioned that manager Kirk Gibson has instituted some rules to enforce team discipline, such as wearing jackets and ties on the road, and no cellphones in the clubhouse.
God damn you BH.
Quote from: BH on August 18, 2011, 11:38:04 AM
LSA (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/8/18/2364649/tom-ricketts-chicago-cubs-statement-future). Al's take on what he wants to get out of the announcement. Hint - it's all about clubhouse culture.
Quote from: Alvin
Jim Hendry is a very nice man. I've met him briefly a couple of times; he's always been friendly and pleasant and it's my impression that he's very well-liked among his peers. Further, he's always been very good to his players, particularly players who, for one reason or another, didn't quite have a place on the Cubs. For example, when it didn't appear Sam Fuld would fit in to the 2011 Cubs plans, he included Fuld in the Matt Garza trade; Fuld has flourished in Tampa. He's done this for many players -- players love to play for a boss like that.
Two great points here - Hendry trades guys he doesn't want because he's just so damn nice, and Fuld is flourishing (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/fuldsa01.shtml) at a .240/.304/.365/.669 clip.
Quote from: BH on August 18, 2011, 11:38:04 AM
LSA (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/8/18/2364649/tom-ricketts-chicago-cubs-statement-future). Al's take on what he wants to get out of the announcement. Hint - it's all about clubhouse culture.
I refuse to click on that. As a matter of fact I'm thinking about contacting IT and requesting that one of these be attached to the link...
You are accessing a site that is blocked by firm policy. Access to this site is logged and audited.
www.bleedcubbieblue.com has been categorized as a potential risk.
Perusing through the comments;
QuoteBest GM Since Bill Veeck Sr.?
Jim Hendry has been the most successful Cubs general manager in 70 years — because since the 1930s, no other Cubs GM had brought the team to as many postseason appearances as he has (three).
Nice criteria. An 88-win division, and 2 division titles when Tribune and McDonough allowed him to spend freely. In 6 short years (or about 1/2 the time that Hendry has spent with the organization) , Dallas Green constructed 2 legitimate division winners—the first one through trades (Sutcliffe, Sandberg, Dernier, Matthews, Eckersley et.al;..really the whole damn team) and the second one through the farm (Maddux, Grace, Girardi, Jerome Walton, Dwight Smith, Damon Berryhil, not to mention trading a future 500 HR hitting, and 250 winning pitcher in Rafael Palmeiro and Jamie Moyer—also homegriown— to augment these youngsters). Green's player development puts Hendry's to shame, and to ignore Green's regime while tripping over yourself to praise Hendry's is shameful
Apologies in advance for being so combative, but that nonsense is so dumb (and so transparently equivocal, par for the course, I guess) that it glows in the dark. Jim Hendry is a bumbling buffoon who has stumbled into whatever success he's accidentally enjoyed and has produced so few homegrown players—even though he's been in player development for a major market franchise for over a decade— that you ought to be embarassed by any praise you throw his way. He's hardly been better than Ed Lynch, and the insult to Dallas Green is so steeped in wilfull and deceitful ignorance as to provide a disservice to your readers, even though you're just a blogger. My brain hurts.
Quote from: Waco Kid on August 18, 2011, 12:52:27 PM
Perusing through the comments;
QuoteBest GM Since Bill Veeck Sr.?
Jim Hendry has been the most successful Cubs general manager in 70 years — because since the 1930s, no other Cubs GM had brought the team to as many postseason appearances as he has (three).
Nice criteria. An 88-win division, and 2 division titles when Tribune and McDonough allowed him to spend freely. In 6 short years (or about 1/2 the time that Hendry has spent with the organization) , Dallas Green constructed 2 legitimate division winners—the first one through trades (Sutcliffe, Sandberg, Dernier, Matthews, Eckersley et.al;..really the whole damn team) and the second one through the farm (Maddux, Grace, Girardi, Jerome Walton, Dwight Smith, Damon Berryhil, not to mention trading a future 500 HR hitting, and 250 winning pitcher in Rafael Palmeiro and Jamie Moyer—also homegriown— to augment these youngsters). Green's player development puts Hendry's to shame, and to ignore Green's regime while tripping over yourself to praise Hendry's is shameful
Apologies in advance for being so combative, but that nonsense is so dumb (and so transparently equivocal, par for the course, I guess) that it glows in the dark. Jim Hendry is a bumbling buffoon who has stumbled into whatever success he's accidentally enjoyed and has produced so few homegrown players—even though he's been in player development for a major market franchise for over a decade— that you ought to be embarassed by any praise you throw his way. He's hardly been better than Ed Lynch, and the insult to Dallas Green is so steeped in wilfull and deceitful ignorance as to provide a disservice to your readers, even though you're just a blogger. My brain hurts.
Thanks for the plug. Also, I blame BH for compelling me to visit that wasteland for the first time in months and being further compelled to leave that comment.
Quote from: PANK! on August 18, 2011, 12:58:16 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on August 18, 2011, 12:52:27 PM
Perusing through the comments;
QuoteBest GM Since Bill Veeck Sr.?
Jim Hendry has been the most successful Cubs general manager in 70 years — because since the 1930s, no other Cubs GM had brought the team to as many postseason appearances as he has (three).
Nice criteria. An 88-win division, and 2 division titles when Tribune and McDonough allowed him to spend freely. In 6 short years (or about 1/2 the time that Hendry has spent with the organization) , Dallas Green constructed 2 legitimate division winners—the first one through trades (Sutcliffe, Sandberg, Dernier, Matthews, Eckersley et.al;..really the whole damn team) and the second one through the farm (Maddux, Grace, Girardi, Jerome Walton, Dwight Smith, Damon Berryhil, not to mention trading a future 500 HR hitting, and 250 winning pitcher in Rafael Palmeiro and Jamie Moyer—also homegriown— to augment these youngsters). Green's player development puts Hendry's to shame, and to ignore Green's regime while tripping over yourself to praise Hendry's is shameful
Apologies in advance for being so combative, but that nonsense is so dumb (and so transparently equivocal, par for the course, I guess) that it glows in the dark. Jim Hendry is a bumbling buffoon who has stumbled into whatever success he's accidentally enjoyed and has produced so few homegrown players—even though he's been in player development for a major market franchise for over a decade— that you ought to be embarassed by any praise you throw his way. He's hardly been better than Ed Lynch, and the insult to Dallas Green is so steeped in wilfull and deceitful ignorance as to provide a disservice to your readers, even though you're just a blogger. My brain hurts.
Thanks for the plug. Also, I blame BH for compelling me to visit that wasteland for the first time in months and being further compelled to leave that comment.
John Holland also gets an honorable mention for being Not Terrible.
Quote from: PANK! on August 18, 2011, 12:58:16 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on August 18, 2011, 12:52:27 PM
Perusing through the comments;
QuoteBest GM Since Bill Veeck Sr.?
Jim Hendry has been the most successful Cubs general manager in 70 years — because since the 1930s, no other Cubs GM had brought the team to as many postseason appearances as he has (three).
Nice criteria. An 88-win division, and 2 division titles when Tribune and McDonough allowed him to spend freely. In 6 short years (or about 1/2 the time that Hendry has spent with the organization) , Dallas Green constructed 2 legitimate division winners—the first one through trades (Sutcliffe, Sandberg, Dernier, Matthews, Eckersley et.al;..really the whole damn team) and the second one through the farm (Maddux, Grace, Girardi, Jerome Walton, Dwight Smith, Damon Berryhil, not to mention trading a future 500 HR hitting, and 250 winning pitcher in Rafael Palmeiro and Jamie Moyer—also homegriown— to augment these youngsters). Green's player development puts Hendry's to shame, and to ignore Green's regime while tripping over yourself to praise Hendry's is shameful
Apologies in advance for being so combative, but that nonsense is so dumb (and so transparently equivocal, par for the course, I guess) that it glows in the dark. Jim Hendry is a bumbling buffoon who has stumbled into whatever success he's accidentally enjoyed and has produced so few homegrown players—even though he's been in player development for a major market franchise for over a decade— that you ought to be embarassed by any praise you throw his way. He's hardly been better than Ed Lynch, and the insult to Dallas Green is so steeped in wilfull and deceitful ignorance as to provide a disservice to your readers, even though you're just a blogger. My brain hurts.
Thanks for the plug. Also, I blame BH for compelling me to visit that wasteland for the first time in months and being further compelled to leave that comment.
"
While your comabtive tone seems a little unwarranted
I can't disagree with anything you said."
by Mapmaker
"Same here
Tone is unnecessary, but many valid points."
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem.
by Shanghai Badger
Quote from: PANK! on August 18, 2011, 12:58:16 PM
Quote from: Waco Kid on August 18, 2011, 12:52:27 PM
Perusing through the comments;
QuoteBest GM Since Bill Veeck Sr.?
Jim Hendry has been the most successful Cubs general manager in 70 years — because since the 1930s, no other Cubs GM had brought the team to as many postseason appearances as he has (three).
Nice criteria. An 88-win division, and 2 division titles when Tribune and McDonough allowed him to spend freely. In 6 short years (or about 1/2 the time that Hendry has spent with the organization) , Dallas Green constructed 2 legitimate division winners—the first one through trades (Sutcliffe, Sandberg, Dernier, Matthews, Eckersley et.al;..really the whole damn team) and the second one through the farm (Maddux, Grace, Girardi, Jerome Walton, Dwight Smith, Damon Berryhil, not to mention trading a future 500 HR hitting, and 250 winning pitcher in Rafael Palmeiro and Jamie Moyer—also homegriown— to augment these youngsters). Green's player development puts Hendry's to shame, and to ignore Green's regime while tripping over yourself to praise Hendry's is shameful
Apologies in advance for being so combative, but that nonsense is so dumb (and so transparently equivocal, par for the course, I guess) that it glows in the dark. Jim Hendry is a bumbling buffoon who has stumbled into whatever success he's accidentally enjoyed and has produced so few homegrown players—even though he's been in player development for a major market franchise for over a decade— that you ought to be embarassed by any praise you throw his way. He's hardly been better than Ed Lynch, and the insult to Dallas Green is so steeped in wilfull and deceitful ignorance as to provide a disservice to your readers, even though you're just a blogger. My brain hurts.
Thanks for the plug. Also, I blame BH for compelling me to visit that wasteland for the first time in months and being further compelled to leave that comment.
Quote from: Al YellonHowever, it is true that no Cubs GM produced as many postseason appearances as Hendry since the 1930s. Green wasn't GM in 1989, although you are also correct that the players his system produced helped win that title.
It
is true.
In fact, I think Al actually sells Jim short by not highlighting the fact that Hendry has led the Cubs to more NLDS appearances than all other Cubs general managers combined
since 1876.
#FACT
Hendry's clubs have won more than 20 percent of the Cubs' all-time playoff games.
He's 6-12 in the playoffs, a winning percentage of .333, the fourth best playoff winning percentage as baseball executive in charge of the Cubs
The Cubs are 28-55 (.337) all time, or 22-33 (.400) pre-Hendry.
Kick Lynch's 0-3 out in 1998 as Hendry was in the brain trust, and the Cubs were 22-30 in the postseason without Hendry.
Bill Veeck Sr. was involved with the Cubs from 1918-1933, getting shitcanned by PK Wrigley. (Nice choice, Phil.)
Anyway, the Cubs were 3-12 in the postseason those years (.200, tied for fifth best). Boots Weber took over as GM and lasted through 1940, bringing the Cubs to two World Series and a postseason record of 2-8 (.200, tied for fifth). James Gallagher was the Cubs GM of the 1940s, and the Cubs went 3-4 in the postseason under him (.429, second best)
EDIT to reflect James Gallagher 1940-1949 reign
Then you have Dallas Green, whose Cubs were 2-3 (.400, third best) in the postseason, Jim Frey (1-4, .200 tied for fifth best) and Eddie Lynch (0-3, .000, eighth best).
Charles Webb Murphy was the owner of the Cubs from the early aughts to 1913. He was an asshole, an asshole whose results I wouldn't mind seeing today. The Cubs were a mere 11-9 (.550, tops among Cubs executives in charge of baseball ops) in postseason play.
Maybe we can agree that Jim Hendry is the best GM who Al has ever met since he started "writing" and started sucking up to for access.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 18, 2011, 03:03:51 PM
Maybe we can agree that Jim Hendry is the best GM who Al has ever met since he started "writing" and started sucking up to for access.
And Dave Kaplan is the best broadcaster.
I think Al has stumbled onto the reason why Pena wasn't traded.
QuoteRecently, Carlos Peña, who played in the World Series for the 2008 AL champion Rays, said that the Cubs need a culture change:
"What is Latin American culture?" Peña said. "What is the European culture? Basically, it's a way of being.
"When I say culture of the team, (it's) the way we interact with each other, the way we react to things, the way we view ourselves, the way we view our season. (So) what's our identity?
"It's just viewing ourselves in a different light, wearing the uniform with pride, just all those personal things that (should be) ingrained in us."
And what was Mike Quade's response to that? A nervous and silly joke:
Quade, when asked about Carlos Peña's comment that the Cubs need a "cultural change" in the clubhouse: "The culture? Does that mean adding an Australian, or does that mean getting a Chinese player? I don't know."
Pena is your 2012 player/manager. It's gonna hai.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 18, 2011, 06:48:21 PM
I think Al has stumbled onto the reason why Pena wasn't traded.
QuoteRecently, Carlos Peña, who played in the World Series for the 2008 AL champion Rays, said that the Cubs need a culture change:
"What is Latin American culture?" Peña said. "What is the European culture? Basically, it's a way of being.
"When I say culture of the team, (it's) the way we interact with each other, the way we react to things, the way we view ourselves, the way we view our season. (So) what's our identity?
"It's just viewing ourselves in a different light, wearing the uniform with pride, just all those personal things that (should be) ingrained in us."
And what was Mike Quade's response to that? A nervous and silly joke:
Quade, when asked about Carlos Peña's comment that the Cubs need a "cultural change" in the clubhouse: "The culture? Does that mean adding an Australian, or does that mean getting a Chinese player? I don't know."
If that's what it takes to show respect for Asian culture.
Signs (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110818/sports/708189824/)that point to Hendry staying.
Another case for Fleita (because he found starlin castro), Wilkens, both of which may leave if Hendry leaves.
Also, the new GM might hire scouts that don't like who we just drafted. Makes sense.
Go get 'em Jimbo.
Quote from: BH on August 19, 2011, 09:28:26 AM
Signs (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110818/sports/708189824/)that point to Hendry staying.
Another case for Fleita (because he found starlin castro), Wilkens, both of which may leave if Hendry leaves.
Also, the new GM might hire scouts that don't like who we just drafted. Makes sense.
Go get 'em Jimbo.
I believe finding one player with good potential (that has not been reached and may never be reached, for all we know) is a great reason for a lifetime extension. Make it hai. Nevermind - the Orange One says Hendry is FIRED.
FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRED
Quote from: Slaky on August 19, 2011, 10:08:59 AM
Quote from: BH on August 19, 2011, 09:28:26 AM
Signs (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110818/sports/708189824/)that point to Hendry staying.
Another case for Fleita (because he found starlin castro), Wilkens, both of which may leave if Hendry leaves.
Also, the new GM might hire scouts that don't like who we just drafted. Makes sense.
Go get 'em Jimbo.
I believe finding one player with good potential (that has not been reached and may never be reached, for all we know) is a great reason for a lifetime extension. Make it hai.
Nevermind - the Orange One says Hendry is FIRED.
FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRED
Source. (http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104570551196057600)
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:15:12 AM
Quote from: Slaky on August 19, 2011, 10:08:59 AM
Quote from: BH on August 19, 2011, 09:28:26 AM
Signs (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110818/sports/708189824/)that point to Hendry staying.
Another case for Fleita (because he found starlin castro), Wilkens, both of which may leave if Hendry leaves.
Also, the new GM might hire scouts that don't like who we just drafted. Makes sense.
Go get 'em Jimbo.
I believe finding one player with good potential (that has not been reached and may never be reached, for all we know) is a great reason for a lifetime extension. Make it hai.
Nevermind - the Orange One says Hendry is FIRED.
FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRED
Source. (http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104570551196057600)
Looks like I'll have to cast my "stalking net" and corner Kaplan today before I get too excited.
Quote from: PANK! on August 19, 2011, 10:22:25 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:15:12 AM
Quote from: Slaky on August 19, 2011, 10:08:59 AM
Quote from: BH on August 19, 2011, 09:28:26 AM
Signs (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110818/sports/708189824/)that point to Hendry staying.
Another case for Fleita (because he found starlin castro), Wilkens, both of which may leave if Hendry leaves.
Also, the new GM might hire scouts that don't like who we just drafted. Makes sense.
Go get 'em Jimbo.
I believe finding one player with good potential (that has not been reached and may never be reached, for all we know) is a great reason for a lifetime extension. Make it hai.
Nevermind - the Orange One says Hendry is FIRED.
FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRED
Source. (http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104570551196057600)
Looks like I'll have to cast my "stalking net" and corner Kaplan today before I get too excited.
I'm going to wait until someone other than Yeti, Colin Cowherd and Kaplan say he's out.
Levine reporting it on ESPN.
http://espn.go.com/chicago/mlb/story/_/id/6876743/chicago-cubs-fire-general-manager-jim-hendry
Can't help it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnkefjCES-4
So, according to Yeti's transcript of the presser, Hendry was told he was being fired before the trade deadline?
Fuck this team.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:53:07 AM
So, according to Yeti's transcript of the presser, Hendry was told he was being fired before the trade deadline?
Fuck this team.
Wait, what?
Why in the hell would they do that?
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:53:07 AM
So, according to Yeti's transcript of the presser, Hendry was told he was being fired before the trade deadline?
Fuck this team.
My guess is that they wanted someone to negotiate the contracts on the draft picks, which apparently was what Hendry did personally over the last few days. In terms of the trade deadline, they didn't really have shit to trade anyway. They could still do waiver deals for Soriano, et. al.
Quote from: flannj on August 19, 2011, 10:55:48 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:53:07 AM
So, according to Yeti's transcript of the presser, Hendry was told he was being fired before the trade deadline?
Fuck this team.
Wait, what?
Why in the hell would they do that?
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104580936909324288
QuoteHendry just admitted that he was fired on July 22nd. He stayed on to help get all of the draft picks signed.
Also...
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104579924874108928
QuoteA search will commence immediately. Current structure with business on one side/baseball operations on the other expected to be in place.
I assume this means Crane lives to milque another toast.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 11:01:55 AM
Also...
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104579924874108928
QuoteA search will commence immediately. Current structure with business on one side/baseball operations on the other expected to be in place.
I assume this means Crane lives to milque another toast.
i've never understood the Kenney hate--he's never done enough to make me think twice about him, let alone hate him. He's just...bleh.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:57:33 AM
Quote from: flannj on August 19, 2011, 10:55:48 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 10:53:07 AM
So, according to Yeti's transcript of the presser, Hendry was told he was being fired before the trade deadline?
Fuck this team.
Wait, what?
Why in the hell would they do that?
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104580936909324288
QuoteHendry just admitted that he was fired on July 22nd. He stayed on to help get all of the draft picks signed.
All this does is underline how much I wish Yeti had been right.
He should have been gone by last October.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 18, 2011, 08:32:42 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 18, 2011, 06:48:21 PM
I think Al has stumbled onto the reason why Pena wasn't traded.
QuoteRecently, Carlos Peña, who played in the World Series for the 2008 AL champion Rays, said that the Cubs need a culture change:
"What is Latin American culture?" Peña said. "What is the European culture? Basically, it's a way of being.
"When I say culture of the team, (it's) the way we interact with each other, the way we react to things, the way we view ourselves, the way we view our season. (So) what's our identity?
"It's just viewing ourselves in a different light, wearing the uniform with pride, just all those personal things that (should be) ingrained in us."
And what was Mike Quade's response to that? A nervous and silly joke:
Quade, when asked about Carlos Peña's comment that the Cubs need a "cultural change" in the clubhouse: "The culture? Does that mean adding an Australian, or does that mean getting a Chinese player? I don't know."
If that's what it takes to show respect for Asian culture.
oof
Quote from: fiveouts on August 19, 2011, 11:04:54 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 11:01:55 AM
Also...
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104579924874108928
QuoteA search will commence immediately. Current structure with business on one side/baseball operations on the other expected to be in place.
I assume this means Crane lives to milque another toast.
i've never understood the Kenney hate--he's never done enough to make me think twice about him, let alone hate him. He's just...bleh.
The problem was that he was Hendry's boss and stood between the baseball operations and the dipshits who owned the team. He knew nothing of this baseball sport thing. And so he's still a problem because even with Hendry leaving, there's just Crane and the Ricketts hiring the replacement. So what will be different? Fuck Crane.
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 19, 2011, 02:12:11 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on August 19, 2011, 11:04:54 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 11:01:55 AM
Also...
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104579924874108928
QuoteA search will commence immediately. Current structure with business on one side/baseball operations on the other expected to be in place.
I assume this means Crane lives to milque another toast.
i've never understood the Kenney hate--he's never done enough to make me think twice about him, let alone hate him. He's just...bleh.
The problem was that he was Hendry's boss and stood between the baseball operations and the dipshits who owned the team. He knew nothing of this baseball sport thing. And so he's still a problem because even with Hendry leaving, there's just Crane and the Ricketts hiring the replacement. So what will be different? Fuck Crane.
How did he stand between baseball operations and ownership? When he was with the Trib? From everything I have seen, the guy hasn't had anything to do with the baseball decisions and only shows his face when they're talking about stadium or Spring Training home issues. Or to bless a stupid fucking goat.
Everything I heard from Ricketts in terms of their ideal candidate seemed okay by me.
This is awesome (http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/8/19/2372787/jim-hendry-fired-cubs-gm-disliked).
Al really nails it.
" There never seemed to be a "Cubs Way" of doing things from the lowest level of the minors to the majors; poor fundamental play and no team discipline, represented by something as simple as not having the entire team standing outside the dugout at Wrigley Field for the national anthem, even as visiting teams did. The message was clear: "Cubs can do whatever they want."
Friday, owner Tom Ricketts sent the clear message that this sort of thing won't be tolerated, by saying the new GM will come from outside the organization and would report directly to him. That, at least, should get Cubs fans to put their torches and pitchforks away and have a glimmer of hope for the future."
Quote from: fiveouts on August 19, 2011, 03:13:23 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 19, 2011, 02:12:11 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on August 19, 2011, 11:04:54 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 11:01:55 AM
Also...
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104579924874108928
QuoteA search will commence immediately. Current structure with business on one side/baseball operations on the other expected to be in place.
I assume this means Crane lives to milque another toast.
i've never understood the Kenney hate--he's never done enough to make me think twice about him, let alone hate him. He's just...bleh.
The problem was that he was Hendry's boss and stood between the baseball operations and the dipshits who owned the team. He knew nothing of this baseball sport thing. And so he's still a problem because even with Hendry leaving, there's just Crane and the Ricketts hiring the replacement. So what will be different? Fuck Crane.
How did he stand between baseball operations and ownership? When he was with the Trib? From everything I have seen, the guy hasn't had anything to do with the baseball decisions and only shows his face when they're talking about stadium or Spring Training home issues. Or to bless a stupid fucking goat.
Everything I heard from Ricketts in terms of their ideal candidate seemed okay by me.
I don't think you really grasp this whole firebarn concept all that firmly.
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 19, 2011, 04:40:13 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on August 19, 2011, 03:13:23 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on August 19, 2011, 02:12:11 PM
Quote from: fiveouts on August 19, 2011, 11:04:54 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on August 19, 2011, 11:01:55 AM
Also...
http://twitter.com/thekapman/status/104579924874108928
QuoteA search will commence immediately. Current structure with business on one side/baseball operations on the other expected to be in place.
I assume this means Crane lives to milque another toast.
i've never understood the Kenney hate--he's never done enough to make me think twice about him, let alone hate him. He's just...bleh.
The problem was that he was Hendry's boss and stood between the baseball operations and the dipshits who owned the team. He knew nothing of this baseball sport thing. And so he's still a problem because even with Hendry leaving, there's just Crane and the Ricketts hiring the replacement. So what will be different? Fuck Crane.
How did he stand between baseball operations and ownership? When he was with the Trib? From everything I have seen, the guy hasn't had anything to do with the baseball decisions and only shows his face when they're talking about stadium or Spring Training home issues. Or to bless a stupid fucking goat.
Everything I heard from Ricketts in terms of their ideal candidate seemed okay by me.
I don't think you really grasp this whole firebarn concept all that firmly.
I'm actually legitimately confused--I constantly hear writers, tv personalities, radio guys, et. al. rip this guy with Cutler-level intensity. I'm actually legitimately confused about it, because I haven't read a ton of specific things he's done that have been terrible; the only thing I ever hear are vague generalizations about him wanting "in on the baseball decisions."
Personally, I don't care about him either way. If you want to nuke the entire front office (aside from Ari Kaplan and Tim Wilken), I'm cool with it. I'm just wondering if this guy is a legitimate jerkoff or if he just doesn't play nice with the media. I honestly have no idea.
Well, you know, it's good to have you guys here, you know, and obviously you have to know there are no shortcuts, and we just need to, you know, improve our facilities throughout the organization, and also Carlos Zambrano is, you know, Satan incarnate. Enjoy Wrigley Field.
Edit: Look! I'm up here in the upper deck with the rubes! What a great guy and friendly owner I am. I bet those idiots in the ESPN booth are eating this up!
Quote from: BH on August 19, 2011, 03:33:56 PM
This is awesome (http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/8/19/2372787/jim-hendry-fired-cubs-gm-disliked).
Al really nails it.
" There never seemed to be a "Cubs Way" of doing things from the lowest level of the minors to the majors; poor fundamental play and no team discipline,
Au contraire, Alvin. I think you've hit directly on the "Cubs way" of doing things.
David Haugh sets the record straight on Crane Kenney. (http://www.modbee.com/2011/08/23/1827828/cubs-presidents-task-is-developing.html)
Quote from: BH on August 24, 2011, 10:05:59 AM
David Haugh sets the record straight on Crane Kenney. (http://www.modbee.com/2011/08/23/1827828/cubs-presidents-task-is-developing.html)
Okay, what the hell is going on with Crane Kenney? My assumption was always that he was an empty suit that Ricketts was keeping around to do the dirty political negotiations because nobody likes him anyway. Now all I hear is that he's Bob Pulford 2.0.
I WANT SOME ANSWERS DAMMIT!
Quote from: CT III on August 24, 2011, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: BH on August 24, 2011, 10:05:59 AM
David Haugh sets the record straight on Crane Kenney. (http://www.modbee.com/2011/08/23/1827828/cubs-presidents-task-is-developing.html)
Okay, what the hell is going on with Crane Kenney? My assumption was always that he was an empty suit that Ricketts was keeping around to do the dirty political negotiations because nobody likes him anyway. Now all I hear is that he's Bob Pulford 2.0.
I WANT SOME ANSWERS DAMMIT!
It's obvious: There's a super gay four-way between Biggsy, TIMSHAW, Crane Kenney and David Haugh. It's like Lemon Party 3000.
Quote from: Slaky on August 24, 2011, 12:56:42 PM
Quote from: CT III on August 24, 2011, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: BH on August 24, 2011, 10:05:59 AM
David Haugh sets the record straight on Crane Kenney. (http://www.modbee.com/2011/08/23/1827828/cubs-presidents-task-is-developing.html)
Okay, what the hell is going on with Crane Kenney? My assumption was always that he was an empty suit that Ricketts was keeping around to do the dirty political negotiations because nobody likes him anyway. Now all I hear is that he's Bob Pulford 2.0.
I WANT SOME ANSWERS DAMMIT!
It's obvious: There's a super gay four-way between Biggsy, TIMSHAW, Crane Kenney and David Haugh. It's like Lemon Party 3000.
So Crane is Lemon Party Chairman?
Quote from: CT III on August 24, 2011, 12:58:43 PM
Quote from: Slaky on August 24, 2011, 12:56:42 PM
Quote from: CT III on August 24, 2011, 12:24:11 PM
Quote from: BH on August 24, 2011, 10:05:59 AM
David Haugh sets the record straight on Crane Kenney. (http://www.modbee.com/2011/08/23/1827828/cubs-presidents-task-is-developing.html)
Okay, what the hell is going on with Crane Kenney? My assumption was always that he was an empty suit that Ricketts was keeping around to do the dirty political negotiations because nobody likes him anyway. Now all I hear is that he's Bob Pulford 2.0.
I WANT SOME ANSWERS DAMMIT!
It's obvious: There's a super gay four-way between Biggsy, TIMSHAW, Crane Kenney and David Haugh. It's like Lemon Party 3000.
So Crane is Lemon Party Chairman?
Da.
(http://i.imgur.com/tW2NF.gif)
No idea what this (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6283/ricketts-hires-walters-to-help-with-spending) means, but I'm going to assume that hiring a non-baseball guy to watch over spending means we'll win the World Series in a few years.
Quote from: BH on August 31, 2011, 10:11:36 AM
No idea what this (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6283/ricketts-hires-walters-to-help-with-spending) means, but I'm going to assume that hiring a non-baseball guy to watch over spending means we'll win the World Series in a few years.
Again, Tom Ricketts wants a non-baseball guy to control spending? Doesn't he know he didn't have to look far? (http://endingspending.com/about/ending-spending-leadership/)
Quote from: BH on August 31, 2011, 10:11:36 AM
No idea what this (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6283/ricketts-hires-walters-to-help-with-spending) means
Probably nothing.
Quote from: Eli on August 31, 2011, 10:36:29 AM
Quote from: BH on August 31, 2011, 10:11:36 AM
No idea what this (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6283/ricketts-hires-walters-to-help-with-spending) means
Probably nothing.
"Chicago Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts hired Stephen J.K. Walters to be a top consultant on all expenditures for the organization."
His first advice should be to fire the guy who they hired to give advice about spending money.
I take it Rosenbloom (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-helping-cubs-ricketts-understand-gm-comments-20110901,0,6980852.column) isn't a fan of our owner. Way to go FANBOY, you just guaranteed Epstein signs a 3 year extension
with the Red Sox. Because a reporter asked Epstein about the Cubs. Good one, FANBOY.
Quote from: BH on September 01, 2011, 10:13:00 AM
I take it Rosenbloom (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-helping-cubs-ricketts-understand-gm-comments-20110901,0,6980852.column) isn't a fan of our owner. Way to go FANBOY, you just guaranteed Epstein signs a 3 year extension
with the Red Sox. Because a reported asked Epstein about the Cubs. Good one, FANBOY.
How can we be friends when you keep trying to Rosenroll me?
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
The good news is, Rozner and the rest of the Daily Herald are going behind a $20 per month paywall shortly, so we'll never hear from him again. I'll miss reading Sassone and Miles though.
Quote from: CT III on September 01, 2011, 10:30:31 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
The good news is, Rozner and the rest of the Daily Herald are going behind a $20 per month paywall shortly, so we'll never hear from him again. I'll miss reading Sassone and Miles though.
You're joking. Who's running that paper, Todd Rickaskey?
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
Actually the next GM needs to understand the culture, otherwise he doesn't stand a ghost's chance in Hell of changing it.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
What Chuck said. "OBA" was used as a metaphor for "things relating to how a player might be at playing baseball, scoring runs, preventing the other team from scoring runs, and ultimately winning games."
Quote from: Brownie on September 01, 2011, 11:25:27 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
What Chuck said. "OBA" was used as a metaphor for "things relating to how a player might be at playing baseball, scoring runs, preventing the other team from scoring runs, and ultimately winning games."
Again, how does a person get credit for saying things like the Cubs need better players and a drastic organizational-wide attitude shift? The point wasn't that Rozner is wrong for saying these things. The point is that a smart person like Dan Bernstein shouldn't be giving Ol' Barry a belly rub and a bucket of milk bones because he finally managed to string together a few one-sentence paragraphs of cogent thought. How many of us could have, and
have, written that same exact thing on this very message board?
The Cubs need better players and a new attitude. HAIL BARRY! HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH SUCH BRILLIANCE?
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 11:49:38 AM
Again, how does a person get credit for saying things like the Cubs need better players and a drastic organizational-wide attitude shift? The point wasn't that Rozner is wrong for saying these things. The point is that a smart person like Dan Bernstein shouldn't be giving Ol' Barry a belly rub and a bucket of milk bones because he finally managed to string together a few one-sentence paragraphs of cogent thought. How many of us could have, and have, written that same exact thing on this very message board?
How? Seriously?
David Haugh.
Rick Morrissey.
Gordon Wittendouche.
Hell, even our good friend David Kaplan was telling me the other day that they need to hire someone who understands the Cubs.
They all have been given a public platform, one that they are financially compensated for.
Rozner gets kudos for telling the truth. What's sad is that said saying of the truth is so rare.
That we would say the same thing is akin to saying, "How kin deez gize get paid so much to plays a game? I'd plays dat dem der game for free!"
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 01:40:52 PM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 11:49:38 AM
Again, how does a person get credit for saying things like the Cubs need better players and a drastic organizational-wide attitude shift? The point wasn't that Rozner is wrong for saying these things. The point is that a smart person like Dan Bernstein shouldn't be giving Ol' Barry a belly rub and a bucket of milk bones because he finally managed to string together a few one-sentence paragraphs of cogent thought. How many of us could have, and have, written that same exact thing on this very message board?
How? Seriously?
David Haugh.
Rick Morrissey.
Gordon Wittendouche.
Hell, even our good friend David Kaplan was telling me the other day that they need to hire someone who understands the Cubs.
They all have been given a public platform, one that they are financially compensated for.
Rozner gets kudos for telling the truth. What's sad is that said saying of the truth is so rare.
That we would say the same thing is akin to saying, "How kin deez gize get paid so much to plays a game? I'd plays dat dem der game for free!"
Fine, let's hold everyone to the lowest possible standard. Hey, I wiped my own ass today.
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 05:02:20 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 01:40:52 PM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 11:49:38 AM
Again, how does a person get credit for saying things like the Cubs need better players and a drastic organizational-wide attitude shift? The point wasn't that Rozner is wrong for saying these things. The point is that a smart person like Dan Bernstein shouldn't be giving Ol' Barry a belly rub and a bucket of milk bones because he finally managed to string together a few one-sentence paragraphs of cogent thought. How many of us could have, and have, written that same exact thing on this very message board?
How? Seriously?
David Haugh.
Rick Morrissey.
Gordon Wittendouche.
Hell, even our good friend David Kaplan was telling me the other day that they need to hire someone who understands the Cubs.
They all have been given a public platform, one that they are financially compensated for.
Rozner gets kudos for telling the truth. What's sad is that said saying of the truth is so rare.
That we would say the same thing is akin to saying, "How kin deez gize get paid so much to plays a game? I'd plays dat dem der game for free!"
Fine, let's hold everyone to the lowest possible standard. Hey, I wiped my own ass today.
I actually had a non-wiper today
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 05:02:20 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 01:40:52 PM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 11:49:38 AM
Again, how does a person get credit for saying things like the Cubs need better players and a drastic organizational-wide attitude shift? The point wasn't that Rozner is wrong for saying these things. The point is that a smart person like Dan Bernstein shouldn't be giving Ol' Barry a belly rub and a bucket of milk bones because he finally managed to string together a few one-sentence paragraphs of cogent thought. How many of us could have, and have, written that same exact thing on this very message board?
How? Seriously?
David Haugh.
Rick Morrissey.
Gordon Wittendouche.
Hell, even our good friend David Kaplan was telling me the other day that they need to hire someone who understands the Cubs.
They all have been given a public platform, one that they are financially compensated for.
Rozner gets kudos for telling the truth. What's sad is that said saying of the truth is so rare.
That we would say the same thing is akin to saying, "How kin deez gize get paid so much to plays a game? I'd plays dat dem der game for free!"
Fine, let's hold everyone to the lowest possible standard. Hey, I wiped my own ass today.
I'm pretty sure that puts you one up on Haugh.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
What the fuck does "understand winning" mean?
Quote from: Shooter on September 02, 2011, 02:26:05 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
What the fuck does "understand winning" mean?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Quote from: Shooter on September 02, 2011, 02:26:05 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
What the fuck does "understand winning" mean?
Don't worry - Chuck already decided that Rozner is a genius because the rest of the beat writers in town eat their own shit.
Quote from: CT III on September 02, 2011, 07:15:18 AM
Quote from: Shooter on September 02, 2011, 02:26:05 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 01, 2011, 11:18:58 AM
Quote from: Slaky on September 01, 2011, 10:20:32 AM
This reminds me: I like Dan Bernstein and he's a pretty smart person. I also understand that Barry Rozner is a colleague at the Score so maybe he feels obligated to support him, professionally. But when Bernstein retweets a Rozner article saying that Barry "gets it" because he's managed to do the mental gymnastics required to write an article about how the Cubs should be using sabermetrics as a tool to build a roster, that bums me out. Celebrating people who grasp obvious things like On Base Percentage is important should be beneath someone like Bernstein. Also, this one article doesn't erase 15 years of hackneyed, meatball horse-shit that Rozner has churned out on a regular basis.
So I guess the question is, WHY DAN WHY.
Umm... Wasn't Rozner's real point is that we need less of a Yellonish take on the team? The headline is misleading.
QuoteThe next GM doesn't need to understand the culture. He needs to get rid of terrible contracts and transparent dogs and get better players who understand winning and aren't comfortable playing for managers and GMs who make life so pleasant and relaxed that even in 90-loss seasons, complacent players don't want to leave for a chance to win a ring.
What Barry wrote is bad?
What the fuck does "understand winning" mean?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
CT, sit down.
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
Quote from: BH on September 03, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Quote from: CT III on September 03, 2011, 08:16:33 PM
Quote from: BH on September 03, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Another extension on the way? (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6338/will-ricketts-extend-scouting-directors-deal-next) The new GM is going to have total control over baseball operations. Except for the two most important positions.
QuoteA meeting with scouting director Tim Wilken is next on Chicago Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts' to-do list before he hires his next general manager.
Ricketts already extended the contract of vice president of player personnel Oneri Fleita for four years, including a good-sized raise, in order to keep him from taking a job with the Detroit Tigers.
According to MLB sources, Wilken will meet with Ricketts over the weekend of Sept. 16 to discuss the state of the scouting department and his current contract status.
Quote from: R-V on September 04, 2011, 08:58:19 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 03, 2011, 08:16:33 PM
Quote from: BH on September 03, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Another extension on the way? (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6338/will-ricketts-extend-scouting-directors-deal-next) The new GM is going to have total control over baseball operations. Except for the two most important positions.
QuoteA meeting with scouting director Tim Wilken is next on Chicago Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts' to-do list before he hires his next general manager.
Ricketts already extended the contract of vice president of player personnel Oneri Fleita for four years, including a good-sized raise, in order to keep him from taking a job with the Detroit Tigers.
According to MLB sources, Wilken will meet with Ricketts over the weekend of Sept. 16 to discuss the state of the scouting department and his current contract status.
Nice to see all of ricketts baseball knowledge going into making these decisions. I can't imagine any big name GMs wanting to take the cubs jobs when he has no decisions on personnel that work for him.
Quote from: BH on September 05, 2011, 09:37:21 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 04, 2011, 08:58:19 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 03, 2011, 08:16:33 PM
Quote from: BH on September 03, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Another extension on the way? (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6338/will-ricketts-extend-scouting-directors-deal-next) The new GM is going to have total control over baseball operations. Except for the two most important positions.
QuoteA meeting with scouting director Tim Wilken is next on Chicago Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts' to-do list before he hires his next general manager.
Ricketts already extended the contract of vice president of player personnel Oneri Fleita for four years, including a good-sized raise, in order to keep him from taking a job with the Detroit Tigers.
According to MLB sources, Wilken will meet with Ricketts over the weekend of Sept. 16 to discuss the state of the scouting department and his current contract status.
Nice to see all of ricketts baseball knowledge going into making these decisions. I can't imagine any big name GMs wanting to take the cubs jobs when he has no decisions on personnel that work for him.
I expect Ricketts to come out of this meeting and announcing that Wilken is the new GM.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on September 05, 2011, 11:12:30 AM
Quote from: BH on September 05, 2011, 09:37:21 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 04, 2011, 08:58:19 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 03, 2011, 08:16:33 PM
Quote from: BH on September 03, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Another extension on the way? (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6338/will-ricketts-extend-scouting-directors-deal-next) The new GM is going to have total control over baseball operations. Except for the two most important positions.
QuoteA meeting with scouting director Tim Wilken is next on Chicago Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts' to-do list before he hires his next general manager.
Ricketts already extended the contract of vice president of player personnel Oneri Fleita for four years, including a good-sized raise, in order to keep him from taking a job with the Detroit Tigers.
According to MLB sources, Wilken will meet with Ricketts over the weekend of Sept. 16 to discuss the state of the scouting department and his current contract status.
Nice to see all of ricketts baseball knowledge going into making these decisions. I can't imagine any big name GMs wanting to take the cubs jobs when he has no decisions on personnel that work for him.
I expect Ricketts to come out of this meeting and announcing that Wilken Phil Rogers is the new GM.
Only half kidding'd.
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 05, 2011, 12:23:11 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on September 05, 2011, 11:12:30 AM
Quote from: BH on September 05, 2011, 09:37:21 AM
Quote from: R-V on September 04, 2011, 08:58:19 PM
Quote from: CT III on September 03, 2011, 08:16:33 PM
Quote from: BH on September 03, 2011, 06:56:00 PM
CT will be excited, Fleita's contract was extended (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-cubs-farm-director-fleita-given-extension-20110903,0,6855491.story) by four years? Shouldn't the new GM be part of this decision?
IT MEANS HE GETS RESULTS YOU STUPID CHIEF!
Another extension on the way? (http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/6338/will-ricketts-extend-scouting-directors-deal-next) The new GM is going to have total control over baseball operations. Except for the two most important positions.
QuoteA meeting with scouting director Tim Wilken is next on Chicago Cubs chairman Tom Ricketts' to-do list before he hires his next general manager.
Ricketts already extended the contract of vice president of player personnel Oneri Fleita for four years, including a good-sized raise, in order to keep him from taking a job with the Detroit Tigers.
According to MLB sources, Wilken will meet with Ricketts over the weekend of Sept. 16 to discuss the state of the scouting department and his current contract status.
Nice to see all of ricketts baseball knowledge going into making these decisions. I can't imagine any big name GMs wanting to take the cubs jobs when he has no decisions on personnel that work for him.
I expect Ricketts to come out of this meeting and announcing that Wilken Phil Rogers is the new GM.
Only half kidding'd.
Ned Coletti broseephus.
Really...
Todd and Rocco?
Retard 1 and Retard 2.
Fuck this.
?
Quote from: Brownie on September 07, 2011, 09:52:34 PM
?
Tonights seventh inning stretch.
Todd and his ex boss singing and of course the requisite interviews with both.
It was everything you could possibly imagine.
Quote from: flannj on September 07, 2011, 10:33:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 07, 2011, 09:52:34 PM
?
Tonights seventh inning stretch.
Todd and his ex boss singing and of course the requisite interviews with both.
It was everything you could possibly imagine.
Maybe my expectations are too low these days, but they should forget about hiring a new GM and just cut out all the damn singing. Losing the 7th inning stretch and post-game songs would make me less angry.
Quote from: Tony on September 08, 2011, 03:01:35 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 07, 2011, 10:33:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 07, 2011, 09:52:34 PM
?
Tonights seventh inning stretch.
Todd and his ex boss singing and of course the requisite interviews with both.
It was everything you could possibly imagine.
Maybe my expectations are too low these days, but they should forget about hiring a new GM and just cut out all the damn singing. Losing the 7th inning stretch and post-game songs would make me less angry.
Unless they just hired Mr. T to do it full time.
Quote from: Slaky on September 08, 2011, 03:54:56 PM
Quote from: Tony on September 08, 2011, 03:01:35 PM
Quote from: flannj on September 07, 2011, 10:33:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 07, 2011, 09:52:34 PM
?
Tonights seventh inning stretch.
Todd and his ex boss singing and of course the requisite interviews with both.
It was everything you could possibly imagine.
Maybe my expectations are too low these days, but they should forget about hiring a new GM and just cut out all the damn singing. Losing the 7th inning stretch and post-game songs would make me less angry.
Unless they just hired Mr. T Steve McMichael to do it full time.
TODD! (http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/dish/201109/black-slime-takes-cubs-fans-stomachs)
Maybe Crane Kenney will be next to go? (http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-insider/2011/09/crane-kenney-wont-return-as-cubs-president-according-to-source/)
Quote from: BH on September 16, 2011, 01:05:18 PM
Maybe Crane Kenney will be next to go? (http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-insider/2011/09/crane-kenney-wont-return-as-cubs-president-according-to-source/)
DEEP GOAT!
Quote from: BH on September 16, 2011, 01:05:18 PM
Maybe Crane Kenney will be next to go? (http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-insider/2011/09/crane-kenney-wont-return-as-cubs-president-according-to-source/)
pleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetruepleasebetrue
Quote from: Fork on September 16, 2011, 01:24:48 PM
Quote from: BH on September 16, 2011, 01:05:18 PM
Maybe Crane Kenney will be next to go? (http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-insider/2011/09/crane-kenney-wont-return-as-cubs-president-according-to-source/)
DEEP GOAT!
Quote
"They milked Kenney and Hendry for what and they were worth" The source tells me.
Nothing?
Who was the asshole who started this thread? What a bunch of wrong he is full of!
You've got to be kidding me! (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/celebrity/aboutlastnight/chi-sighting-theo-epstein-and-tom-ricketts-watch-world-20111027,0,353980.column)
QuoteIt was unclear who Epstein was cheering for during the game, but Tom, who is an investor in The Fifty/50, clapped when the Cardinals' David Freese's hit the game winning homerun.
Quote from: Brownie on October 28, 2011, 11:46:55 AM
You've got to be kidding me! (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/celebrity/aboutlastnight/chi-sighting-theo-epstein-and-tom-ricketts-watch-world-20111027,0,353980.column)
QuoteIt was unclear who Epstein was cheering for during the game, but Tom, who is an investor in The Fifty/50, clapped when the Cardinals' David Freese's hit the game winning homerun.
He met his mistress while standing in line for a beer at the old Urinal Cake. But we know where his heart is.
Quote from: Internet Apex on October 28, 2011, 05:06:58 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 28, 2011, 11:46:55 AM
You've got to be kidding me! (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/celebrity/aboutlastnight/chi-sighting-theo-epstein-and-tom-ricketts-watch-world-20111027,0,353980.column)
QuoteIt was unclear who Epstein was cheering for during the game, but Tom, who is an investor in The Fifty/50, clapped when the Cardinals' David Freese's hit the game winning homerun.
He met his mistress while standing in line for a beer at the old Urinal Cake. But we know where his heart is.
Gov. Quinn was reportedly at the game last night
Quote from: Tollbooth Yeti on October 28, 2011, 09:39:06 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on October 28, 2011, 05:06:58 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 28, 2011, 11:46:55 AM
You've got to be kidding me! (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/celebrity/aboutlastnight/chi-sighting-theo-epstein-and-tom-ricketts-watch-world-20111027,0,353980.column)
QuoteIt was unclear who Epstein was cheering for during the game, but Tom, who is an investor in The Fifty/50, clapped when the Cardinals' David Freese's hit the game winning homerun.
He met his mistress while standing in line for a beer at the old Urinal Cake. But we know where his heart is.
Gov. Quinn was reportedly at the game last night
If he wasn't wearing a Rangers hat he needs to be impeached.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on October 29, 2011, 12:18:47 AM
Quote from: Tollbooth Yeti on October 28, 2011, 09:39:06 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on October 28, 2011, 05:06:58 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 28, 2011, 11:46:55 AM
You've got to be kidding me! (http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/celebrity/aboutlastnight/chi-sighting-theo-epstein-and-tom-ricketts-watch-world-20111027,0,353980.column)
QuoteIt was unclear who Epstein was cheering for during the game, but Tom, who is an investor in The Fifty/50, clapped when the Cardinals' David Freese's hit the game winning homerun.
He met his mistress while standing in line for a beer at the old Urinal Cake. But we know where his heart is.
Gov. Quinn was reportedly at the game last night
If he wasn't wearing a Rangers hat he needs to be impeached.
Quinn's a Sox fan, so at best, he'd be ambivalent of the Cardinals.
I can't help but think Epstink is to blame for this (http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/archives/2012/03/4865_ricketts_everyb.html).
QuoteChicago Cubs owner Tom Ricketts gave a talk to the all-powerful Naperville Area Chamber of Commerce yesterday, in the course of which he said this about the need for public subsidies for the renovation of Wrigley Field:
"There's 30 teams in baseball, and there's really two ways that you finance your stadium. One model, which about 25 teams use, is that you have a public agency build and provide you a stadium and you pay rent and expenses and some sort of amusement tax. The five other teams use a different model where they cover all of their expenses, but they don't pay any taxes. Believe it or not, Chicago has a hybrid model where you cover all of your own expenses, remain totally private and pay the second-highest taxes in the league."
This is ... I hate to say "lying," so let's just say an interesting interpretation of reality. The Boston Red Sox and San Francisco Giants, to name two, both pay the lion's share of their stadium costs and pay property and other taxes to boot. (And on the flip side, there are plenty of teams that got public funds and yet don't pay either rent or ticket taxes.)
What Ricketts is harping on is that Chicago has an amusement tax that applies to tickets for pretty much anything and everything, and he wants to get a bye from paying it, so that he can turn around and use the money on Wrigley Field improvements. As we've discussed before, since everybody else in town has to pay the tax, that'd be just as much of a subsidy as asking for bags of unmarked twenties.
Quote from: R-V on March 20, 2012, 09:01:42 AM
I can't help but think Epstink is to blame for this (http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/archives/2012/03/4865_ricketts_everyb.html).
QuoteChicago Cubs owner Tom Ricketts gave a talk to the all-powerful Naperville Area Chamber of Commerce yesterday, in the course of which he said this about the need for public subsidies for the renovation of Wrigley Field:
"There's 30 teams in baseball, and there's really two ways that you finance your stadium. One model, which about 25 teams use, is that you have a public agency build and provide you a stadium and you pay rent and expenses and some sort of amusement tax. The five other teams use a different model where they cover all of their expenses, but they don't pay any taxes. Believe it or not, Chicago has a hybrid model where you cover all of your own expenses, remain totally private and pay the second-highest taxes in the league."
This is ... I hate to say "lying," so let's just say an interesting interpretation of reality. The Boston Red Sox and San Francisco Giants, to name two, both pay the lion's share of their stadium costs and pay property and other taxes to boot. (And on the flip side, there are plenty of teams that got public funds and yet don't pay either rent or ticket taxes.)
What Ricketts is harping on is that Chicago has an amusement tax that applies to tickets for pretty much anything and everything, and he wants to get a bye from paying it, so that he can turn around and use the money on Wrigley Field improvements. As we've discussed before, since everybody else in town has to pay the tax, that'd be just as much of a subsidy as asking for bags of unmarked twenties.
Fuck him and his "We don't want to pay taxes" family.
Rahmstink is terrible.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/11884774-418/emanuel-has-fenway-plan-for-wrigley-to-maximize-money-making-potential.html
QuoteNow that Emanuel is Chicago's mayor and former Red Sox General Manager Theo Epstein is president of baseball operations for the Cubs, City Hall believes it's time to replicate the Fenway model at Wrigley.
"The more that is generated out of improvements to the building and the activities immediately around it, the less money is needed from the public sector," said Chicago-based sports marketing expert Marc Ganis, who is familiar with the plan.
Nice job Tom. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-spt-0816-rogers-cubs-shakeup-chicago--20120816,0,1573686.column)
Quote from: BH on August 16, 2012, 03:06:29 PM
Nice job Tom. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-spt-0816-rogers-cubs-shakeup-chicago--20120816,0,1573686.column)
And the Tribune paywall works again!
(Though, if you're just dying to read Phildo on Crane, you can click here (http://google.com/url?q=http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-spt-0816-rogers-cubs-shakeup-chicago--20120816,0,1573686.column).)
Thanks to the Rickstinks, my beloved Peoria Chiefs will be replacing their t-shirt cannons with jorts cannons (http://www.pjstar.com/news/x1547509087/Peoria-Chiefs-to-become-Cardinals-affiliate-again).
QuoteThe Peoria Chiefs again will become an affiliate of the St. Louis Cardinals.
The Chiefs announced today that the team has reached a four-year agreement with the Cardinals. The term is the longest possible under rules governing Major League Baseball teams and affiliates.
Last month, Chicago media leaked news that the Chicago Cubs — the Chiefs' parent club since 2005 — would be severing its Peoria connection in favor of placing that affiliate in Kane County, west of Chicago. Before the Cubs, the Chiefs had been a farm team for the Cardinals from 1995 to 2004. Meantime, from 2005 to 2012, the Cardinals' Midwest League team was the Quad Cities River Bandits.
Quote from: R-V on September 19, 2012, 09:04:54 AM
Thanks to the Rickstinks, my beloved Peoria Chiefs will be replacing their t-shirt cannons with jorts cannons (http://www.pjstar.com/news/x1547509087/Peoria-Chiefs-to-become-Cardinals-affiliate-again).
QuoteThe Peoria Chiefs again will become an affiliate of the St. Louis Cardinals.
The Chiefs announced today that the team has reached a four-year agreement with the Cardinals. The term is the longest possible under rules governing Major League Baseball teams and affiliates.
Last month, Chicago media leaked news that the Chicago Cubs — the Chiefs' parent club since 2005 — would be severing its Peoria connection in favor of placing that affiliate in Kane County, west of Chicago. Before the Cubs, the Chiefs had been a farm team for the Cardinals from 1995 to 2004. Meantime, from 2005 to 2012, the Cardinals' Midwest League team was the Quad Cities River Bandits.
But Huey will be able to ride his bike to see Albert Almora play!
Daddy Ricketts is apparently giving Romney $10,000,000.
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 09:35:02 AM
Daddy Ricketts is apparently giving Romney $10,000,000.
nice choice joe.
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 19, 2012, 09:40:50 AM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 09:35:02 AM
Daddy Ricketts is apparently giving Romney $10,000,000.
nice choice joe.
Yeah. He has a great track record for picking winners.
Quote from: R-V on September 19, 2012, 09:04:54 AM
Thanks to the Rickstinks, my beloved Peoria Chiefs will be replacing their t-shirt cannons with jorts cannons (http://www.pjstar.com/news/x1547509087/Peoria-Chiefs-to-become-Cardinals-affiliate-again).
QuoteThe Peoria Chiefs again will become an affiliate of the St. Louis Cardinals.
The Chiefs announced today that the team has reached a four-year agreement with the Cardinals. The term is the longest possible under rules governing Major League Baseball teams and affiliates.
Last month, Chicago media leaked news that the Chicago Cubs — the Chiefs' parent club since 2005 — would be severing its Peoria connection in favor of placing that affiliate in Kane County, west of Chicago. Before the Cubs, the Chiefs had been a farm team for the Cardinals from 1995 to 2004. Meantime, from 2005 to 2012, the Cardinals' Midwest League team was the Quad Cities River Bandits.
There was so much butthurt in the paper (http://www.pjstar.com/news/luciano/x631383752/Luciano-Chiefs-fans-time-to-step-to-the-plate) about it. Plus some bonus Dutchie Caray butthurt. Occupy Rickettses! (http://www.pjstar.com/news/luciano/x631384781/Luciano-Last-chance-for-Cubs-Chiefs-plea)
Can't believe it didn't work.
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 11:13:42 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 19, 2012, 09:40:50 AM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 09:35:02 AM
Daddy Ricketts is apparently giving Romney $10,000,000.
nice choice joe.
Yeah. He has a great track record for picking winners.
He should have just given me the dough - I stand just as much of a chance of being President.
From the Daily Beast:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/17/joe-ricketts-superpac-attack-s-true-victim-wrigley-field.html
Animated by disdain for President Obama, Joe Ricketts, the billionaire founder of TD Ameritrade Inc., is zealously forging ahead with a $12 million series of ads to support Mitt Romney and Republican congressional candidates despite the fact that his effort further complicates an important business proposition of his own children, according to sources at Chicago's City Hall.
The proposition is the desperately needed upgrade of Wrigley Field, home of the Chicago Cubs, which is owned by the family of billionaire Ricketts and overseen by his four kids, notably Tom Ricketts, a bright and mild-mannered team chairman whose politics are decidedly more moderate than his deeply conservative father. Indeed, sister Laura Ricketts is an unabashed Obama supporter and fundraiser.
The father's move, a City Hall source indicated, will further raise doubts among African-American and other legislators whose votes would be mandatory for approval of government assistance.
Word originally leaked in May that the father was plotting a $10 million super-PAC campaign to attack Obama, in part over the president's past ties to the hyperbolic Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's onetime pastor and a favorite villain of the right during the 2008 campaign. An aide to Ricketts senior then disavowed the Wright plan and claimed it was not authored by Joe, but rather by consultants acting without his full approval.
As for Tom Ricketts, he made clear, "As chairman of the Chicago Cubs, I repudiate any return to racially divisive issues in this year's presidential campaign or any setting—like my father has."
But Monday's Wall Street Journal confirmed that he would this week start airing an ad campaign, apparently to run in battleground states and to feature supposedly onetime Obama supporters discussing their change of heart and plan to back Romney. The effort is to be funded by Joe Ricketts's own super-PAC and is part and parcel of the huge infusion of money into the presidential race via such PACs and related groups legally approved and further inspired by the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling.
The barrage may or may not hurt the incumbent president. But it seems certain to harm the cause of upgrading Wrigley Field, one of America's beloved, if dilapidated, baseball stadiums. It is a virtual tourist mecca—its popularity enduring even the Cubs' dismal performance on the field this season, which has the club 30 games out of first place going into Monday night's combat. Alderman Tom Tunney, who represents the Wrigley Field neighborhood and has had a prickly relationship with the owners, says Joe Ricketts's campaign was "disturbing for those of us who are backing the president." Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
I suspect TJ is referring to the proposed amendment to overturn
Citizens United.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on September 19, 2012, 02:29:30 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
I suspect TJ is referring to the proposed amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Yes.
Besides the proposed C.U. Amendment, we can also add other ways in which Obama shows little use for the First Amendment when people use it in ways counter to his interests. Two things immediately come to mind:
-Asking Youtube to remove anti-Muslim video.
-Forcing private, religious-based organization to provide things counter to their religious beliefs.
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
I agree but don't think this type of behavior is unique to Chicago or Democrats.
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
No. This is a bad deal, but one they'd be willing to pass to enable handing out a few hundred million in construction projects AND to help out (read: massively enrich) a friendly business owner.
As Joe is showing he isn't friendly, it gets easy to pass on the help part. Passing it would show they are low-rent.
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:59:54 PM
... Obama shows little use for the First Amendment when people use it in ways counter to his interests.
So, he uses the First Amendment like any other politician. Got it.
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:59:54 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on September 19, 2012, 02:29:30 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
I suspect TJ is referring to the proposed amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Yes.
Besides the proposed C.U. Amendment, we can also add other ways in which Obama shows little use for the First Amendment when people use it in ways counter to his interests. Two things immediately come to mind:
-Asking Youtube to remove anti-Muslim video.
-Forcing private, religious-based organization to provide things counter to their religious beliefs.
1. It wouldn't be the first time that the Constitution was amended to correct a mistake. (e.g. the 13th amendment, and the 21st amendment)
2. Asking Youtube to do something is hardly an attack on free speech, prosecuting Youtube would be.
3. If providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution then the Draft was involuntary servitude.
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:59:54 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on September 19, 2012, 02:29:30 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
I suspect TJ is referring to the proposed amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Yes.
Besides the proposed C.U. Amendment, we can also add other ways in which Obama shows little use for the First Amendment when people use it in ways counter to his interests. Two things immediately come to mind:
-Asking Youtube to remove anti-Muslim video.
-Forcing private, religious-based organization to provide things counter to their religious beliefs.
1. It wouldn't be the first time that the Constitution was amended to correct a mistake. (e.g. the 13th amendment, and the 21st amendment)
2. Asking Youtube to do something is hardly an attack on free speech, prosecuting Youtube would be.
3. If providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution then the Draft was involuntary servitude.
1. You believe the First Amendment was a mistake? Here's hoping enough others disagree. There aren't many places to which I can flee.
2. You or I, private citizens, requesting YouTube to take down a video on whatever grounds is one thing. Asking someone to censor something as a representative of the government has a smell to it.
3. I didn't saying providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution; I said requiring a private entity to pay for something for their employees that they believe is morally wrong on religious grounds flies in the face of Congress being prohibited to make a law infringing on the free exercise of said religion.
It used to be a free country.
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 03:59:56 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:59:54 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on September 19, 2012, 02:29:30 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
I suspect TJ is referring to the proposed amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Yes.
Besides the proposed C.U. Amendment, we can also add other ways in which Obama shows little use for the First Amendment when people use it in ways counter to his interests. Two things immediately come to mind:
-Asking Youtube to remove anti-Muslim video.
-Forcing private, religious-based organization to provide things counter to their religious beliefs.
1. It wouldn't be the first time that the Constitution was amended to correct a mistake. (e.g. the 13th amendment, and the 21st amendment)
2. Asking Youtube to do something is hardly an attack on free speech, prosecuting Youtube would be.
3. If providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution then the Draft was involuntary servitude.
1. You believe the First Amendment was a mistake? Here's hoping enough others disagree. There aren't many places to which I can flee.
2. You or I, private citizens, requesting YouTube to take down a video on whatever grounds is one thing. Asking someone to censor something as a representative of the government has a smell to it.
3. I didn't saying providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution; I said requiring a private entity to pay for something for their employees that they believe is morally wrong on religious grounds flies in the face of Congress being prohibited to make a law infringing on the free exercise of said religion.
It used to be a free country.
1. I believe Stew was referring to that particular decision of the Court's being a mistake, rather than the amendment itself.
2. The government asking a private company to take down a video that has the serious potential of affecting national security is less pernicious than you make it out to be.
3. Plenty of Americans don't like tanks, but are forced to pay for them via their taxes.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 04:04:54 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 03:59:56 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 03:42:53 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:59:54 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on September 19, 2012, 02:29:30 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 02:25:08 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
City Hall has already gone on the record as being against the First Amendment. Come to think of it, Emanuel's former boss has proposed a repeal (or at least a strong curb) on the First Amendment.
The Ricketti shouldn't get state or city money to rebuild Wrigley Field, but the fact that Chicago politicians think that expression of one's political views make a good deal a bad deal shows how low-rent they are.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on September 19, 2012, 02:09:27 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 19, 2012, 01:32:21 PM
Asked how Ricketts's move might affect any negotiations to strike a government-supported deal to fund a Wrigley renovation, Tunney put it bluntly: "It certainly doesn't help."
What Tunney should have said:
"Joe Ricketts is campaigning against unnecessary government spending. If this is what he wants, and he is my constituent, I shall focus my efforts on keeping the government from spending any money that would needlessly enrich a billionaire like Joe Ricketts. I'm sure he would agree that he doesn't need any government handouts."
But of course, Chuck. If Joseph Ricketts can make the City of Chicago to see the light and go 88-12 for Romney, that would be wonderful.
I'm sorry, when did this happen?
I suspect TJ is referring to the proposed amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Yes.
Besides the proposed C.U. Amendment, we can also add other ways in which Obama shows little use for the First Amendment when people use it in ways counter to his interests. Two things immediately come to mind:
-Asking Youtube to remove anti-Muslim video.
-Forcing private, religious-based organization to provide things counter to their religious beliefs.
1. It wouldn't be the first time that the Constitution was amended to correct a mistake. (e.g. the 13th amendment, and the 21st amendment)
2. Asking Youtube to do something is hardly an attack on free speech, prosecuting Youtube would be.
3. If providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution then the Draft was involuntary servitude.
1. You believe the First Amendment was a mistake? Here's hoping enough others disagree. There aren't many places to which I can flee.
2. You or I, private citizens, requesting YouTube to take down a video on whatever grounds is one thing. Asking someone to censor something as a representative of the government has a smell to it.
3. I didn't saying providing health insurance to one's employees is a violation of the Constitution; I said requiring a private entity to pay for something for their employees that they believe is morally wrong on religious grounds flies in the face of Congress being prohibited to make a law infringing on the free exercise of said religion.
It used to be a free country.
1. I believe Stew was referring to that particular decision of the Court's being a mistake, rather than the amendment itself.
2. The government asking a private company to take down a video that has the serious potential of affecting national security is less pernicious than you make it out to be.
3. Plenty of Americans don't like tanks, but are forced to pay for them via their taxes.
1. A poorly-written law means you expand government's power over expression?
2. If someone from the government contacts my place of business and asks me to do/not to do something, I'd be on the phones with my attorneys.
3. Fair, but when an employee (or a student) chooses to work for an institution that is tied with one particular faith or another, is it unreasonable for them (especially victims like a 34-year-old law student) to consider: "If I choose place A, I'd have to understand that benefits, etc., are constrained by its faith; thus, place B might be a better place for me."
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 19, 2012, 04:34:44 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 19, 2012, 04:20:44 PM
Quote from: Eli on September 19, 2012, 04:03:53 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 03:59:56 PM
It used to be a free country.
Thanks a lot, Obama.
Thanks for nuttin', jerk.
(||)
No, Chuck.
Quote from: PANK! on September 19, 2012, 06:30:57 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 19, 2012, 04:34:44 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 19, 2012, 04:20:44 PM
Quote from: Eli on September 19, 2012, 04:03:53 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 03:59:56 PM
It used to be a free country.
Thanks a lot, Obama.
Thanks for nuttin', jerk.
(||)
No, Chuck.
Too big for nuttin' after jerkin'?
Quote from: Fork on September 19, 2012, 06:33:40 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 19, 2012, 06:30:57 PM
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 19, 2012, 04:34:44 PM
Quote from: PANK! on September 19, 2012, 04:20:44 PM
Quote from: Eli on September 19, 2012, 04:03:53 PM
Quote from: Brownie on September 19, 2012, 03:59:56 PM
It used to be a free country.
Thanks a lot, Obama.
Thanks for nuttin', jerk.
(||)
No, Chuck.
Too big for nuttin' after jerkin'?
No, Chork.
Quote
1. A poorly-written law means you expand government's power over expression?
2. If someone from the government contacts my place of business and asks me to do/not to do something, I'd be on the phones with my attorneys.
3. Fair, but when an employee (or a student) chooses to work for an institution that is tied with one particular faith or another, is it unreasonable for them (especially victims like a 34-year-old law student) to consider: "If I choose place A, I'd have to understand that benefits, etc., are constrained by its faith; thus, place B might be a better place for me."
1. What you call a poorly-written law, I call a bipartisan law that was the product of nearly 25 years of Congressional work designed to regulate campaign finance rather than curtail speech. Your position presupposes that money, in this sense, equals speech, which I (and many others) find to be a preposterous ideas because it prefigures that one could have "more" speech by virtue of having "more" money. To analogize, it would be akin to permitting a person to use an exceedingly large megaphone on a street corner to get his message out, which, under traditional first amendment jurisprudence, the State can regulate, seeing as it's a mechanism of speech, rather than a content-based restriction. Nevertheless, it need not take a new law to change the campaign finance scheme, rather a couple of vacancies on the Court and a sympathetic president.
2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
3. I have no problem with a religious organization or employer mandating specific provisions or discriminatory policies in their workforces, provided that the nature of the work performed by the organization is spiritual in nature and the policies sought by said organization have a bona fide occupational relationship to that work. Put another way, I don't want the government mandating that Catholic Churces perform gay marriages, even if the government legalizes it writ large, because it speaks to the ecclesiastical nature of their work. Conversely, if a religious organization performs work of a largely secular nature, i.e. providing social services and assistance, that religious organization should play by the secular rules.
Fuck it's silent in here.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 07:28:20 PM
2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
Excuse me, sir. Could you please keep your voices down? This is a family restaurant.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on September 19, 2012, 09:04:11 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 07:28:20 PM
2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
Excuse me, sir. Could you please keep your voices down? This is a family restaurant.
(http://2damnfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Im-Sorry-I-Thought-This-Was-America-Randy.jpg)
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 19, 2012, 07:49:03 PM
Fuck it's silent in here.
I see what you did there, and I approve.
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 07:28:20 PM
Quote
1. A poorly-written law means you expand government's power over expression?
2. If someone from the government contacts my place of business and asks me to do/not to do something, I'd be on the phones with my attorneys.
3. Fair, but when an employee (or a student) chooses to work for an institution that is tied with one particular faith or another, is it unreasonable for them (especially victims like a 34-year-old law student) to consider: "If I choose place A, I'd have to understand that benefits, etc., are constrained by its faith; thus, place B might be a better place for me."
1. What you call a poorly-written law, I call a bipartisan law that was the product of nearly 25 years of Congressional work designed to regulate campaign finance rather than curtail speech. Your position presupposes that money, in this sense, equals speech, which I (and many others) find to be a preposterous ideas because it prefigures that one could have "more" speech by virtue of having "more" money. To analogize, it would be akin to permitting a person to use an exceedingly large megaphone on a street corner to get his message out, which, under traditional first amendment jurisprudence, the State can regulate, seeing as it's a mechanism of speech, rather than a content-based restriction. Nevertheless, it need not take a new law to change the campaign finance scheme, rather a couple of vacancies on the Court and a sympathetic president.
2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
3. I have no problem with a religious organization or employer mandating specific provisions or discriminatory policies in their workforces, provided that the nature of the work performed by the organization is spiritual in nature and the policies sought by said organization have a bona fide occupational relationship to that work. Put another way, I don't want the government mandating that Catholic Churces perform gay marriages, even if the government legalizes it writ large, because it speaks to the ecclesiastical nature of their work. Conversely, if a religious organization performs work of a largely secular nature, i.e. providing social services and assistance, that religious organization should play by the secular rules.
I can't say I agree with number 3. You can't say the church should play by secular rules because they're "doing things of a secular nature" in providing social services or medical services. They do that because that follows the "good works" standpoint of their religion, and they've been doing it for hundreds of years, back when those were considered to be largely religious occupations. I don't think you can just say "well, that's a secular thing now so you have to change your way of doing things."
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 08:31:46 AM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 07:28:20 PM
Quote
1. A poorly-written law means you expand government's power over expression?
2. If someone from the government contacts my place of business and asks me to do/not to do something, I'd be on the phones with my attorneys.
3. Fair, but when an employee (or a student) chooses to work for an institution that is tied with one particular faith or another, is it unreasonable for them (especially victims like a 34-year-old law student) to consider: "If I choose place A, I'd have to understand that benefits, etc., are constrained by its faith; thus, place B might be a better place for me."
1. What you call a poorly-written law, I call a bipartisan law that was the product of nearly 25 years of Congressional work designed to regulate campaign finance rather than curtail speech. Your position presupposes that money, in this sense, equals speech, which I (and many others) find to be a preposterous ideas because it prefigures that one could have "more" speech by virtue of having "more" money. To analogize, it would be akin to permitting a person to use an exceedingly large megaphone on a street corner to get his message out, which, under traditional first amendment jurisprudence, the State can regulate, seeing as it's a mechanism of speech, rather than a content-based restriction. Nevertheless, it need not take a new law to change the campaign finance scheme, rather a couple of vacancies on the Court and a sympathetic president.
2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
3. I have no problem with a religious organization or employer mandating specific provisions or discriminatory policies in their workforces, provided that the nature of the work performed by the organization is spiritual in nature and the policies sought by said organization have a bona fide occupational relationship to that work. Put another way, I don't want the government mandating that Catholic Churces perform gay marriages, even if the government legalizes it writ large, because it speaks to the ecclesiastical nature of their work. Conversely, if a religious organization performs work of a largely secular nature, i.e. providing social services and assistance, that religious organization should play by the secular rules.
I can't say I agree with number 3. You can't say the church should play by secular rules because they're "doing things of a secular nature" in providing social services or medical services. They do that because that follows the "good works" standpoint of their religion, and they've been doing it for hundreds of years, back when those were considered to be largely religious occupations. I don't think you can just say "well, that's a secular thing now so you have to change your way of doing things."
This is completely outside the confines of this argument, which is a legal/constitutional one and interesting, but just from a common sense perspective, why is birth control a controversial issue? It's 2012 for Atheismo's sake. Does anyone but the Pope give a shit if a woman takes birth control pills? If so, why?
Quote from: R-V on September 20, 2012, 08:50:00 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 08:31:46 AM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 07:28:20 PM
Quote
1. A poorly-written law means you expand government's power over expression?
2. If someone from the government contacts my place of business and asks me to do/not to do something, I'd be on the phones with my attorneys.
3. Fair, but when an employee (or a student) chooses to work for an institution that is tied with one particular faith or another, is it unreasonable for them (especially victims like a 34-year-old law student) to consider: "If I choose place A, I'd have to understand that benefits, etc., are constrained by its faith; thus, place B might be a better place for me."
1. What you call a poorly-written law, I call a bipartisan law that was the product of nearly 25 years of Congressional work designed to regulate campaign finance rather than curtail speech. Your position presupposes that money, in this sense, equals speech, which I (and many others) find to be a preposterous ideas because it prefigures that one could have "more" speech by virtue of having "more" money. To analogize, it would be akin to permitting a person to use an exceedingly large megaphone on a street corner to get his message out, which, under traditional first amendment jurisprudence, the State can regulate, seeing as it's a mechanism of speech, rather than a content-based restriction. Nevertheless, it need not take a new law to change the campaign finance scheme, rather a couple of vacancies on the Court and a sympathetic president.
2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
3. I have no problem with a religious organization or employer mandating specific provisions or discriminatory policies in their workforces, provided that the nature of the work performed by the organization is spiritual in nature and the policies sought by said organization have a bona fide occupational relationship to that work. Put another way, I don't want the government mandating that Catholic Churces perform gay marriages, even if the government legalizes it writ large, because it speaks to the ecclesiastical nature of their work. Conversely, if a religious organization performs work of a largely secular nature, i.e. providing social services and assistance, that religious organization should play by the secular rules.
I can't say I agree with number 3. You can't say the church should play by secular rules because they're "doing things of a secular nature" in providing social services or medical services. They do that because that follows the "good works" standpoint of their religion, and they've been doing it for hundreds of years, back when those were considered to be largely religious occupations. I don't think you can just say "well, that's a secular thing now so you have to change your way of doing things."
This is completely outside the confines of this argument, which is a legal/constitutional one and interesting, but just from a common sense perspective, why is birth control a controversial issue? It's 2012 for Atheismo's sake. Does anyone but the Pope give a shit if a woman takes birth control pills? If so, why?
Most Catholics use birth control. Vatican II basically said "decide for yourself" in terms of using it, but the Catholic Church with a capital C still balks at paying for it, and I personally don't think they should have to. People who want to work for the Catholic Church in any format should accept that there are some ground rules. There are other hospitals and groups you can work for otherwise. If people still want to work for Catholic hospitals and organizations because they pay better or whatever the reason is, I think you can probably accept the burden of paying for your own birth control. I think the biggest issue is that the Catholic Church, probably because of its long history, looks bigger (and paranoid-er) picture and thinks this is a slippery slope to the government slowly chipping away at organized religion.
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 08:58:07 AM
Most Catholics use birth control. Vatican II basically said "decide for yourself" in terms of using it, but the Catholic Church with a capital C still balks at paying for it, and I personally don't think they should have to. People who want to work for the Catholic Church in any format should accept that there are some ground rules. There are other hospitals and groups you can work for otherwise. If people still want to work for Catholic hospitals and organizations because they pay better or whatever the reason is, I think you can probably accept the burden of paying for your own birth control. I think the biggest issue is that the Catholic Church, probably because of its long history, looks bigger (and paranoid-er) picture and thinks this is a slippery slope to the government slowly chipping away at organized religion.
Well, the other issue is that birth control pills can be prescribed to women for reasons other than shameful, childless sex.
Also, I'd be curious to know if the same plan that excludes women's birth control would cover a Viagra prescription, and if so, would the man in question have to provide his marriage license in order to get coverage?
Quote from: Gilgamesh on September 19, 2012, 07:28:20 PM
Quote
1. A poorly-written law means you expand government's power over expression?
2. If someone from the government contacts my place of business and asks me to do/not to do something, I'd be on the phones with my attorneys.
3. Fair, but when an employee (or a student) chooses to work for an institution that is tied with one particular faith or another, is it unreasonable for them (especially victims like a 34-year-old law student) to consider: "If I choose place A, I'd have to understand that benefits, etc., are constrained by its faith; thus, place B might be a better place for me."
1. What you call a poorly-written law, I call a bipartisan law that was the product of nearly 25 years of Congressional work designed to regulate campaign finance rather than curtail speech. Your position presupposes that money, in this sense, equals speech, which I (and many others) find to be a preposterous ideas because it prefigures that one could have "more" speech by virtue of having "more" money. To analogize, it would be akin to permitting a person to use an exceedingly large megaphone on a street corner to get his message out, which, under traditional first amendment jurisprudence, the State can regulate, seeing as it's a mechanism of speech, rather than a content-based restriction. Nevertheless, it need not take a new law to change the campaign finance scheme, rather a couple of vacancies on the Court and a sympathetic president.
No. That's not the analogy. You can turn off the TV, you can ignore billboard messages, you can tune out print and Internet ads. (Hell, you can fuck your candidate's opponent by clicking on his PPC ads often.) The law, as written, regulated the mentioning of a candidate in a federal election. It would affect the freedom of the press (many owned by corporate interests) and the freedom of speech.
Also, while we're on the subject, can we all just agree that "unions" and "corporations" are people? They're not controlled by some non-being. They're controlled by membership and shareholders, respectively, so when a union spends on an issue ad, it's collectively pooling resources to give its membership a louder voice. When it's a voluntary arrangement, it's a beautiful thing.
Quote2. I'd hope you'd be on the phone with your attorney, but I hope said attorney would take the time to delineate between prior restraint and a "hey, it'd help if you took this down, but we won't prosecute you if you don't"-type admonishment.
"Sure, just comply with us. If you don't we won't prosecute you, but we can't promise that an audit/surprise building inspection/etc. happens."
Quote from: CT III on September 20, 2012, 09:10:10 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 08:58:07 AM
Most Catholics use birth control. Vatican II basically said "decide for yourself" in terms of using it, but the Catholic Church with a capital C still balks at paying for it, and I personally don't think they should have to. People who want to work for the Catholic Church in any format should accept that there are some ground rules. There are other hospitals and groups you can work for otherwise. If people still want to work for Catholic hospitals and organizations because they pay better or whatever the reason is, I think you can probably accept the burden of paying for your own birth control. I think the biggest issue is that the Catholic Church, probably because of its long history, looks bigger (and paranoid-er) picture and thinks this is a slippery slope to the government slowly chipping away at organized religion.
Well, the other issue is that birth control pills can be prescribed to women for reasons other than shameful, childless sex.
Also, I'd be curious to know if the same plan that excludes women's birth control would cover a Viagra prescription, and if so, would the man in question have to provide his marriage license in order to get coverage?
CT, I don't think anyone here would argue with the use of bc for shameful, non-procreative sex, let alone medicinal uses. The problem I have is this: the employer-employee relationship is a voluntary arrangement. If you want to work for me, you will have to decide if it's worth the tradeoff of looking at my stupid face everyday. If it's not worth it, take your talents somewhere that you don't have to. If I want to be competitive, I remedy it in some way as your superskills are elsewhere, helping someone else make money. If Sandra Fluke wants to go to Georgetown Law, she should consider that it has been a Jesuit institution for hundreds of years. If G-town was the only law school she could go to (ha ha), she should consider another profession if $9 b.c. pills being subsidized are that important.
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 08:58:07 AM
Most Catholics use birth control. Vatican II basically said "decide for yourself" in terms of using it, but the Catholic Church with a capital C still balks at paying for it, and I personally don't think they should have to. People who want to work for the Catholic Church in any format should accept that there are some ground rules. There are other hospitals and groups you can work for otherwise. If people still want to work for Catholic hospitals and organizations because they pay better or whatever the reason is, I think you can probably accept the burden of paying for your own birth control. I think the biggest issue is that the Catholic Church, probably because of its long history, looks bigger (and paranoid-er) picture and thinks this is a slippery slope to the government slowly chipping away at organized religion.
Nobody's asking the Church to pay for anything. Insurance pays for it. The Church merely has to provide the option.
Besides, considering how much organized religion chips away at the Government (while enjoying representation without taxation) I'm not sure they're in a position to complain.
Quote from: Fork on September 20, 2012, 09:21:36 AM
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 08:58:07 AM
Most Catholics use birth control. Vatican II basically said "decide for yourself" in terms of using it, but the Catholic Church with a capital C still balks at paying for it, and I personally don't think they should have to. People who want to work for the Catholic Church in any format should accept that there are some ground rules. There are other hospitals and groups you can work for otherwise. If people still want to work for Catholic hospitals and organizations because they pay better or whatever the reason is, I think you can probably accept the burden of paying for your own birth control. I think the biggest issue is that the Catholic Church, probably because of its long history, looks bigger (and paranoid-er) picture and thinks this is a slippery slope to the government slowly chipping away at organized religion.
Nobody's asking the Church to pay for anything. Insurance pays for it. The Church merely has to provide the option.
Besides, considering how much organized religion chips away at the Government (while enjoying representation without taxation) I'm not sure they're in a position to complain.
So they don't have to pay the insurance company anything more for more comprehensive plans to provide for their employees? Is that how that works? Interesting.
Also, what do you mean "the way organized religion chips away at government" ? I can't remember the last time the Church had the ability to tell the government what to do and force them to comply. Also, religions don't have to pay taxes so therefore they owe the government and should just do what they're told? I don't think the tax free status was instituted in order to ensure More cooperation between church and state.
GO BOILERS!
So I gather this thread devolved into that whole birth control argument.
Well, why isn't anyone talking about (/670thescore) the fact that catholic charities (and employers of the like) don't actually have to buy BC for their employees nor supply a tub of condoms to them. The law that is in effect mandates that health insurance companies must cover birth control in their health care plans. Debate that, if you will. The other aspect of the law is that employers must choose a health insurance company that covers BC, so under the current law, they simply must choose any health insurance provider, since all of them cover it. So, really, they're not forced to pay for their employees' birth control. Essentially, it is no different than them paying an employee and them buying rubbers/BC.
Quote from: Tollbooth Yeti on September 20, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
So I gather this thread devolved into that whole birth control argument.
Well, why isn't anyone talking about (/670thescore) the fact that catholic charities (and employers of the like) don't actually have to buy BC for their employees nor supply a tub of condoms to them. The law that is in effect mandates that health insurance companies must cover birth control in their health care plans. Debate that, if you will. The other aspect of the law is that employers must choose a health insurance company that covers BC, so under the current law, they simply must choose any health insurance provider, since all of them cover it. So, really, they're not forced to pay for their employees' birth control. Essentially, it is no different than them paying an employee and them buying rubbers/BC.
Unless they self-insure, which many do.
Think of all the problems a single-payer system would solve.
Quote from: Tollbooth Yeti on September 20, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
So I gather this thread devolved into that whole birth control argument.
Well, why isn't anyone talking about (/670thescore) the fact that catholic charities (and employers of the like) don't actually have to buy BC for their employees nor supply a tub of condoms to them. The law that is in effect mandates that health insurance companies must cover birth control in their health care plans. Debate that, if you will. The other aspect of the law is that employers must choose a health insurance company that covers BC, so under the current law, they simply must choose any health insurance provider, since all of them cover it. So, really, they're not forced to pay for their employees' birth control. Essentially, it is no different than them paying an employee and them buying rubbers/BC.
Mea culpa. But when the Rickettes high step their way into city and national politics this seemed to me to be the correct thread.
Also, since religious organizations can just make up shit as they go along, do you religious freedom fighters really see no opportunity for abuse?
What if one were to get a job teaching at a Jesuit university and all of a sudden, after one were diagnosed with cancer the Jesuits were to all of a sudden come out against chemotherapy? Since one is free to go get another job, cool. Oh, but aren't you also against Obamacare and, therefore, even getting a new job would mean that one now has a pre-existing condition that is no longer covered?
Granted, this example is a but extreme but this whole backwards anti-birth control argument flies in the face of anything a civilized society ought to be standing for.
Quote from: SKO on September 20, 2012, 09:24:53 AM
Also, what do you mean "the way organized religion chips away at government" ? I can't remember the last time the Church had the ability to tell the government what to do and force them to comply. Also, religions don't have to pay taxes so therefore they owe the government and should just do what they're told? I don't think the tax free status was instituted in order to ensure More cooperation between church and state.
If the Government actually enforced the clause in the Internal Revenue Code that states politically active religious organizations forfeit their tax-free status, we'd never have to issue another T-Bill ever.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 19, 2012, 07:49:03 PM
Fuck it's silent in here.
You've been doing much better lately.
Quote from: Eli on September 20, 2012, 12:10:22 PM
Quote from: CBStew on September 20, 2012, 12:04:07 PM
Quote from: Eli on September 20, 2012, 11:53:52 AM
Quote from: Internet Apex on September 20, 2012, 11:51:25 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 19, 2012, 07:49:03 PM
Fuck it's silent in here.
You've been doing much better lately.
He loses a point for properly punctuating "it's."
Your right.
His post could of been even better.
Irregardless, it was still funny.
Quote from: Tollbooth Yeti on September 20, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
So I gather this thread devolved into that whole birth control argument.
Well, why isn't anyone talking about (/670thescore) the fact that catholic charities (and employers of the like) don't actually have to buy BC for their employees nor supply a tub of condoms to them. The law that is in effect mandates that health insurance companies must cover birth control in their health care plans. Debate that, if you will. The other aspect of the law is that employers must choose a health insurance company that covers BC, so under the current law, they simply must choose any health insurance provider, since all of them cover it. So, really, they're not forced to pay for their employees' birth control. Essentially, it is no different than them paying an employee and them buying rubbers/BC.
Why is Yeti talking about buying BC? I mean, he's got quite the broadcast voice and ability to make pictures better, but *buying* him?
Quote from: morpheus on September 20, 2012, 08:45:45 PM
Quote from: Tollbooth Yeti on September 20, 2012, 09:35:05 AM
So I gather this thread devolved into that whole birth control argument.
Well, why isn't anyone talking about (/670thescore) the fact that catholic charities (and employers of the like) don't actually have to buy BC for their employees nor supply a tub of condoms to them. The law that is in effect mandates that health insurance companies must cover birth control in their health care plans. Debate that, if you will. The other aspect of the law is that employers must choose a health insurance company that covers BC, so under the current law, they simply must choose any health insurance provider, since all of them cover it. So, really, they're not forced to pay for their employees' birth control. Essentially, it is no different than them paying an employee and them buying rubbers/BC.
Why is Yeti talking about buying BC? I mean, he's got quite the broadcast voice and ability to make pictures better, but *buying* him?
Wait. Is buying and selling people a crime now?
I am not a season ticket holder, but I got this today.
QuoteA Message From Tom Ricketts
As part of the Cubs' ongoing efforts to engage and communicate with their fans, Chairman Tom Ricketts wrote the following letter to Cubs Season Ticket Holders:
Dear Season Ticket Holder -
With the 2012 season having drawn to a close, it's time for all of us at the Chicago Cubs to thank you for your support and provide an update on the progress we've made toward building a championship-caliber organization. You are a vital stakeholder to this franchise and an important partner in our transformation.
Despite this year's results in the standings, we are confident the Chicago Cubs are heading in the right direction. Our players, coaches, management and front office have approached their jobs with professionalism, effort and unity, which has created a winning atmosphere inside the organization. It's our responsibility to turn that effort into additional wins on the field. Our number one goal is to reward loyal generations of Cubs fans with a World Series and we're reinvesting every dollar spent by our fans into the franchise to achieve that goal.
To achieve our goal, it was clear the team needed a long-term strategy. Over the past year, we recruited new baseball leadership to create and execute a plan for building a consistently-competitive ballclub. We now have a long-term strategy in place and a baseball organization focused on delivering a championship to Wrigley Field. That team is communicating openly and honestly about implementing a proven model for sustained success.
As part of that strategy, we are developing a core of young players at the major league level. This season provided an opportunity for homegrown and acquired players to gain valuable experience and establish themselves as potential long-term contributors to the club.
Our minor league system improved in 2012, as the Cubs acquired, drafted or signed a significant wave of new talent into the organization. We welcomed a strong 2012 first-year player draft class into the system, building on a franchise-record investment in draft signings in 2011. Many of these players made immediate positive contributions. In fact, five Cubs prospects were included in MLB's recently-released Top 100 Prospects list; a total topped by only three other teams in the league. A number of our newly-acquired players excelled in both the minor and major leagues and look to contribute further in 2013 and beyond.
We've welcomed new talent in the front office as well. Perhaps no operation bears more responsibility for advancing our organizational plan than scouting and player development. After a season of evaluation, our scouting and development teams have been reorganized to procure and develop the best amateur, professional and international talent available. Our scouts and coaches have been equipped with state-of-the-art analysis tools and equipment to enhance the club's analytical capabilities.
In addition to personnel investments, we've made significant upgrades to our facilities. We are currently building a new baseball academy to serve our Latin American players in the Dominican Republic. The facility, open year-round, will span 50 acres with baseball fields, training facilities, player housing and an education center, making it the largest academy in the country. Additionally, we broke ground this season on a new Spring Training facility in Mesa, Ariz., that will be one of the premier training facilities in baseball, as well as a more enjoyable venue for watching a Spring Training game. We continue to make improvements to Wrigley Field's facilities for our players and fans, with larger scale investments coming down the road. All of these improvements will enhance your fan experience and bolster the club's ability to attract and develop elite players throughout the world.
Lastly, we continue to invest in the Chicago community to help deserving children and families. The Cubs and Chicago Cubs Charities will support a team-record $4.5 million of donations to worthwhile nonprofits and programs across Chicagoland this year. We're honored to support the people and organizations that make our city a great place to work, live and play baseball.
In the end, we are fans and our goal is to win. We're committed to building an organization you can be proud of and we're committed to building a champion the right way. This franchise has embarked on a path that will present challenges along the way, but the destination is promising.
We deeply and sincerely appreciate your ongoing support.
Tom
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:11:05 PM
I am not a season ticket holder, but I got this today.
Quote
Tom's shitty letter
I guess this should be in the "Polyellon banned me" thread. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs)
QuoteI asked for it. I got it. What is it? A letter from Cubs management, sent to season-ticket holders.
Well, well. Either this was in the works a while back, or someone in the organization read what I wrote and chairman Tom Ricketts decided to write. Here's the text of the email I just received, signed by Tom. It's exactly the right thing to do, a good public relations move, just stating the team's goals. I applaud them for doing it. (Even if I had to practically beg them to do it here.)
EDIT: DPD.
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:11:05 PM
I am not a season ticket holder, but I got this today.
Quote
Tom's shitty letter
I guess this should be in the "Polyellon banned me" thread. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs)
QuoteI asked for it. I got it. What is it? A letter from Cubs management, sent to season-ticket holders.
Well, well. Either this was in the works a while back, or someone in the organization read what I wrote and chairman Tom Ricketts decided to write. Here's the text of the email I just received, signed by Tom. It's exactly the right thing to do, a good public relations move, just stating the team's goals. I applaud them for doing it. (Even if I had to practically beg them to do it here.)
EDIT: DPD.
Please don't post this crap unless you have booby pics of Al for Penfoe.
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
I guess this should be in the "Polyellon banned me" thread. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs)
QuoteI asked for it. I got it. What is it? A letter from Cubs management, sent to season-ticket holders.
Well, well. Either this was in the works a while back, or someone in the organization read what I wrote and chairman Tom Ricketts decided to write. Here's the text of the email I just received, signed by Tom. It's exactly the right thing to do, a good public relations move, just stating the team's goals. I applaud them for doing it. (Even if I had to practically beg them to do it here.)
EDIT: DPD.
Well, well. What a turd.
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:11:05 PM
I am not a season ticket holder, but I got this today.
Quote
Tom's shitty letter
I guess this should be in the "Polyellon banned me" thread. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs)
QuoteI asked for it. I got it. What is it? A letter from Cubs management, sent to season-ticket holders.
Well, well. Either this was in the works a while back, or someone in the organization read what I wrote and chairman Tom Ricketts decided to write. Here's the text of the email I just received, signed by Tom. It's exactly the right thing to do, a good public relations move, just stating the team's goals. I applaud them for doing it. (Even if I had to practically beg them to do it here.)
EDIT: DPD.
Christ on a buttsprayed cracker this guy is delusional.
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:11:05 PM
I am not a season ticket holder, but I got this today.
Quote
Tom's shitty letter
I guess this should be in the "Polyellon banned me" thread. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs)
QuoteI asked for it. I got it. What is it? A letter from Cubs management, sent to season-ticket holders.
Well, well. Either this was in the works a while back, or someone in the organization read what I wrote and chairman Tom Ricketts decided to write. Here's the text of the email I just received, signed by Tom. It's exactly the right thing to do, a good public relations move, just stating the team's goals. I applaud them for doing it. (Even if I had to practically beg them to do it here.)
EDIT: DPD.
What the HELL?
Quote from: BH on October 12, 2012, 01:27:55 PM
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:19:41 PM
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:11:05 PM
I am not a season ticket holder, but I got this today.
Quote
Tom's shitty letter
I guess this should be in the "Polyellon banned me" thread. (http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs)
QuoteI asked for it. I got it. What is it? A letter from Cubs management, sent to season-ticket holders.
Well, well. Either this was in the works a while back, or someone in the organization read what I wrote and chairman Tom Ricketts decided to write. Here's the text of the email I just received, signed by Tom. It's exactly the right thing to do, a good public relations move, just stating the team's goals. I applaud them for doing it. (Even if I had to practically beg them to do it here.)
EDIT: DPD.
Please don't post this crap unless you have booby pics of Al for Penfoe.
Well, I don't have booby pics, but I do know of an "intimate" pic.
(http://firealyellon.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/yellonholeqj7.png)
Quote from: morpheus on October 12, 2012, 01:34:37 PM
Well, I don't have booby pics, but I do know of an "intimate" pic.
(http://firealyellon.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/yellonholeqj7.png)
Is this face of a lover of beastiality? I'm not saying it is, but you gotta ask the question.
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2012/10/11/3490904/tom-ricketts-season-ticket-holder-letter-cubs#120961905
QuoteIts the least they can do for dedicated fans like yourself.
by Wrigley on Oct 11, 2012 6:00 PM CDT
Well,
almost the least they could do.
I'm picturing Al imagining Tom firing up BCB with his first cup of coffee every morning and sitting there nodding while filling up pages of notes on a legal pad. Marching into Theo's office at the start of the work day, closing the door, tossing the notes on the desk, taking a seat and then the two of them spending the next several hours poring over and pondering Al's genius.
What a self important fuckhead.
Well yes, Tom Ricketts says that the Cubs will
take us all to Dairy Queenfinish first, not last or anywhere in betweenbe winning like Charlie Sheenenjoy the same result as the team coached by Tom Creanfrom all those losing days weanbe the greatest you've ever seenwin half the Championships as Olajuwon, HakeemBe a mean, lean World Series winning machine in 2013!
Just read the letter...
QuoteA bunch of stuff thanking you for buying your tickets...
A bunch of stuff saying basically this. (http://www.hark.com/clips/myfrrwlwls-a-thousand-points-of-light)
Hmm, here's some good stuff.
QuoteOur number one goal is to reward loyal generations of Cubs fans with a World Series and we're reinvesting every dollar spent by our fans into the franchise to achieve that goal.
Right on! Buy your World Series tickets now, bitchez! Wait, there's more?
QuoteTo achieve our goal, it was clear the team needed a long-term strategy. Over the past year, we recruited new baseball leadership to create and execute a plan for building a consistently-competitive ballclub. We now have a long-term strategy in place and a baseball organization focused on delivering a championship to Wrigley Field. That team is communicating openly and honestly about implementing a proven model for sustained success.
As part of that strategy, we are developing a core of young players at the major league level. This season provided an opportunity for homegrown and acquired players to gain valuable experience and establish themselves as potential long-term contributors to the club.
Hmm, long-term? Does that mean a bunch of 2-year contracts to the likes of Shane Victorino?
QuoteA bunch of stuff on the minor league system.
Well, we're waiting. Can't wait to hear the Ricketts has announced that they have traded Ian Stewart and Luis Valbuena and the rights to pay Alfonso Soriano's salary to Detroit for Fielder, Cabrera, Verlander and Austin Jackson pending the completion of the playoffs.
QuoteA number of our newly-acquired players excelled in both the minor and major leagues and look to contribute further in 2013 and beyond.
Beyond? That can't be a hedge for "if we suck next year, don't worry, Castro and RIzzo are going to be here awhile?
QuoteWe've welcomed new talent in the front office as well. Perhaps no operation bears more responsibility for advancing our organizational plan than scouting and player development.
Player development? That's like recruiting top free agents for a win-now team, right?
QuoteA bunch of stuff on the facilities in the D.R., Ariz., and Lakeview as well as a bunch of charitable endeavors.
Hmm, maybe they're investing in quieter speakers!
QuoteIn the end, we are fans and our goal is to win.
That's right, bitches! Should I stop reading??
QuoteWe're committed to building an organization you can be proud of and we're committed to building a champion the right way.
Well, anyone knows that the "right way" is code for "getting it" which is code for "listening to Al."
QuoteThis franchise has embarked on a path that will present challenges along the way, but the destination is promising.
Challenges along the way? embarked? Oh shit, he basically said what Theo just said.
Can someone make a picture of a sadfaced Apex next to Al and something big?
You forgot Kevin Youkilis.
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 18, 2013, 02:50:42 PM
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Are you suggesting the types celebrating World Series titles while in Chicago would need a hotel because they're not local? I'm indignant!
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2013, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 18, 2013, 02:50:42 PM
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Are you suggesting the types celebrating World Series titles while in Chicago would need a hotel because they're not local? I'm indignant!
If there is no hotel available you will have to put me up on your couch.
Quote from: CBStew on January 18, 2013, 04:40:16 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2013, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 18, 2013, 02:50:42 PM
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Are you suggesting the types celebrating World Series titles while in Chicago would need a hotel because they're not local? I'm indignant!
If there is no hotel available you will have to put me up on your couch.
I will bring Peet's Coffee, Dungeness crab, sourdough bread and several bottles of fine Napa cabernet.
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2013, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 18, 2013, 02:50:42 PM
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Are you suggesting the types celebrating World Series titles while in Chicago would need a hotel because they're not local? I'm indignant!
I'm a CALIFORNIAN now, dude.
Quote from: CBStew on January 18, 2013, 04:46:01 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 18, 2013, 04:40:16 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2013, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 18, 2013, 02:50:42 PM
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Are you suggesting the types celebrating World Series titles while in Chicago would need a hotel because they're not local? I'm indignant!
If there is no hotel available you will have to put me up on your couch.
I will bring Peet's Coffee, Dungeness crab, sourdough bread and several bottles of fine Napa cabernet. some of Humboldt County's finest exports and I'll be at Oleg's if you need me.
Give the people what they want'd.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 18, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 18, 2013, 04:46:01 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 18, 2013, 04:40:16 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2013, 02:56:44 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 18, 2013, 02:50:42 PM
The Rickettses are building a hotel on the McDonald's lot. (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130117&content_id=41007052&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc) Should be a nice, reasonably-priced place to unwind after celebrating World Series titles.
Are you suggesting the types celebrating World Series titles while in Chicago would need a hotel because they're not local? I'm indignant!
If there is no hotel available you will have to put me up on your couch.
I will bring Peet's Coffee, Dungeness crab, sourdough bread and several bottles of fine Napa cabernet. some of Humboldt County's finest exports and I'll be at Oleg's if you need me.
Give the people what they want'd.
+420!
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
Fan polls or fan suggestions are mentioned three times. I wish they wouldn't wet their fingers and stick 'em in the air on all this, considering people like Al Yellon no doubt make up a large sample of these polls.
The night game restrictions need to go. The difference in drunk Chads staggering around Wrigleyville at 11:00 on a Friday or Saturday night would be zero.
Du Page Cubs? Certainly within their right if Tom Tunney doesn't play ball.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130319/BLOGS02/130319747/dupage-cubs-the-plot-thickens
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on March 20, 2013, 01:50:28 PM
Du Page Cubs? Certainly within their right if Tom Tunney doesn't play ball.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130319/BLOGS02/130319747/dupage-cubs-the-plot-thickens
Tom Tunney is apparently on meth and PCP. Or just drunk on the Murphys' and Loukases' cash.
I'm continually amazed that the Cubs give the rooftop owners the time of day let alone engage in bargaining with them. They're selling access to something they don't own.
The Cubs need to tell them to fuck the fuck off. The ballclub doesn't owe them anything.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on March 20, 2013, 06:24:53 PM
The Cubs need to tell them to fuck the fuck off. The ballclub doesn't owe them anything.
Sadly, the Cubs do have a contract with the Roofies. Wonder if the bankruptcy they went through would have cancelled it?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on March 20, 2013, 10:24:54 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on March 20, 2013, 06:24:53 PM
The Cubs need to tell them to fuck the fuck off. The ballclub doesn't owe them anything.
Sadly, the Cubs do have a contract with the Roofies. Wonder if the bankruptcy they went through would have cancelled it?
It wouldn't. Bankruptcy give the debtor the right to terminate contracts, but it requires an affirmative step by the debtor. The debtor is still responsible for payment of damages associated with termination of the contract. That usually doesn't matter as the debtor is insolvent, so there is no money left to pay the damages. In the case of the Cubs, if they tried to terminate the contracts the rooftop owners would have certainly made claims in the bankruptcy court that they were entitled to damages and that some of the sales proceeds should be be set aside for them, which would have, at the least, slowed up the bankruptcy.
Quote from: thehawk on March 21, 2013, 09:13:54 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on March 20, 2013, 10:24:54 PM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on March 20, 2013, 06:24:53 PM
The Cubs need to tell them to fuck the fuck off. The ballclub doesn't owe them anything.
Sadly, the Cubs do have a contract with the Roofies. Wonder if the bankruptcy they went through would have cancelled it?
It wouldn't. Bankruptcy give the debtor the right to terminate contracts, but it requires an affirmative step by the debtor. The debtor is still responsible for payment of damages associated with termination of the contract. That usually doesn't matter as the debtor is insolvent, so there is no money left to pay the damages. In the case of the Cubs, if they tried to terminate the contracts the rooftop owners would have certainly made claims in the bankruptcy court that they were entitled to damages and that some of the sales proceeds should be be set aside for them, which would have, at the least, slowed up the bankruptcy.
Kinda what I thought. In short: They could have tried to cancel the contract, but only if the Roofies and Cubs agreed on a payoff amount.
Maybe the Ricketts should do that today: Offer the Roofies an NPV on projected lost profits on the remaining years of the contract.
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
"A new lawsuit shows how taxpayers footed the bill so the White Sox can make millions" (http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/taxpayers-subsidize-white-sox-park/Content?oid=9371315)
Just in case you needed a reminder about what a useless piece of crap our ex big gay Governor is.
Quote from: flannj on May 01, 2013, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
"A new lawsuit shows how taxpayers footed the bill so the White Sox can make millions" (http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/taxpayers-subsidize-white-sox-park/Content?oid=9371315)
Just in case you needed a reminder about what a useless piece of crap our ex big gay Governor is.
Oh, man... I read this last week and meant to post it.
QuoteIn 2010 Reinsdorf negotiated a deal with IFSA in which taxpayers paid about $6.9 million to build a restaurant for which the White Sox get to keep all the proceeds—which may be an even sweeter deal than the original one to build the ballpark.
When the Tribune asked why he'd agree to these terms, Thompson replied, "We said to Jerry, 'Jerry, can we have part of the profits?' And he said, no. We said, OK. I've known Jerry for 52 years. He's tough. He's tough."
If only the Detroit Tigers were so easy to defeat.
We tried, dammit!
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 01, 2013, 12:21:04 PM
Quote from: flannj on May 01, 2013, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
"A new lawsuit shows how taxpayers footed the bill so the White Sox can make millions" (http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/taxpayers-subsidize-white-sox-park/Content?oid=9371315)
Just in case you needed a reminder about what a useless piece of crap our ex big gay Governor is.
Oh, man... I read this last week and meant to post it.
QuoteIn 2010 Reinsdorf negotiated a deal with IFSA in which taxpayers paid about $6.9 million to build a restaurant for which the White Sox get to keep all the proceeds—which may be an even sweeter deal than the original one to build the ballpark.
When the Tribune asked why he'd agree to these terms, Thompson replied, "We said to Jerry, 'Jerry, can we have part of the profits?' And he said, no. We said, OK. I've known Jerry for 52 years. He's tough. He's tough."
If only the Detroit Tigers were so easy to defeat.
We tried, dammit!
That's solid negotiation there.
I like that Reinsdorf had somebody fired* for $1.2 million - the cost of a backup outfielder.
*allegedly
Quote from: flannj on May 01, 2013, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
"A new lawsuit shows how taxpayers footed the bill so the White Sox can make millions" (http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/taxpayers-subsidize-white-sox-park/Content?oid=9371315)
Just in case you needed a reminder about what a useless piece of crap our ex big gay Governor is.
Maybe this lawsuit will unearth some evidence that not even Dan Webb and the heavies and Winston and Strawn can keep him out of prison.
Quote from: Brownie on May 01, 2013, 08:33:07 PM
Quote from: flannj on May 01, 2013, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
"A new lawsuit shows how taxpayers footed the bill so the White Sox can make millions" (http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/taxpayers-subsidize-white-sox-park/Content?oid=9371315)
Just in case you needed a reminder about what a useless piece of crap our ex big gay Governor is.
Maybe this lawsuit will unearth some evidence that not even Dan Webb and the heavies and Winston and Strawn can keep him out of prison.
This time it's
personal.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 02, 2013, 12:43:12 AM
Quote from: Brownie on May 01, 2013, 08:33:07 PM
Quote from: flannj on May 01, 2013, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
Well, it looks like the Ricketts aren't asking for public money now. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-ricketts-20130119,0,4139258.story) They just want the oppressive nanny state of the city to go fuck themselves so they can rebuild the stadium, then realize their revenue potential and build a goddamn dynasty.
Annoyed no more.
"A new lawsuit shows how taxpayers footed the bill so the White Sox can make millions" (http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/taxpayers-subsidize-white-sox-park/Content?oid=9371315)
Just in case you needed a reminder about what a useless piece of crap our ex big gay Governor is.
Maybe this lawsuit will unearth some evidence that not even Dan Webb and the heavies and Winston and Strawn can keep him out of prison.
This time it's personal.
With sexy results.
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
So in the Sbox we just now (god, what the hell) remembered this and that Brett Taylor posted a bunch of gay porn on this here message board during the Great CubsTalk War.
Holy shit
Quote from: Slaky on May 24, 2013, 01:09:50 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
So in the Sbox we just now (god, what the hell) remembered this and that Brett Taylor posted a bunch of gay porn on this here message board during the Great CubsTalk War.
Holy shit
That sure was a lot of words to say Ricketts = businessman. Tell me more about this Great CubsTalk War, please.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 24, 2013, 01:49:25 PM
Quote from: Slaky on May 24, 2013, 01:09:50 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
So in the Sbox we just now (god, what the hell) remembered this and that Brett Taylor posted a bunch of gay porn on this here message board during the Great CubsTalk War.
Holy shit
That sure was a lot of words to say Ricketts = businessman. Tell me more about this Great CubsTalk War, please.
It was a lot of fighting about which Cubs site was better. It was weird. In retaliation, some people from CubsTalk started posting tranny porn on the board here and, I believe, TJ Brown had to call Andy at work to remove it. And we were all like, "You have Andy Dolan's phone number?!"
Great days in Desipio History.
ETA: I think I was still in college at that point. Holy crap.
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 01:52:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 24, 2013, 01:49:25 PM
Quote from: Slaky on May 24, 2013, 01:09:50 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
So in the Sbox we just now (god, what the hell) remembered this and that Brett Taylor posted a bunch of gay porn on this here message board during the Great CubsTalk War.
Holy shit
That sure was a lot of words to say Ricketts = businessman. Tell me more about this Great CubsTalk War, please.
It was a lot of fighting about which Cubs site was better. It was weird. In retaliation, some people from CubsTalk started posting tranny porn on the board here and, I believe, TJ Brown had to call Andy at work to remove it. And we were all like, "You have Andy Dolan's phone number?!"
Great days in Desipio History.
ETA: I think I was still in college at that point. Holy crap.
And now Ace is Brett and has 23k followers on Twitter and the most comprehensive and arguably the best cubs blog.
Crazy world.
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 01:52:04 PM
TJ Brown had to call Andy at work to remove it. And we were all like, "You have Andy Dolan's phone number?!"
TJ Brown is a pretty big wheel down at the cracker factory.
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 01:52:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 24, 2013, 01:49:25 PM
Quote from: Slaky on May 24, 2013, 01:09:50 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
So in the Sbox we just now (god, what the hell) remembered this and that Brett Taylor posted a bunch of gay porn on this here message board during the Great CubsTalk War.
Holy shit
That sure was a lot of words to say Ricketts = businessman. Tell me more about this Great CubsTalk War, please.
It was a lot of fighting about which Cubs site was better. It was weird. In retaliation, some people from CubsTalk started posting tranny porn on the board here and, I believe, TJ Brown had to call Andy at work to remove it. And we were all like, "You have Andy Dolan's phone number?!"
Great days in Desipio History.
ETA: I think I was still in college at that point. Holy crap.
The feud dragged on until a truce was called so that all the members of the major Cubs' messageboards could attend a ceremony to give Eric Patterson an award for achievement in the field of minor league excellence.
Quote from: CT III on May 24, 2013, 06:57:22 PM
The feud dragged on until a truce was called so that all the members of the major Cubs' messageboards could attend a ceremony to give Eric Patterson an award for achievement in the field of minor league excellence.
And $100!
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on May 24, 2013, 06:57:22 PM
The feud dragged on until a truce was called so that all the members of the major Cubs' messageboards could attend a ceremony to give Eric Patterson an award for achievement in the field of minor league excellence.
And $100!
"Congrats, Eric!" (http://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24901)
QuoteStrong consideration was given to Matt Murton, who edged out Patterson in the user vote. However, the NSBB minor league writers for the site were unanimous in nominating Patterson for their 50% of the vote, giving him the overall edge in the award. Others receiving support included Brandon Sing, Sean Gallagher, Ronny Cedeno, Ricky Nolasco and others.
(http://i.imgur.com/rHOioae.jpg)
I completely forgot about the picture. The caption should read:
"Eric Patterson accepts hairdoll from internet weirdos outside of a minor league bathroom while a mop, bucket and broom proudly look on"
QuoteMatt Murton, Eric Patterson, Brandon Sing, Sean Gallagher, Ronny Cedeno, Ricky Nolasco and others.
There's a lot of shit in that pile.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 24, 2013, 09:29:01 PM
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on May 24, 2013, 06:57:22 PM
The feud dragged on until a truce was called so that all the members of the major Cubs' messageboards could attend a ceremony to give Eric Patterson an award for achievement in the field of minor league excellence.
And $100!
"Congrats, Eric!" (http://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24901)
QuoteStrong consideration was given to Matt Murton, who edged out Patterson in the user vote. However, the NSBB minor league writers for the site were unanimous in nominating Patterson for their 50% of the vote, giving him the overall edge in the award. Others receiving support included Brandon Sing, Sean Gallagher, Ronny Cedeno, Ricky Nolasco and others.
(http://i.imgur.com/rHOioae.jpg)
Reminds me of the time Al gave Derrek Lee a shirt. Patterson looks slightly more enthused than D-Lee did.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 24, 2013, 09:29:01 PM
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on May 24, 2013, 06:57:22 PM
The feud dragged on until a truce was called so that all the members of the major Cubs' messageboards could attend a ceremony to give Eric Patterson an award for achievement in the field of minor league excellence.
And $100!
"Congrats, Eric!" (http://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24901)
QuoteStrong consideration was given to Matt Murton, who edged out Patterson in the user vote. However, the NSBB minor league writers for the site were unanimous in nominating Patterson for their 50% of the vote, giving him the overall edge in the award. Others receiving support included Brandon Sing, Sean Gallagher, Ronny Cedeno, Ricky Nolasco and others.
(http://i.imgur.com/rHOioae.jpg)
The writers' vote outweighed the readers. They must have watched them play 100 times.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 24, 2013, 11:08:52 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 24, 2013, 09:29:01 PM
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: CT III on May 24, 2013, 06:57:22 PM
The feud dragged on until a truce was called so that all the members of the major Cubs' messageboards could attend a ceremony to give Eric Patterson an award for achievement in the field of minor league excellence.
And $100!
"Congrats, Eric!" (http://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=24901)
QuoteStrong consideration was given to Matt Murton, who edged out Patterson in the user vote. However, the NSBB minor league writers for the site were unanimous in nominating Patterson for their 50% of the vote, giving him the overall edge in the award. Others receiving support included Brandon Sing, Sean Gallagher, Ronny Cedeno, Ricky Nolasco and others.
(http://i.imgur.com/rHOioae.jpg)
Reminds me of the time Al gave Derrek Lee a shirt. Patterson looks slightly more enthused than D-Lee did.
(http://i.imgur.com/mPcacTQ.jpg)
Stoked.
(http://i37.tinypic.com/ivaewy.jpg)
Quote from: Eli on May 24, 2013, 01:52:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 24, 2013, 01:49:25 PM
Quote from: Slaky on May 24, 2013, 01:09:50 PM
Quote from: BH on June 17, 2011, 02:24:52 PM
Ace gets it. (http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/06/16/managing-expectations-and-the-meaning-of-confidence/)
So in the Sbox we just now (god, what the hell) remembered this and that Brett Taylor posted a bunch of gay porn on this here message board during the Great CubsTalk War.
Holy shit
That sure was a lot of words to say Ricketts = businessman. Tell me more about this Great CubsTalk War, please.
It was a lot of fighting about which Cubs site was better. It was weird. In retaliation, some people from CubsTalk started posting tranny porn on the board here and, I believe, TJ Brown had to call Andy at work to remove it. And we were all like, "You have Andy Dolan's phone number?!"
Great days in Desipio History.
ETA: I think I was still in college at that point. Holy crap.
I was enjoying that tranny porn, and then TJ had to go blab to teacher. Thanks a bunch, TJ.
Quote from: Fork on May 26, 2013, 10:54:12 PM
(http://i37.tinypic.com/ivaewy.jpg)
SHHHHHHH! Theres a game on.
Quote from: thehawk on May 28, 2013, 03:28:05 PM
Quote from: Fork on May 26, 2013, 10:54:12 PM
(http://i37.tinypic.com/ivaewy.jpg)
SHHHHHHH! Theres a game on.
Where the fuck are the cookies?
THEY SAID THERE WOULD BE COOKIES!
(http://i.imgur.com/eQOtsBv.jpg) (http://i.imgur.com/w8qogwR.jpg)
Quote from: morpheus on May 29, 2013, 04:00:19 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/eQOtsBv.jpg) (http://i.imgur.com/w8qogwR.jpg)
It's hard to imagine a time before BC was in every photoshop. I prefer not to.
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville’s alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
(||) ?
GET WYSOCKI ON THE CASE!
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Specifics:
QuoteIn addition to reducing the left field Jumbotron from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and the right field ad board from 1,000 square feet to 650 square feet, Tunney told the Cubs they will need to get rid of a request for a pedestrian bridge over Clark Street that team CEO Tom Ricketts want to connect the ballpark to the hotel.
"I don't think there's a functional reason to put a bridge over Clark Street," Tunney said. "To transport 175 hotel guests?"
In addition, Tunney said he wants the entrance to the hotel moved from Patterson Avenue, a residential street west of Wrigley Field, to either Clark Street or Addison Street. And the alderman said he can't support a plan for an outdoor patio in the hotel above Patterson where hotel guests could hang out. "Come on, people live 50 feet away from there," he said.
The Cubs are like .... nah.
QuoteIn response to Tunney's letter, Cubs spokesman Julian Green reiterated the team's position that if the Ricketts family is to invest $300 million in the restoration and modernization of Wrigley Field, plus another $200 million for a hotel across the street, "all elements" of the sprawling plan must be in place.
"Anything less significantly hampers our ability to make a $500 million investment," Green said.
QuoteTunney said his voice has been heard in the negotiations, but his letter expresses frustration with the amount of communication he has been getting from the team as he tries to assuage the concerns of residents in the already congested neighborhood full of bars and restaurants.
"I will expect a greater level of responsiveness and consideration from you and the Cubs organization as we finalize the Planned Development documents," Tunney's letter reads. "By your own admission, the proposed plans pose serious disruptions to my residents and will dramatically affect their quality of life. We must work together to minimize those disruptions and compose operations plans to manage the additional activity and proposed new uses."
Aww. Poor Tom wants a seat at the table. Aldermanning is hard.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 27, 2013, 01:26:03 PM
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Specifics:
QuoteIn addition to reducing the left field Jumbotron from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and the right field ad board from 1,000 square feet to 650 square feet, Tunney told the Cubs they will need to get rid of a request for a pedestrian bridge over Clark Street that team CEO Tom Ricketts want to connect the ballpark to the hotel.
"I don't think there's a functional reason to put a bridge over Clark Street," Tunney said. "To transport 175 hotel guests?"
In addition, Tunney said he wants the entrance to the hotel moved from Patterson Avenue, a residential street west of Wrigley Field, to either Clark Street or Addison Street. And the alderman said he can't support a plan for an outdoor patio in the hotel above Patterson where hotel guests could hang out. "Come on, people live 50 feet away from there," he said.
The Cubs are like .... nah.
QuoteIn response to Tunney's letter, Cubs spokesman Julian Green reiterated the team's position that if the Ricketts family is to invest $300 million in the restoration and modernization of Wrigley Field, plus another $200 million for a hotel across the street, "all elements" of the sprawling plan must be in place.
"Anything less significantly hampers our ability to make a $500 million investment," Green said.
QuoteTunney said his voice has been heard in the negotiations, but his letter expresses frustration with the amount of communication he has been getting from the team as he tries to assuage the concerns of residents in the already congested neighborhood full of bars and restaurants.
"I will expect a greater level of responsiveness and consideration from you and the Cubs organization as we finalize the Planned Development documents," Tunney's letter reads. "By your own admission, the proposed plans pose serious disruptions to my residents and will dramatically affect their quality of life. We must work together to minimize those disruptions and compose operations plans to manage the additional activity and proposed new uses."
Aww. Poor Tom wants a seat at the table. Aldermanning is hard.
(http://www.rosemont.com/images/flash/logo_rosemont.png)
Quote from: Brownie on June 27, 2013, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 27, 2013, 01:26:03 PM
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Specifics:
QuoteIn addition to reducing the left field Jumbotron from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and the right field ad board from 1,000 square feet to 650 square feet, Tunney told the Cubs they will need to get rid of a request for a pedestrian bridge over Clark Street that team CEO Tom Ricketts want to connect the ballpark to the hotel.
"I don't think there's a functional reason to put a bridge over Clark Street," Tunney said. "To transport 175 hotel guests?"
In addition, Tunney said he wants the entrance to the hotel moved from Patterson Avenue, a residential street west of Wrigley Field, to either Clark Street or Addison Street. And the alderman said he can't support a plan for an outdoor patio in the hotel above Patterson where hotel guests could hang out. "Come on, people live 50 feet away from there," he said.
The Cubs are like .... nah.
QuoteIn response to Tunney's letter, Cubs spokesman Julian Green reiterated the team's position that if the Ricketts family is to invest $300 million in the restoration and modernization of Wrigley Field, plus another $200 million for a hotel across the street, "all elements" of the sprawling plan must be in place.
"Anything less significantly hampers our ability to make a $500 million investment," Green said.
QuoteTunney said his voice has been heard in the negotiations, but his letter expresses frustration with the amount of communication he has been getting from the team as he tries to assuage the concerns of residents in the already congested neighborhood full of bars and restaurants.
"I will expect a greater level of responsiveness and consideration from you and the Cubs organization as we finalize the Planned Development documents," Tunney's letter reads. "By your own admission, the proposed plans pose serious disruptions to my residents and will dramatically affect their quality of life. We must work together to minimize those disruptions and compose operations plans to manage the additional activity and proposed new uses."
Aww. Poor Tom wants a seat at the table. Aldermanning is hard.
(http://www.rosemont.com/images/flash/logo_rosemont.png)
I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I can't possibly be the only person who found his use of the phrase "my residents" to be a bit condescending and paternalistic? I mean, I'm familiar with the source, but there isn't a better way he could have phrased that.
"My constituents" "The residents of my district" "Our [meaning the Cubs and himself] neighbors"
Or am I thinking too much into this?
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 27, 2013, 02:27:37 PM
Quote from: Brownie on June 27, 2013, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 27, 2013, 01:26:03 PM
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Specifics:
QuoteIn addition to reducing the left field Jumbotron from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and the right field ad board from 1,000 square feet to 650 square feet, Tunney told the Cubs they will need to get rid of a request for a pedestrian bridge over Clark Street that team CEO Tom Ricketts want to connect the ballpark to the hotel.
"I don't think there's a functional reason to put a bridge over Clark Street," Tunney said. "To transport 175 hotel guests?"
In addition, Tunney said he wants the entrance to the hotel moved from Patterson Avenue, a residential street west of Wrigley Field, to either Clark Street or Addison Street. And the alderman said he can't support a plan for an outdoor patio in the hotel above Patterson where hotel guests could hang out. "Come on, people live 50 feet away from there," he said.
The Cubs are like .... nah.
QuoteIn response to Tunney's letter, Cubs spokesman Julian Green reiterated the team's position that if the Ricketts family is to invest $300 million in the restoration and modernization of Wrigley Field, plus another $200 million for a hotel across the street, "all elements" of the sprawling plan must be in place.
"Anything less significantly hampers our ability to make a $500 million investment," Green said.
QuoteTunney said his voice has been heard in the negotiations, but his letter expresses frustration with the amount of communication he has been getting from the team as he tries to assuage the concerns of residents in the already congested neighborhood full of bars and restaurants.
"I will expect a greater level of responsiveness and consideration from you and the Cubs organization as we finalize the Planned Development documents," Tunney's letter reads. "By your own admission, the proposed plans pose serious disruptions to my residents and will dramatically affect their quality of life. We must work together to minimize those disruptions and compose operations plans to manage the additional activity and proposed new uses."
Aww. Poor Tom wants a seat at the table. Aldermanning is hard.
(http://www.rosemont.com/images/flash/logo_rosemont.png)
I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I can't possibly be the only person who found his use of the phrase "my residents" to be a bit condescending and paternalistic? I mean, I'm familiar with the source, but there isn't a better way he could have phrased that.
"My constituents" "The residents of my district" "Our [meaning the Cubs and himself] neighbors"
Or am I thinking too much into this?
Tom Tunney IS Wrigleyville, pal. He built it with his BARE DAMN HANDS!
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 27, 2013, 02:27:37 PM
I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I can't possibly be the only person who found his use of the phrase "my residents" to be a bit condescending and paternalistic? I mean, I'm familiar with the source, but there isn't a better way he could have phrased that.
"My constituents" "The residents of my district" "Our [meaning the Cubs and himself] neighbors"
Or am I thinking too much into this?
However you phrase it, doesn't it basically boil down to "the rooftop owners"?
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 27, 2013, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 27, 2013, 02:27:37 PM
I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I can't possibly be the only person who found his use of the phrase "my residents" to be a bit condescending and paternalistic? I mean, I'm familiar with the source, but there isn't a better way he could have phrased that.
"My constituents" "The residents of my district" "Our [meaning the Cubs and himself] neighbors"
Or am I thinking too much into this?
However you phrase it, doesn't it basically boil down to "the rooftop owners"?
"The totally legitimate, and non-freeloading, independent business people of the Wrigleyville rooftops."
They're just like any other legitimate business. Do you think that local farmer's market of yours *doesn't* steal crops from random farms from time to time? COME ON!!
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 27, 2013, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 27, 2013, 02:27:37 PM
I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I can't possibly be the only person who found his use of the phrase "my residents" to be a bit condescending and paternalistic? I mean, I'm familiar with the source, but there isn't a better way he could have phrased that.
"My constituents" "The residents of my district" "Our [meaning the Cubs and himself] neighbors"
Or am I thinking too much into this?
However you phrase it, doesn't it basically boil down to "the rooftop owners"?
To answer Gil, yes, "my residents" seems a bit paternalistic vs. "my constituents" and I thought similar thoughts.
As for JWalt, well, of course. That is also synonymous with "my contributors."
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 27, 2013, 02:39:51 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on June 27, 2013, 02:36:09 PM
Quote from: Gilgamesh on June 27, 2013, 02:27:37 PM
I don't know if this was intentional or not, but I can't possibly be the only person who found his use of the phrase "my residents" to be a bit condescending and paternalistic? I mean, I'm familiar with the source, but there isn't a better way he could have phrased that.
"My constituents" "The residents of my district" "Our [meaning the Cubs and himself] neighbors"
Or am I thinking too much into this?
However you phrase it, doesn't it basically boil down to "the rooftop owners"?
"The totally legitimate, and non-freeloading, independent business people of the Wrigleyville rooftops."
They're just like any other legitimate business. Do you think that local farmer's market of yours *doesn't* steal crops from random farms from time to time? COME ON!!
Well they won't once colony collapse takes out the rest of those thieving bees.
Quote from: Brownie on June 27, 2013, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 27, 2013, 01:26:03 PM
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Specifics:
QuoteIn addition to reducing the left field Jumbotron from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and the right field ad board from 1,000 square feet to 650 square feet, Tunney told the Cubs they will need to get rid of a request for a pedestrian bridge over Clark Street that team CEO Tom Ricketts want to connect the ballpark to the hotel.
"I don't think there's a functional reason to put a bridge over Clark Street," Tunney said. "To transport 175 hotel guests?"
In addition, Tunney said he wants the entrance to the hotel moved from Patterson Avenue, a residential street west of Wrigley Field, to either Clark Street or Addison Street. And the alderman said he can't support a plan for an outdoor patio in the hotel above Patterson where hotel guests could hang out. "Come on, people live 50 feet away from there," he said.
The Cubs are like .... nah.
QuoteIn response to Tunney's letter, Cubs spokesman Julian Green reiterated the team's position that if the Ricketts family is to invest $300 million in the restoration and modernization of Wrigley Field, plus another $200 million for a hotel across the street, "all elements" of the sprawling plan must be in place.
"Anything less significantly hampers our ability to make a $500 million investment," Green said.
QuoteTunney said his voice has been heard in the negotiations, but his letter expresses frustration with the amount of communication he has been getting from the team as he tries to assuage the concerns of residents in the already congested neighborhood full of bars and restaurants.
"I will expect a greater level of responsiveness and consideration from you and the Cubs organization as we finalize the Planned Development documents," Tunney's letter reads. "By your own admission, the proposed plans pose serious disruptions to my residents and will dramatically affect their quality of life. We must work together to minimize those disruptions and compose operations plans to manage the additional activity and proposed new uses."
Aww. Poor Tom wants a seat at the table. Aldermanning is hard.
(http://www.rosemont.com/images/flash/logo_rosemont.png)
You can't miss it, or you
won't miss it?
Quote from: Tonker on June 27, 2013, 05:41:54 PM
Quote from: Brownie on June 27, 2013, 01:33:02 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 27, 2013, 01:26:03 PM
Quote from: BH on June 27, 2013, 08:21:01 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on June 26, 2013, 10:10:45 PM
Emperor Tunney issues his "demands" from on high (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-tunney-issues-wrigley-demands-20130626,0,994565.story):
QuoteWrigleyville's alderman sent a letter to the Cubs on Wednesday saying that if the organization wants his support for the plan, it will need to cut by one-third the size of a left field video scoreboard and greatly reduce the size of a requested right field advertising sign.
QuoteThe 44th Ward alderman said he spoke to Mayor Rahm Emanuel about those and three other specific changes he wants to the Cubs plan before sending the letter to team officials.
These changes are based on ... what? Tunney's aesthetic taste?
Makes perfect sense for the alderman to tell a team what to do in their own building. This goes in front of review by Emanuel appointed folks right? Hopefully they tell the alderman to cram it.
Specifics:
QuoteIn addition to reducing the left field Jumbotron from 6,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet and the right field ad board from 1,000 square feet to 650 square feet, Tunney told the Cubs they will need to get rid of a request for a pedestrian bridge over Clark Street that team CEO Tom Ricketts want to connect the ballpark to the hotel.
"I don't think there's a functional reason to put a bridge over Clark Street," Tunney said. "To transport 175 hotel guests?"
In addition, Tunney said he wants the entrance to the hotel moved from Patterson Avenue, a residential street west of Wrigley Field, to either Clark Street or Addison Street. And the alderman said he can't support a plan for an outdoor patio in the hotel above Patterson where hotel guests could hang out. "Come on, people live 50 feet away from there," he said.
The Cubs are like .... nah.
QuoteIn response to Tunney's letter, Cubs spokesman Julian Green reiterated the team's position that if the Ricketts family is to invest $300 million in the restoration and modernization of Wrigley Field, plus another $200 million for a hotel across the street, "all elements" of the sprawling plan must be in place.
"Anything less significantly hampers our ability to make a $500 million investment," Green said.
QuoteTunney said his voice has been heard in the negotiations, but his letter expresses frustration with the amount of communication he has been getting from the team as he tries to assuage the concerns of residents in the already congested neighborhood full of bars and restaurants.
"I will expect a greater level of responsiveness and consideration from you and the Cubs organization as we finalize the Planned Development documents," Tunney's letter reads. "By your own admission, the proposed plans pose serious disruptions to my residents and will dramatically affect their quality of life. We must work together to minimize those disruptions and compose operations plans to manage the additional activity and proposed new uses."
Aww. Poor Tom wants a seat at the table. Aldermanning is hard.
(http://www.rosemont.com/images/flash/logo_rosemont.png)
You can't miss it, or you won't miss it?
Yes.
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130724/wrigleyville/cubs-propose-bridge-linking-right-field-patio-red-line-stop-sources-say
QuoteA pedestrian bridge could be making its way back into the Cubs' Wrigley Field renovation plan, but this time it would be over Sheffield Avenue — and might reach the "L".
Sources say if the team can't get a controversial bridge over Clark Street approved, they're pitching a separate plan that would connect the Addison Red Line station to Wrigley Field beyond right field.
...
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on July 24, 2013, 07:06:57 PM
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130724/wrigleyville/cubs-propose-bridge-linking-right-field-patio-red-line-stop-sources-say
QuoteA pedestrian bridge could be making its way back into the Cubs' Wrigley Field renovation plan, but this time it would be over Sheffield Avenue — and might reach the "L".
Sources say if the team can't get a controversial bridge over Clark Street approved, they're pitching a separate plan that would connect the Addison Red Line station to Wrigley Field beyond right field.
...
To wit, the shops on Addison didn't grease Tunney's wheels.
HOW DARE DA RICKETTSES TURN DERE BACKS ON OLD STYLE AFTER ALL DESE YEARS?? (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0907-beer-cubs-brewers-chicago-20130907,0,2375072.story)
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 06, 2013, 11:23:56 PM
HOW DARE DA RICKETTSES TURN DERE BACKS ON OLD STYLE AFTER ALL DESE YEARS?? (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0907-beer-cubs-brewers-chicago-20130907,0,2375072.story)
"Old style is Chicago cubs baseball. Sorry that you don't understand the traditions just like the goat. Wrigley is going to lose all it's historic charm that separates it from every other MLB franchise. Thanks again Mr.Ricketts."
Quote from: CT III on September 07, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 06, 2013, 11:23:56 PM
HOW DARE DA RICKETTSES TURN DERE BACKS ON OLD STYLE AFTER ALL DESE YEARS?? (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0907-beer-cubs-brewers-chicago-20130907,0,2375072.story)
"Old style is Chicago cubs baseball. Sorry that you don't understand the traditions just like the goat. Wrigley is going to lose all it's historic charm that separates it from every other MLB franchise. Thanks again Mr.Ricketts."
That's called Capitalism. What do think? Is this Green Bay where the people own the means of production?
Quote from: CT III on September 07, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on September 06, 2013, 11:23:56 PM
HOW DARE DA RICKETTSES TURN DERE BACKS ON OLD STYLE AFTER ALL DESE YEARS?? (http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0907-beer-cubs-brewers-chicago-20130907,0,2375072.story)
"Old style is Chicago cubs baseball. Sorry that you don't understand the traditions just like the goat. Wrigley is going to lose all it's historic charm that separates it from every other MLB franchise. Thanks again Mr.Ricketts."
Maybe the Curse hasn't been the fucking goat at all. Maybe it's been Joe Krausen.
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Go ahead, we're right behind you.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
Is it still Rosenblatt? Thought the name changed when the redid it. Haven't been there since U.L. Washington was in AAA.
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
That's going to be a little awkward (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha_Royals).
Quote from: ChuckD on October 03, 2013, 06:28:49 AM
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
That's going to be a little awkward (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha_Royals).
The Royals can locate a AAA team in Chicago. I'm sure they could join the Lakeview Chamber of Commerce.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 06:54:25 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
Is it still Rosenblatt? Thought the name changed when the redid it. Haven't been there since U.L. Washington was in AAA.
You're right. It's TD Ameritrade Stadium.
Quote from: Brownie on October 03, 2013, 09:08:59 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 06:54:25 PM
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
Is it still Rosenblatt? Thought the name changed when the redid it. Haven't been there since U.L. Washington was in AAA.
You're right. It's TD Ameritrade Stadium.
Can't wait til the Cubs win a World Series at TD Ameritrade Presents Budweiser Stadium at Wrigley Field Built By the Home Depot.
Quote from: Brownie on October 03, 2013, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on October 03, 2013, 06:28:49 AM
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
That's going to be a little awkward (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha_Royals).
The Royals can locate a AAA team in Chicago. I'm sure they could join the Lakeview Chamber of Commerce.
Honestly, the drive to Omaha for a weekday night game would probably take no longer than going to Rosemont.
Quote from: CT III on October 03, 2013, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Brownie on October 03, 2013, 09:07:50 AM
Quote from: ChuckD on October 03, 2013, 06:28:49 AM
Quote from: Brownie on October 02, 2013, 06:05:41 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 02, 2013, 03:07:04 PM
Let's all move to Nebraska! (http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2013/09/09/pete-ricketts-nebraska-governor-chicago-cubs/2786075/)
Hmm, Tom Tunney and Beth Murphy fuck around too long and the Nebraska statehouse will approve $1B to add skyboxes and 2 decks to Rosenblatt Stadium, home of the College World Series and your Omaha Cubs.
That's going to be a little awkward (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omaha_Royals).
The Royals can locate a AAA team in Chicago. I'm sure they could join the Lakeview Chamber of Commerce.
Honestly, the drive to Omaha for a weekday night game would probably take no longer than going to Rosemont.
The casino in Council Bluffs has gotta have better odds than Rivers.
So, how much will all the people who moved to Wrigleyville in the past quarter-century bitch about
this ruining their quiet old neighborhood? (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/24010906-418/city-moves-to-let-cubs-sell-beer-in-wrigley-field-plaza.html)
QuoteThe Cubs would be allowed to sell beer and wine from kiosks at an open-air plaza adjacent to a renovated Wrigley Field — and fans would be allowed to bring drinks in plastic cups to the plaza — in the latest in a string of concessions to the team.
Local Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) on Tuesday introduced the ordinance to a City Council that's preparing to give the Cubs the go-ahead to take another 10 feet of street and sidewalk and sell advertising on a "branding arch" over Clark Street.
Tunney's new ordinance applies to 99-year-old Wrigley and all other stadiums with capacities exceeding 30,000.
"It says, if you are a licensed brick-and-mortar part of the stadium, you'll have an opportunity to have a sports venue license to be able to either transfer a drink from inside in a plastic container or to serve beer and wine kiosk-like on the plaza," Tunney said.
Fans would be allowed to enter and exit the ballpark. But fans leaving the open-air plaza would not be permitted to leave with drinks in their hands.
...
The ordinance would allow the plaza to operate year-round — when the Cubs are playing at Wrigley and when they're not in town. But the plaza would be required to close down at 11 p.m. on weekdays and at midnight on Friday and Saturday.
Outdoor concerts would be subject to existing noise restrictions, with limitations on noise levels that can be heard more than 100 feet away from the plaza.
Cubs spokesman Julian Green said the team hopes to create a town square of sorts in the open-air plaza. The Cubs hope to fill the space with farmers markets, a winter ice-skating rink, movies in the park and live music.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 27, 2013, 06:15:05 PM
So, how much will all the people who moved to Wrigleyville in the past quarter-century bitch about this ruining their quiet old neighborhood? (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/24010906-418/city-moves-to-let-cubs-sell-beer-in-wrigley-field-plaza.html)
QuoteThe Cubs would be allowed to sell beer and wine from kiosks at an open-air plaza adjacent to a renovated Wrigley Field — and fans would be allowed to bring drinks in plastic cups to the plaza — in the latest in a string of concessions to the team.
Local Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) on Tuesday introduced the ordinance to a City Council that's preparing to give the Cubs the go-ahead to take another 10 feet of street and sidewalk and sell advertising on a "branding arch" over Clark Street.
Tunney's new ordinance applies to 99-year-old Wrigley and all other stadiums with capacities exceeding 30,000.
"It says, if you are a licensed brick-and-mortar part of the stadium, you'll have an opportunity to have a sports venue license to be able to either transfer a drink from inside in a plastic container or to serve beer and wine kiosk-like on the plaza," Tunney said.
Fans would be allowed to enter and exit the ballpark. But fans leaving the open-air plaza would not be permitted to leave with drinks in their hands.
...
The ordinance would allow the plaza to operate year-round — when the Cubs are playing at Wrigley and when they're not in town. But the plaza would be required to close down at 11 p.m. on weekdays and at midnight on Friday and Saturday.
Outdoor concerts would be subject to existing noise restrictions, with limitations on noise levels that can be heard more than 100 feet away from the plaza.
Cubs spokesman Julian Green said the team hopes to create a town square of sorts in the open-air plaza. The Cubs hope to fill the space with farmers markets, a winter ice-skating rink, movies in the park and live music.
This was such a nice neighborhood before those damn ballplayers moved in across the street!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on November 27, 2013, 09:44:34 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on November 27, 2013, 06:15:05 PM
So, how much will all the people who moved to Wrigleyville in the past quarter-century bitch about this ruining their quiet old neighborhood? (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/24010906-418/city-moves-to-let-cubs-sell-beer-in-wrigley-field-plaza.html)
QuoteThe Cubs would be allowed to sell beer and wine from kiosks at an open-air plaza adjacent to a renovated Wrigley Field — and fans would be allowed to bring drinks in plastic cups to the plaza — in the latest in a string of concessions to the team.
Local Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) on Tuesday introduced the ordinance to a City Council that's preparing to give the Cubs the go-ahead to take another 10 feet of street and sidewalk and sell advertising on a "branding arch" over Clark Street.
Tunney's new ordinance applies to 99-year-old Wrigley and all other stadiums with capacities exceeding 30,000.
"It says, if you are a licensed brick-and-mortar part of the stadium, you'll have an opportunity to have a sports venue license to be able to either transfer a drink from inside in a plastic container or to serve beer and wine kiosk-like on the plaza," Tunney said.
Fans would be allowed to enter and exit the ballpark. But fans leaving the open-air plaza would not be permitted to leave with drinks in their hands.
...
The ordinance would allow the plaza to operate year-round — when the Cubs are playing at Wrigley and when they're not in town. But the plaza would be required to close down at 11 p.m. on weekdays and at midnight on Friday and Saturday.
Outdoor concerts would be subject to existing noise restrictions, with limitations on noise levels that can be heard more than 100 feet away from the plaza.
Cubs spokesman Julian Green said the team hopes to create a town square of sorts in the open-air plaza. The Cubs hope to fill the space with farmers markets, a winter ice-skating rink, movies in the park and live music.
This was such a nice neighborhood before those damn ballplayers moved in across the street!
Considering that 'friend of the neighborhood' Ald. Tunney introduced it, I'm thinking very few will complain
Clark the Cub (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-introduce-new-mascot-the-unbearably-cute-clark?ymd=20140113&content_id=66536324).
Quote from: Fork on January 13, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Clark the Cub (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-introduce-new-mascot-the-unbearably-cute-clark?ymd=20140113&content_id=66536324).
QuoteThe Cubs say Clark will be a champion for Cubs Charities' mission of targeting improvements in health and wellness, fitness and education for children, and families at risk. Young fans will see the mascot at schools during Cubs Caravan or "Cubs on the Move" fitness program visits; hospital appearances; and other family-focused events, such as the upcoming Cubs Convention.
God fucking damnit. Ricketts claims to be a Cub fan yet he fails to understand that Wrigley is for drinking and whoring and swearing and taking pictures from 500 feet away to post on the bookfaces.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 13, 2014, 03:51:50 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 13, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Clark the Cub (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-introduce-new-mascot-the-unbearably-cute-clark?ymd=20140113&content_id=66536324).
QuoteThe Cubs say Clark will be a champion for Cubs Charities' mission of targeting improvements in health and wellness, fitness and education for children, and families at risk. Young fans will see the mascot at schools during Cubs Caravan or "Cubs on the Move" fitness program visits; hospital appearances; and other family-focused events, such as the upcoming Cubs Convention.
God fucking damnit. Ricketts claims to be a Cub fan yet he fails to understand that Wrigley is for drinking and whoring and swearing and taking pictures from 500 feet away to post on the bookfaces.
What have you got against towel drills?
Quote from: Fork on January 13, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Clark the Cub (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-introduce-new-mascot-the-unbearably-cute-clark?ymd=20140113&content_id=66536324).
QuoteThe Cubs say the mascot will not be on top of the dugout between innings, tossing T-shirts or hot dogs into the stands, and it won't disrupt the game.
QuoteWhat fans won't see is Clark riding an ATV around the warning track or interfering with fans' views of the field during the game, the team said.
Famous last words.
http://cubs.mlb.com/index.jsp?c_id=chc
"ClarK"? This is just embarrassing.
Quote from: Fork on January 13, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Clark the Cub (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-introduce-new-mascot-the-unbearably-cute-clark?ymd=20140113&content_id=66536324).
The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 13, 2014, 08:12:39 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 13, 2014, 03:20:25 PM
Clark the Cub (http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-introduce-new-mascot-the-unbearably-cute-clark?ymd=20140113&content_id=66536324).
The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.
"unbearably cute"
(http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/assets/images/9/7/0/66601970/cuts/clark_1280_8unzdmcb_7lw85qs4.jpg)
You think you're annoyed? What about Billy Cub?
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Billy-Cub-Disappointed-by-Cubs-Mascot-Snub-240020121.html
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
It's because it sucks. It looks like a Clip Art mascot, like they just picked a cheap one off the shelf using the absolute minimum of thought. And then there's the whole tradition, Wrigley Field, only a few teams don't have mascots and the Cubs were one of them, baseball is serious business stuff.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:29:15 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
It's because it sucks. It looks like a Clip Art mascot, like they just picked a cheap one off the shelf using the absolute minimum of thought. And then there's the whole tradition, Wrigley Field, only a few teams don't have mascots and the Cubs were one of them, baseball is serious business stuff.
And yet I've never once given two shits about the existence of Staley, who is basically the same thing. Who cares? This is the dumbest thing since the last dumb thing that was dumb.
Quote from: SKO on January 14, 2014, 08:26:33 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:29:15 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
It's because it sucks. It looks like a Clip Art mascot, like they just picked a cheap one off the shelf using the absolute minimum of thought. And then there's the whole tradition, Wrigley Field, only a few teams don't have mascots and the Cubs were one of them, baseball is serious business stuff.
And yet I've never once given two shits about the existence of Staley, who is basically the same thing. Who cares? This is the dumbest thing since the last dumb thing that was dumb.
My 3 year old had me rewind the news like 5 times this morning so he could see Clark over and over. Kids will love this pervy weirdo and the Cubs will sell a fuckton of Clark merchandise that can be spent on a Brian Roberts signing and we'll all have something to make fun of so I don't see a downside.
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field. And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.
If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored. Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field. And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.
If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored. Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
So given the choice (if it were a choice) between a guy in a bear suit and Soriano redux, you'd pass on the guy in the bear suit?
It's a dopey mascot. It'll get kids and furries excited. The Cubs need to drum up something, and it's somewhat better than just putting cardboard cutouts of Baez, Bryant, Soler and Almora out there.
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field. And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.
If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored. Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
The red sox already have a mascot.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
(http://i.imgur.com/y6ZCwnh.jpg)
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
I don't irrationally hate it. I understand what they are doing. I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs. You know, the kind of people who would be so stupid as to ask for public financing while running a PAC against government spending.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
I don't irrationally hate it. I understand what they are doing. I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs. You know, the kind of people who would be so stupid as to ask for public financing while running a PAC against government spending.
Welcome to Chucktown where all Cubs news fits into the "Tom Ricketts is dumb" narrative.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs.
Why do you care? This is like bitching about the quality of the food on a kids menu. "And such small portions!"
Then threading in a non sequitur about Joe Ricketts' politics or Pete Ricketts' run for governor in Nebraska.
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 09:29:10 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
(http://i.imgur.com/y6ZCwnh.jpg)
Illinois the University? or Illinois the state?
Meet Squeezy the Pension Python!
(http://watchdog.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/11/python.jpg)
As for "Clark," were Ramirez, Beckett, Garvey, Stargell, Kranepool and Greenberg all rejected?
Quote from: Brownie on January 14, 2014, 09:52:38 AM
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 09:29:10 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
(http://i.imgur.com/y6ZCwnh.jpg)
Illinois the University? or Illinois the state?
Meet Squeezy the Pension Python!
(http://watchdog.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/11/python.jpg)
As for "Clark," were Ramirez, Beckett, Garvey, Stargell, Kranepool and Greenberg all rejected?
Sized
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 09:29:10 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
(http://i.imgur.com/y6ZCwnh.jpg)
That never stops winning.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs.
Why do you care?
I don't. Doesn't mean I can't make fun of it.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs.
Why do you care?
I don't. Doesn't mean I can't make fun of it.
I'm more annoyed by people getting butthurt over the mascot than I am by the fact that the Cubs are going to blow this year. True story.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
THI
Can we at least agree that the original mascot was awesome?
(http://i.imgur.com/vgCManB.jpg)
They really should have brought that one back.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
This is like bitching about the quality of the food on a kids menu. "And such small portions!"
That sums is up perfectly.
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 10:49:38 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
This is like bitching about the quality of the food on a kids menu. "And such small portions!"
That sums is up perfectly.
If you have kids can you bitch about the quality of the food on the kids menu?
Because I do all the time.
Quote from: PenFoe on January 14, 2014, 10:56:56 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 10:49:38 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
This is like bitching about the quality of the food on a kids menu. "And such small portions!"
That sums is up perfectly.
If you have kids can you bitch about the quality of the food on the kids menu?
Because I do all the time.
We end up having to eat it.
Quote from: Slaky on January 14, 2014, 11:12:59 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 14, 2014, 10:56:56 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 10:49:38 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
This is like bitching about the quality of the food on a kids menu. "And such small portions!"
That sums is up perfectly.
If you have kids can you bitch about the quality of the food on the kids menu?
Because I do all the time.
We end up having to eat it.
You end up eating it. You don't have to eat it. Isn't it always chicken fingers or some shit like that? I assumed it always sucks.
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 11:17:55 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 14, 2014, 11:12:59 AM
Quote from: PenFoe on January 14, 2014, 10:56:56 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 10:49:38 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:50:01 AM
This is like bitching about the quality of the food on a kids menu. "And such small portions!"
That sums is up perfectly.
If you have kids can you bitch about the quality of the food on the kids menu?
Because I do all the time.
We end up having to eat it.
You end up eating it. You don't have to eat it. Isn't it always chicken fingers or some shit like that? I assumed it always sucks.
I don't have to but I hate to see food go to waste.
It's usually finger food, yes.
I don't know what we're talking about anymore.
I don't care about the Cubs mascot but I like jokes.
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Leitch was remarkably restrained, waiting until the third paragraph to make it about him.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 08:47:33 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field. And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.
If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored. Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.
Do you mean Wally (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wally_the_Green_Monster)? The mascot who was rolled out the year the Red Sox rode a 78-84 record to 4th place in the AL East? And the year after they finished 3rd in the AL East?
I suppose back then there was little interest on the actual product on the field. And it was proof that ownership knew they had to generate interest in a way other than the actual product they produced.
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 11:37:29 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Leitch was remarkably restrained, waiting until the third paragraph to make it about him.
I am imagining that the unnamed Cubs' executive who had to confront Billy Bear was an irate Crane Kenney and it's making me laugh.
DPD
Also, about this:
QuoteDon't worry, though: Here is Clark. His eyes may be lost, but he's right here for you, terrifying your children.
Nobody should presume to know what terrifies children. I've got 3 of them, and I'm still not entirely sure.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
QuoteThe Cubs probably thought introducing Clark at the Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center's pediatric developmental center, helping kids with developmental challenges, would inure them to criticism.
How quickly those hacks were disabused of this once the kids started grilling them over Joe Ricketts' Ending Spending SuperPAC.
Be honest. If Clark were around when you were a kid, would you be a Cub fan today?
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 12:16:50 PM
Be honest. If Clark were around when you were a kid, would you be a Cub fan today?
In all likelihood.
Is that a good thing?
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 12:16:50 PM
Be honest. If Clark were around when you were a kid, would you be a Cub fan today?
I remember going to a game when I was really little, and there was some kind of traveling mascot there. I want to say it was for an ice cream company, and it was a polar bear. I thought it was kind of neat, and doubt it really made much of a difference in my decision to be a Cub fan.
My newphew's birthday is this weekend. Maybe I'll get him a Clark teddy bear to see if it affects his decision to be a Cub fan. I'll let you know in 20 years how the experiment works out.
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 12:37:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 12:16:50 PM
Be honest. If Clark were around when you were a kid, would you be a Cub fan today?
I remember going to a game when I was really little, and there was some kind of traveling mascot there. I want to say it was for an ice cream company, and it was a polar bear. I thought it was kind of neat, and doubt it really made much of a difference in my decision to be a Cub fan.
My newphew's birthday is this weekend. Maybe I'll get him a Clark teddy bear to see if it affects his decision to be a Cub fan. I'll let you know in 20 years how the experiment works out.
When I was a kid, the Famous Chicken used to perform during random Indianapolis Indians games and I thought he was pretty great. I traveled to Philadelphia with my parents and saw the Phils sweep a three-game series against the Cubs, throughout which the Phanatic was the most interesting attraction. I remember seeing some dumb-looking mascots at Sox Park and on television in Montreal etc. and hating them. Ultimately, I was so baseball-crazy in those days that the mascot could have been a giant rubber dildo that smacked kids across the face, and I'd still be 100% invested in the Cubs and the sport.
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 12:16:50 PM
Be honest. If Clark were around when you were a kid, would you be a Cub fan today?
They had Peanuts Lowrey. Same thing.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 14, 2014, 12:51:31 PM
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 12:37:33 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 12:16:50 PM
Be honest. If Clark were around when you were a kid, would you be a Cub fan today?
I remember going to a game when I was really little, and there was some kind of traveling mascot there. I want to say it was for an ice cream company, and it was a polar bear. I thought it was kind of neat, and doubt it really made much of a difference in my decision to be a Cub fan.
My newphew's birthday is this weekend. Maybe I'll get him a Clark teddy bear to see if it affects his decision to be a Cub fan. I'll let you know in 20 years how the experiment works out.
When I was a kid, the Famous Chicken used to perform during random Indianapolis Indians games and I thought he was pretty great. I traveled to Philadelphia with my parents and saw the Phils sweep a three-game series against the Cubs, throughout which the Phanatic was the most interesting attraction. I remember seeing some dumb-looking mascots at Sox Park and on television in Montreal etc. and hating them. Ultimately, I was so baseball-crazy in those days that the mascot could have been a giant rubber dildo that smacked kids across the face, and I'd still be 100% invested in the Cubs and the sport.
Ribbie and Roobarb!
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Quote from: Cockbag LeitchEvery Cubs fan I talked to had that same sense of sadness and embarrassment: Why did we do this?
I wish he'd asked me, because I don't give a flying fuck about Clark. If I need anything to get sad or embarrassed about, my life is rich with opportunity without having to worry about the Cubs creating a mascot for kids.
Quote from: Tonker on January 14, 2014, 01:37:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Quote from: Cockbag LeitchEvery Cubs fan I talked to had that same sense of sadness and embarrassment: Why did we do this?
I wish he'd asked me, because I don't give a flying fuck about Clark. If I need anything to get sad or embarrassed about, my life is rich with opportunity without having to worry about the Cubs creating a mascot for kids.
Did you get your Fosters of the Month club shipment today?
I don't know anyone who's really upset about the mascot. It's just something to goof on until pitchers and catchers report, and then we can goof on them.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 02:11:06 PM
I don't know anyone who's really upset about the mascot.
Rewind a couple pages.
Quote from: CBStew on January 13, 2014, 06:19:49 PM
This is just embarrassing.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 13, 2014, 08:12:39 PM
The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:29:15 AM
It's because it sucks.
I don't really know those guys. I only met Stew once.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 02:11:06 PM
I don't know anyone who's really upset about the mascot.
Rewind a couple pages.
Quote from: CBStew on January 13, 2014, 06:19:49 PM
This is just embarrassing.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 13, 2014, 08:12:39 PM
The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:29:15 AM
It's because it sucks.
Not sure how saying it sucks (which it does) and being "really upset" about it (which I'm not) are the same thing. Just that it might be a reason why some people are upset, even though it's a mascot for kids.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:43:54 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 02:11:06 PM
I don't know anyone who's really upset about the mascot.
Rewind a couple pages.
Quote from: CBStew on January 13, 2014, 06:19:49 PM
This is just embarrassing.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 13, 2014, 08:12:39 PM
The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:29:15 AM
It's because it sucks.
Not sure how saying it sucks (which it does) and being "really upset" about it (which I'm not) are the same thing. Just that it might be a reason why some people are upset, even though it's a mascot for kids.
(http://atechnologyjobisnoexcuse.com/files/2012/09/386367_4152670889571_850037504_n.jpg)
Quote from: PenFoe on January 14, 2014, 02:50:24 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:43:54 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 02:33:07 PM
Quote from: Fork on January 14, 2014, 02:11:06 PM
I don't know anyone who's really upset about the mascot.
Rewind a couple pages.
Quote from: CBStew on January 13, 2014, 06:19:49 PM
This is just embarrassing.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 13, 2014, 08:12:39 PM
The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 02:29:15 AM
It's because it sucks.
Not sure how saying it sucks (which it does) and being "really upset" about it (which I'm not) are the same thing. Just that it might be a reason why some people are upset, even though it's a mascot for kids.
(http://atechnologyjobisnoexcuse.com/files/2012/09/386367_4152670889571_850037504_n.jpg)
hey how'd you get that picture of me
Quote from: Tonker on January 14, 2014, 01:37:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Quote from: Cockbag LeitchEvery Cubs fan I talked to had that same sense of sadness and embarrassment: Why did we do this?
I wish he'd asked me, because I don't give a flying fuck about Clark. If I need anything to get sad or embarrassed about, my life is rich with opportunity without having to worry about the Cubs creating a mascot for kids.
I wonder if Leitch is sad and embarrassed about the pantless, (http://lh6.ggpht.com/_cnJvHwukrzs/SejgbtRX_GI/AAAAAAAAAdk/FC_qptfSnfY/P1000205_thumb%255B1%255D.jpg%3Fimgmax%3D800)baby-eating, (http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/stl/images/fan_forum/y2009/fans_fredbird250x187_15.jpg) Fredbird. (http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/data/11152/fredbird.jpg)
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 03:34:26 PM
Quote from: Tonker on January 14, 2014, 01:37:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 14, 2014, 11:31:17 AM
It's okay, everybody. Cardinals fan and Billy Cub enthusiast Will Leitch has helicoptered in from Georgia to tell us What This All Means. (http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/66607386/)
I love Clark now.
Quote from: Cockbag LeitchEvery Cubs fan I talked to had that same sense of sadness and embarrassment: Why did we do this?
I wish he'd asked me, because I don't give a flying fuck about Clark. If I need anything to get sad or embarrassed about, my life is rich with opportunity without having to worry about the Cubs creating a mascot for kids.
I wonder if Leitch is sad and embarrassed about the pantless, (http://lh6.ggpht.com/_cnJvHwukrzs/SejgbtRX_GI/AAAAAAAAAdk/FC_qptfSnfY/P1000205_thumb%255B1%255D.jpg%3Fimgmax%3D800)baby-eating, (http://stlouis.cardinals.mlb.com/stl/images/fan_forum/y2009/fans_fredbird250x187_15.jpg) Fredbird. (http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/data/11152/fredbird.jpg)
If that's anyone other than Steve Allen, he's stealing Tommy Hawk's bit.
A couple of decades ago the Giants had a guy dressed as a Dungeness crab. "Crazy Crab". The fans here greeted him with hatred and derision. One drunk finally beat him up. Now the Giants have a mascot dressed as a sea lion. He, or it, is named "Lou Seal". Or "Lucille." I am not sure which. The A's have a guy in an elephant suit. He is named "Stomper". Before each game he is driven around the warning track in a golf cart. Sometimes he parades around the second deck and fans throw peanuts at him.
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 03:56:10 PM
A couple of decades ago the Giants had a guy dressed as a Dungeness crab. "Crazy Crab". The fans here greeted him with hatred and derision. One drunk finally beat him up. Now the Giants have a mascot dressed as a sea lion. He, or it, is named "Lou Seal". Or "Lucille." I am not sure which. The A's have a guy in an elephant suit. He is named "Stomper". Before each game he is driven around the warning track in a golf cart. Sometimes he parades around the second deck and fans throw peanuts at him.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6hz7zIAGp1qcm16uo1_500.jpg)
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 03:56:10 PM
A couple of decades ago the Giants had a guy dressed as a Dungeness crab. "Crazy Crab". The fans here greeted him with hatred and derision. One drunk finally beat him up. Now the Giants have a mascot dressed as a sea lion. He, or it, is named "Lou Seal". Or "Lucille." I am not sure which. The A's have a guy in an elephant suit. He is named "Stomper". Before each game he is driven around the warning track in a golf cart. Sometimes he parades around the second deck and fans throw peanuts at him.
It's Lou Seal. (http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/sf/fan_forum/louseal.jsp)
Quote from: Richard Chuggar on January 14, 2014, 04:06:14 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 14, 2014, 03:56:10 PM
A couple of decades ago the Giants had a guy dressed as a Dungeness crab. "Crazy Crab". The fans here greeted him with hatred and derision. One drunk finally beat him up. Now the Giants have a mascot dressed as a sea lion. He, or it, is named "Lou Seal". Or "Lucille." I am not sure which. The A's have a guy in an elephant suit. He is named "Stomper". Before each game he is driven around the warning track in a golf cart. Sometimes he parades around the second deck and fans throw peanuts at him.
(http://i.imgur.com/3gPs2rV.jpg)
This is the only proper response.
I admit it...
(http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/tjbrown1975/2012-08-30_18-06-39_754.jpg)
(http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/tjbrown1975/2012-08-30_18-06-58_811.jpg)
Quote from: Brownie on January 14, 2014, 04:50:16 PM
I admit it...
(http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/tjbrown1975/2012-08-30_18-06-39_754.jpg)
(http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/tjbrown1975/2012-08-30_18-06-58_811.jpg)
It's ok. We all have had to wear pleated slacks at some point in our lives.
Quote from: Bort on January 14, 2014, 07:03:15 PM
It's ok. We all have had to wear pleated slacks at some point in our lives.
I'm wearing them right now.
Quote from: Brownie on January 14, 2014, 04:50:16 PM
(http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/tjbrown1975/2012-08-30_18-06-58_811.jpg)
(http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/jim-harbaugh-layers-fat.jpg)
http://deadspin.com/comcast-sportsnet-airs-our-version-of-cubs-mascot-with-1501633812
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/423489367747731456
Quote from: Internet ChuckIf the mascot story is no big deal, why is Julian Green on the radio talking about it?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
I don't irrationally hate it. I understand what they are doing. I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs. You know, the kind of people who would be so stupid as to ask for public financing while running a PAC against government spending.
I'm probably going to hate myself for asking this, but what precisely are your problems with the "the design, execution and roll out"?
I don't see anything in the design that makes it that much better or worse than any other mascot.
And I also don't get the roll out thing. Was there a better way to roll out the mascot other than posting a story on their website and having it go visit a children's hospital?
What would constitute a successful execution and roll out?
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on January 15, 2014, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
I don't irrationally hate it. I understand what they are doing. I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs. You know, the kind of people who would be so stupid as to ask for public financing while running a PAC against government spending.
I'm probably going to hate myself for asking this, but what precisely are your problems with the "the design, execution and roll out"?
I don't see anything in the design that makes it that much better or worse than any other mascot.
And I also don't get the roll out thing. Was there a better way to roll out the mascot other than posting a story on their website and having it go visit a children's hospital?
What would constitute a successful execution and roll out?
Don't forget having the Cubs PR guy promote the new mascot.
Apparently in Chuck's world the Cubs PR guy should not talk about the mascot.
Quote from: Slaky on January 15, 2014, 12:51:15 PM
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on January 15, 2014, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 14, 2014, 09:38:09 AM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 14, 2014, 09:25:40 AM
Quote from: Tony on January 13, 2014, 10:49:37 PM
I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.
Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.
And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.
I don't irrationally hate it. I understand what they are doing. I just think the design, execution and roll out was well done for a bunch of hack amateurs. You know, the kind of people who would be so stupid as to ask for public financing while running a PAC against government spending.
I'm probably going to hate myself for asking this, but what precisely are your problems with the "the design, execution and roll out"?
I don't see anything in the design that makes it that much better or worse than any other mascot.
And I also don't get the roll out thing. Was there a better way to roll out the mascot other than posting a story on their website and having it go visit a children's hospital?
What would constitute a successful execution and roll out?
Don't forget having the Cubs PR guy promote the new mascot.
Apparently in Chuck's world the Cubs PR guy should not talk about the mascot.
The PR guy should focus exclusively on Ron Santo stuff being thrown in dumpsters.
Chuck may not be able to articulate just what the whole mascot "screw up" was, exactly, but he can tell you who to blame and what bad things it portends...
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/423499458983124992
QuoteThis whole mascot screw up just reeks of Crane Kenney. Up next, Clark starts spreading holy water.
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/423548939657166848
QuoteIf the Cubs front office can't manage the rollout of a mascot, are we confident they can manage a billion dollar media deal?
Upon careful consideration of this whole something something something, Chuck finds himself forced to reluctantly ask some tough questions about the competence of the Cubs front office.
Quote from: Slaky on January 15, 2014, 12:51:15 PM
Apparently in Chuck's world the Cubs PR guy should not talk about the mascot.
When the mascot is not around, the young Cubs fans should ask, where's
Poochie Clark?
This whole kerfuffle needs a catchy title in the media like "Clark-gate" or "Mascot Mayhem."
Some observations:
1) Who is the sap in the suit? Is it one guy like Benny the Bull, or is it a revolving cast of performers who have clown college degrees to wordlessly interact with kids.
2) If it shows up at Wrigley and roams the stands / aisles, how long before a drunk grabs the head and tosses it to the lower stands? The over-under starts at May 1.
3) Why does the hat have to be on backwards? Is that to appeal to a demographic or just to impart Clark's "plays by his own rules" rakish nature?
Quote from: Doc on January 15, 2014, 03:03:57 PM
Some observations:
1) Who is the sap in the suit? Is it one guy like Benny the Bull, or is it a revolving cast of performers who have clown college degrees to wordlessly interact with kids.
Let's look at the Wisconsin model.
(http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-10-22/news/0010220370_1_college-sports-murray-sperber-beer-marketers/2)
QuoteQ: You write that one of the myths about successful athletic programs at universities is that they make a lot of money for the school. You used Wisconsin's trip to the 1999 Rose Bowl as an example.
A: Wisconsin's payout for playing was like $1.8 million and they spent $2.1 million. A former student of mine was a reporter in Madison and he sent a list of the official traveling party: 832 persons, from the president's office and all their spouses and the faculty athletic committee and all their spouses, and so on. Of course, they stayed in a fancy Beverly Hills hotel. And then people wonder why those who nominally have control over athletics don't do anything. They're on the gravy train and totally complicit.
But the part that got me was this: I'm reading down the list and near the bottom there's three Bucky Badgers (Wisconsin's mascot). I couldn't figure out why they needed three, because only one runs out on the field. Then I saw that for the New Year's Eve party they spent something like $39,000 and it occurred to me that, if the first two Buckys got wasted, they could always suit up the third for the game.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 15, 2014, 03:01:07 PM
Chuck may not be able to articulate just what the whole mascot "screw up" was, exactly, but he can tell you who to blame and what bad things it portends...
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/423499458983124992
QuoteThis whole mascot screw up just reeks of Crane Kenney. Up next, Clark starts spreading holy water.
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/423548939657166848
QuoteIf the Cubs front office can't manage the rollout of a mascot, are we confident they can manage a billion dollar media deal?
Upon careful consideration of this whole something something something, Chuck finds himself forced to reluctantly ask some tough questions about the competence of the Cubs front office.
No one begs the question quite like Chuck.
Doc edited his post, haha.
Quote from: Tony on January 14, 2014, 10:12:34 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 14, 2014, 04:50:16 PM
(http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/tjbrown1975/2012-08-30_18-06-58_811.jpg)
(http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/jim-harbaugh-layers-fat.jpg)
http://997now.cbslocal.com/2014/01/14/jim-harbaughs-wife-calls-fg-putting-hubby-on-blast-01-14-14/
QuoteJim Harbaugh's wife Sarah surprises Fernando and Greg by calling in and putting her husband's pleated pants on blast! Listen as she asks the guys to help her hubby out and give him a makeover!
...
"I will not take the blame for his outfits," Sarah said.
"I've thrown them away many of times. I've asked him 'Please, pleats are gone. Wear the flat front.'" she explained to Fernando and Greg, "He has a flattering body."
...
"I threw them out and when he went to the combine, he found a Walmart. They were $8. $8!"
...
UPDATE 01.15.2014:
God bless the internet. We now have visual proof of one of Jim Harbaugh's excursions to Walmart for his patented pleated khakis.
(http://i.imgur.com/hhkATlY.jpg) (http://i.imgur.com/E74VkJN.jpg)
Quote from: PANK! on January 15, 2014, 08:55:36 PM
Doc edited his post, haha.
Doc fat-fingered the Enter key when he hit the colon button. It's hard to type with a pistol in your left hand and a lung-rattling cough.
By the way: you just made The List.
Quote from: Doc on January 16, 2014, 01:12:06 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 15, 2014, 08:55:36 PM
Doc edited his post, haha.
Doc fat-fingered the Enter key when he hit the colon button. It's hard to type with a pistol in your left hand and a lung-rattling cough.
By the way: you just made The List.
Huey: Too big for anal
Doc: Too big for colon
I see what you did there.
Quote from: InternetApex on January 16, 2014, 01:51:41 PM
Quote from: Doc on January 16, 2014, 01:12:06 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 15, 2014, 08:55:36 PM
Doc edited his post, haha.
Doc fat-fingered the Enter key when he hit the colon button. It's hard to type with a pistol in your left hand and a lung-rattling cough.
By the way: you just made The List.
Huey: Too big for anal
Doc: Too big for colon
I see what you did there.
Too big because it is a semi colon?
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside.
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside.
Mayor Daley, Chicago needs you. He hates the Cubs, he loves tearing shit up at midnight, he's a perfect fit.
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I give the rooftops credit for turning three dudes hanging out with a grill into bleachers packed with 100+ paying customers. Couldn't the Cubs, back in the day, have bought up all those buildings themselves for a song and done the same thing themselves?
Still, that doesn't give the roofies ownership of the view, and reduces my desire to see the rooftops burned to the ground very little.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 22, 2014, 12:14:25 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside.
Mayor Daley, Chicago needs you. He hates the Cubs, he loves tearing shit up at midnight, he's a perfect fit.
Rahm seems to have the all tools he needs. (http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/22028508-418/cps-skips-permit-in-demolition-of-whittier-school-fieldhouse.html)
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on January 22, 2014, 12:24:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on January 22, 2014, 12:14:25 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside.
Mayor Daley, Chicago needs you. He hates the Cubs, he loves tearing shit up at midnight, he's a perfect fit.
Rahm seems to have the all tools he needs. (http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/22028508-418/cps-skips-permit-in-demolition-of-whittier-school-fieldhouse.html)
Probably a good idea, Daley might "accidentally" swerve into, say, the left field bleachers. Actually, no. Go ahead.
Quote from: motown on January 22, 2014, 12:23:30 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I give the rooftops credit for turning three dudes hanging out with a grill into bleachers packed with 100+ paying customers. Couldn't the Cubs, back in the day, have bought up all those buildings themselves for a song and done the same thing themselves?
Still, that doesn't give the roofies ownership of the view, and reduces my desire to see the rooftops burned to the ground very little.
Another SUPYAD. It's obviously the season for them.
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I just saw the roofies more or less under the same principle as stealing cable. Getting the goods and services without paying for it. Would that type of law be more applicable?
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I had always assumed that the revenue sharing agreement that the two sides signed probably afforded some sort of protection to the rooftop owners view. Nice choice, Crane.
Also, this shit is just infuriating:
QuoteSources said the rooftop owners demanded that the massive video scoreboard planned for left-field also be moved to the top of a rooftop building.
Quote from: CT III on January 22, 2014, 02:07:11 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I had always assumed that the revenue sharing agreement that the two sides signed probably afforded some sort of protection to the rooftop owners view. Nice choice, Crane.
Also, this shit is just infuriating:
QuoteSources said the rooftop owners demanded that the massive video scoreboard planned for left-field also be moved to the top of a rooftop building.
HAHA. Yeah, just put that scoreboard on my building. Yep.
Oh that's mine now, btw. I'm gonna show some movies on it when the Cubs aren't playing and make more money.
Quote from: Fork on January 22, 2014, 01:19:34 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I just saw the roofies more or less under the same principle as stealing cable. Getting the goods and services without paying for it. Would that type of law be more applicable?
That may had been the case in the past, but the rooftop owners have been paying 17% of their gross to the Cubs for a while now. Apparently the revenue sharing deal has some language that could be construed as saying that in exchange for those payments the Cubs will not make changes to the bleachers that would adversely effect the views, but it is apparently far from clear exactly what the langague says or how it applies here (which is what courts are for).
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Quote from: PANK! on January 22, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Yeah, the Cubs aren't moving anywhere. I think we can close the book on that and every unsolved murder in New York.
Quote from: CT III on January 22, 2014, 03:22:49 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 22, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Yeah, the Cubs aren't moving anywhere. I think we can close the book on that and every unsolved murder in New York.
(http://i.imgur.com/ieZMxdb.png)
Quote from: CT III on January 22, 2014, 02:07:11 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I had always assumed that the revenue sharing agreement that the two sides signed probably afforded some sort of protection to the rooftop owners view. Nice choice, Crane.
Also, this shit is just infuriating:
QuoteSources said the rooftop owners demanded that the massive video scoreboard planned for left-field also be moved to the top of a rooftop building.
Crane Kenney needs to be fucking shot.
In the fucking face.
Fucking repeatedly.
And then shot some fucking more.
QuoteSources said the rooftop owners demanded that the massive video scoreboard planned for left-field also be moved to the top of a rooftop building.
The building with the Budweiser ad painted on the sloped roof in left field would actually be a good spot for the fancy new scoreboard. I didn't like any of the renderings that showed it added to the bleachers.
I don't understand why the rooftop owners care so much. You already have a shitty view from out there, and the new scoreboard wouldn't really mess up that many views. Just called it obstructed view with character and move on. Nobody is paying that close of attention to the game out there anyway. And you can probably see 75% of the field anyway.
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 22, 2014, 08:16:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 22, 2014, 02:07:11 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I had always assumed that the revenue sharing agreement that the two sides signed probably afforded some sort of protection to the rooftop owners view. Nice choice, Crane.
Also, this shit is just infuriating:
QuoteSources said the rooftop owners demanded that the massive video scoreboard planned for left-field also be moved to the top of a rooftop building.
Crane Kenney needs to be fucking shot.
In the fucking face.
Fucking repeatedly.
And then shot some fucking more.
I thought I read on the twitter that Tom and Crane are really good friends now, can anyone else back that up?
Quote from: BH on January 23, 2014, 08:17:12 AM
Quote from: Armchair_QB on January 22, 2014, 08:16:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 22, 2014, 02:07:11 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on January 22, 2014, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
Question for the lawyers of the board since it's not mentioned in that article. It's been a while since I studied land use/property law, but I seem to recall there being easements that property owners can get which "run with the land" and allow the owner of the property the right to a viewshed (usually for beachside properties, but this would seem to be the same principle)? Do the rooftop owners have such easements?
I had always assumed that the revenue sharing agreement that the two sides signed probably afforded some sort of protection to the rooftop owners view. Nice choice, Crane.
Also, this shit is just infuriating:
QuoteSources said the rooftop owners demanded that the massive video scoreboard planned for left-field also be moved to the top of a rooftop building.
Crane Kenney needs to be fucking shot.
In the fucking face.
Fucking repeatedly.
And then shot some fucking more.
I thought I read on the twitter that Tom and Crane are really good friends now, can anyone else back that up?
Considering he is still employed after failing to obtain a dollar of government money, taking five years to get revenue producing improvements that were supposed be done this year (which have not started), and negotiating the orignial rooftop deal that looks to be a monumental mistake from the Cubs perspective, I would think so.
Quote from: BH on January 23, 2014, 08:17:12 AM
I thought I read on the twitter that Tom and Crane are really good friends now, can anyone else back that up?
Supposedly Crane got a 5-year extension recently.
Yeah, Tom Ricketts is smart.
Quote from: PANK! on January 22, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Seriously, guys. We need to get a federal prosecutor to get Tunney indicted and then have Ending Spending PAC back an Alderman for Lakeview who stands for stringent enforcement of building and fire codes, starting on Waveland and Sheffield Aves. Send in a couple building inspectors into each building and I'm sure they can find numerous code violations. Give them the 90 days or whatever the hell it is to repair it, then condemn the property and make the landowner pay for demolition. The Ricketts can then buy the land out of bankruptcy court, and you have your Wrigleyland campus and maybe even some sweet parking next to the fire station.
This is Chicago we're in, right?
Quote from: Brownie on January 23, 2014, 10:24:44 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 22, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Seriously, guys. We need to get a federal prosecutor to get Tunney indicted and then have Ending Spending PAC back an Alderman for Lakeview who stands for stringent enforcement of building and fire codes, starting on Waveland and Sheffield Aves. Send in a couple building inspectors into each building and I'm sure they can find numerous code violations. Give them the 90 days or whatever the hell it is to repair it, then condemn the property and make the landowner pay for demolition. The Ricketts can then buy the land out of bankruptcy court, and you have your Wrigleyland campus and maybe even some sweet parking next to the fire station.
This is Chicago we're in, right?
I never realized that TJ was the lost scion of the Wirtz family.
Quote from: CT III on January 24, 2014, 08:50:16 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 23, 2014, 10:24:44 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 22, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Seriously, guys. We need to get a federal prosecutor to get Tunney indicted and then have Ending Spending PAC back an Alderman for Lakeview who stands for stringent enforcement of building and fire codes, starting on Waveland and Sheffield Aves. Send in a couple building inspectors into each building and I'm sure they can find numerous code violations. Give them the 90 days or whatever the hell it is to repair it, then condemn the property and make the landowner pay for demolition. The Ricketts can then buy the land out of bankruptcy court, and you have your Wrigleyland campus and maybe even some sweet parking next to the fire station.
This is Chicago we're in, right?
I never realized that TJ was the lost scion of the Wirtz family.
Hey, why can't we get better seats then?
Quote from: Brownie on January 23, 2014, 10:24:44 PM
Quote from: PANK! on January 22, 2014, 03:21:37 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:58:58 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 22, 2014, 11:49:05 AM
Quote from: Eli on January 22, 2014, 11:45:11 AM
Quote from: Slaky on January 22, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Not sure guys. I think I'm done.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/25113883-418/wrigley-field-deal-fell-apart-at-stormy-session-with-cubs-rooftop-owners.html
I haven't followed all this very closely, but I guess I have never understood why rooftop owners feel they have the right to a clear view inside Wrigley Field.
Who owns the view is a big legal question (http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=njtip).
I understand that it's a complicated legal issue. But from a common-sense perspective, I don't think the rooftops owners deserve anything. Again, just me.
I would very much like to see someone raze their fucking buildings overnight. I don't care who is inside. the Cubs follow through on their threats to move somewhere else.
Seeing that hag cow Beth Murphy and her merry band of self-righteous freeloaders choking on their own vomit would make my year'd.
Seriously, guys. We need to get a federal prosecutor to get Tunney indicted and then have Ending Spending PAC back an Alderman for Lakeview who stands for stringent enforcement of building and fire codes, starting on Waveland and Sheffield Aves. Send in a couple building inspectors into each building and I'm sure they can find numerous code violations. Give them the 90 days or whatever the hell it is to repair it, then condemn the property and make the landowner pay for demolition. The Ricketts can then buy the land out of bankruptcy court, and you have your Wrigleyland campus and maybe even some sweet parking next to the fire station.
This is Chicago we're in, right?
Maybe it's time to re-evaluate my opinion on this. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London)
No, Chuck.
8/26/11 (http://es.pn/QiOD5s):
QuoteBOSTON -- You noticed, didn't you, that when John W. Henry was asked about speculation from ESPN's Buster Olney that the Cubs might have some interest in hiring general manager Theo Epstein, the Red Sox owner's response fell well short of "Over my dead body."
No hint whatsoever by Henry, in fact, that Epstein was off-limits, to the Cubs or anyone else.
Here's what Henry wrote in an email, for those who need the reminder: "This kind of speculation happens from time to time on successful GMs and managers. The Cubs have one of the best presidents in baseball. I think this shows how highly regarded Theo is by the media and baseball in general."
Now, it's certainly plausible that Henry saw no reason to elaborate further. Epstein is under contract through at least the end of the 2012 season, the Sox head into October as postseason favorites again and there is no hint of any rupture in a relationship that has been likened to fawning father and son.
9/27/11 (http://foxs.pt/1njJQvQ):
QuoteWell, we have our first casualty of the Red Sox's collapse. Naturally, it's the Cubs.
If ever the Cubs had a chance to hire Theo Epstein as general manager, that chance probably is gone.
...
Epstein, in the rare trying moments during his nine-year tenure, always has been accountable. It's almost impossible to imagine him leaving his hometown team in a moment of epic failure — if indeed the season ends in such fashion.
"He would never be allowed back in the city of Boston," one rival GM said Tuesday.
...
Henry is fond of Epstein and will not want him to leave. Epstein has never said he was interested in the Cubs and never said he wasn't. But the way this is unfolding, the timing just isn't right.
In fact, one member of the organization said he would be "shocked" if Epstein left, saying that the GM is deeply invested in the Red Sox and excited about the team's future.
10/4/11 (http://bit.ly/1gTT8Jp):
QuoteBecause Epstein is signed through 2012, the Red Sox can block him from talking to other teams. They reportedly will seek compensation if the Cubs hire him away, as the White Sox did with Ozzie Guillen.
...
The only question for Red Sox owner John Henry is how awkward would it be to keep Epstein if he truly wanted to leave? That would be the only leverage on Ricketts' side in this highly unusual potential raid of a sitting general manager.
These things almost never happen. But the Red Sox appear to be at a point when they have to decide between giving Epstein a raise and increased authority or letting him leave.
10/8/11 (http://bo.st/1lYREW5):
QuoteThe Theo Watch continues. He's either going to the Cubs or he's staying here for more years/dollars/power. Whatever happens, it needs to happen soon. The Red Sox have a lot of decisions to make, including hiring a new manager, but nothing happens until Theo Epstein's status is resolved.
...
"Theo's the guy now, he's been the guy,'' summarized Henry.
10/9/11 (http://bo.st/1sUL2d8):
QuoteUntil Theo Epstein is officially announced as the new president/general manager of the Chicago Cubs, we can't be sure the Red Sox have to hunt for new management.
10/10/2011 (http://bit.ly/Q2IiLz):
QuoteEpstein still the Red Sox GM, but rumors about the Cubs are swirling
...
Most baseball insiders interviewed by SI don't discount Epstein moving to the North Side -- despite the Cubs' long lack of success, the GM job remains a coveted position -- but they believe it's more likely than not he'll remain in Boston, at least for now.
...
Regardless, this has all become quite the guessing game thanks to Ricketts' secrecy. But there's one thing we can be sure of. If Epstein does decide to take over the Cubs, Terry Francona won't be their manager. While Henry is seen as the lead force in the ousting of Francona in Boston, Francona wouldn't be gone from Boston if Epstein strongly disagreed. He still has power there, which is why most folks think he'll ultimately decide to stay.
10/11/11 (http://lat.ms/1ezwSVw):
QuoteTheo Epstein is on the verge of leaving his job as general manager of the Boston Red Sox to accept a similar position with the Chicago Cubs that may include greater power than he had in Boston, the Boston Herald reported Tuesday.
...
The announcement is being delayed by two issues. One is that Red Sox ownership is still trying to keep Epstein. The other is that Boston will want significant compensation from the Cubs.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on April 13, 2014, 01:01:47 AM
No, Chuck.
8/26/11 (http://es.pn/QiOD5s):
QuoteBOSTON -- You noticed, didn't you, that when John W. Henry was asked about speculation from ESPN's Buster Olney that the Cubs might have some interest in hiring general manager Theo Epstein, the Red Sox owner's response fell well short of "Over my dead body."
No hint whatsoever by Henry, in fact, that Epstein was off-limits, to the Cubs or anyone else.
Here's what Henry wrote in an email, for those who need the reminder: "This kind of speculation happens from time to time on successful GMs and managers. The Cubs have one of the best presidents in baseball. I think this shows how highly regarded Theo is by the media and baseball in general."
Now, it's certainly plausible that Henry saw no reason to elaborate further. Epstein is under contract through at least the end of the 2012 season, the Sox head into October as postseason favorites again and there is no hint of any rupture in a relationship that has been likened to fawning father and son.
9/27/11 (http://foxs.pt/1njJQvQ):
QuoteWell, we have our first casualty of the Red Sox's collapse. Naturally, it's the Cubs.
If ever the Cubs had a chance to hire Theo Epstein as general manager, that chance probably is gone.
...
Epstein, in the rare trying moments during his nine-year tenure, always has been accountable. It's almost impossible to imagine him leaving his hometown team in a moment of epic failure — if indeed the season ends in such fashion.
"He would never be allowed back in the city of Boston," one rival GM said Tuesday.
...
Henry is fond of Epstein and will not want him to leave. Epstein has never said he was interested in the Cubs and never said he wasn't. But the way this is unfolding, the timing just isn't right.
In fact, one member of the organization said he would be "shocked" if Epstein left, saying that the GM is deeply invested in the Red Sox and excited about the team's future.
10/4/11 (http://bit.ly/1gTT8Jp):
QuoteBecause Epstein is signed through 2012, the Red Sox can block him from talking to other teams. They reportedly will seek compensation if the Cubs hire him away, as the White Sox did with Ozzie Guillen.
...
The only question for Red Sox owner John Henry is how awkward would it be to keep Epstein if he truly wanted to leave? That would be the only leverage on Ricketts' side in this highly unusual potential raid of a sitting general manager.
These things almost never happen. But the Red Sox appear to be at a point when they have to decide between giving Epstein a raise and increased authority or letting him leave.
10/8/11 (http://bo.st/1lYREW5):
QuoteThe Theo Watch continues. He's either going to the Cubs or he's staying here for more years/dollars/power. Whatever happens, it needs to happen soon. The Red Sox have a lot of decisions to make, including hiring a new manager, but nothing happens until Theo Epstein's status is resolved.
...
"Theo's the guy now, he's been the guy,'' summarized Henry.
10/9/11 (http://bo.st/1sUL2d8):
QuoteUntil Theo Epstein is officially announced as the new president/general manager of the Chicago Cubs, we can't be sure the Red Sox have to hunt for new management.
10/10/2011 (http://bit.ly/Q2IiLz):
QuoteEpstein still the Red Sox GM, but rumors about the Cubs are swirling
...
Most baseball insiders interviewed by SI don't discount Epstein moving to the North Side -- despite the Cubs' long lack of success, the GM job remains a coveted position -- but they believe it's more likely than not he'll remain in Boston, at least for now.
...
Regardless, this has all become quite the guessing game thanks to Ricketts' secrecy. But there's one thing we can be sure of. If Epstein does decide to take over the Cubs, Terry Francona won't be their manager. While Henry is seen as the lead force in the ousting of Francona in Boston, Francona wouldn't be gone from Boston if Epstein strongly disagreed. He still has power there, which is why most folks think he'll ultimately decide to stay.
10/11/11 (http://lat.ms/1ezwSVw):
QuoteTheo Epstein is on the verge of leaving his job as general manager of the Boston Red Sox to accept a similar position with the Chicago Cubs that may include greater power than he had in Boston, the Boston Herald reported Tuesday.
...
The announcement is being delayed by two issues. One is that Red Sox ownership is still trying to keep Epstein. The other is that Boston will want significant compensation from the Cubs.
No, Chuck (http://www.stripcreator.com/comics/TtoEtoC/529638)
(I'm really slacking on these. Hopefully, some new material came out of last night's Gonna Drinkin'.)
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on April 13, 2014, 09:02:24 AM
No, Chuck (http://www.stripcreator.com/comics/TtoEtoC/529638)
Oh, man. Forgot about that one. "Theo becomes forgotten."
To review...
October 4, 2011The Rangers eliminate the Rays from playoffs, the Cubs officially ask Boston for permission to talk to TheoQuote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckFreidman vs. Theo. The war begins. (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/4/p138103465#p138103465)
October 11, 2011The Cubs' talks with Theo are reportedly on the verge of an agreementQuote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckMeh. I'd prefer Andrew Friedman. (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/11/p138983705#p138983705) Because of reasons. I prefered him even before Theo was seen as a possibility (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/12/p139075526#p139075526).
October 12, 2011Theo is reported to have accepted a 5-year/$15MM+ deal to helm CubsQuote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckThis could be big if Tom doesn't fuck it up like Mike McCaskey. (http://ivychat.blogspot.com/2011/10/big-time-move.html) Though, when you think about it, wouldn't this hire really just further highlight Tom's incompetence and 'fear'?
October 17, 2011As talks between Chicago and Boston drag on, Theo officially remains Red Sox GM and the internet wrings its hands over the possibility of negotiations breaking downQuote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckWho among us doesn't think Tom could still truly blow this thing? (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/17/p139717493#p139717493) The Sox would just as soon pay Theo to sit on a beach for a year than just let him walk from his contract early, so it'll probably take intervention from the commissioner to snatch him from Henry and Lucchino's neon claws (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/17/p139711355#p139711355).
October 25, 2011The Cubs introduce Theo as President of Baseball OperationsQuote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckWhat the fuck took so long, Tom? (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/25/p140678711#p140678711)
Two and a Half Years Later...In the sideways timelineQuote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet and Real Life ChuckSure, I like everything Theo is doing for the Cubs, but does Tom really deserve any credit for hiring him?
I mean, Theo was already nothing more than a lame duck at his old job, just sitting there like an unemployed bum on a beach somewhere, drawing checks and waiting for someone else to come along and hire him. He was clearly the best available candidate. It was both a hail mary and a no-brainer (https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/449387678614577154).
Just like when Mike McCaskey hired Dave Wannstedt... Basically, what I'm saying is that Tom Ricketts is Mike McCaskey (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/7/20/p127969678#p127969678).
And that he should have hired Theo in 2006 (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/25/p140678711#p140678711). Or 2005 (http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=7389.msg274157#msg274157). Or whatever.
Either way, it means that letting Crane bring in that Orthodox priest in 2008 (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/26/p140769341#p140769341) wasn't even Tom's earliest boner as chairman.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on April 13, 2014, 11:48:41 PM
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on April 13, 2014, 09:02:24 AM
No, Chuck (http://www.stripcreator.com/comics/TtoEtoC/529638)
Oh, man. Forgot about that one. "Theo becomes forgotten."
To review...
October 4, 2011
The Rangers eliminate the Rays from playoffs, the Cubs officially ask Boston for permission to talk to Theo
Quote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckFreidman vs. Theo. The war begins. (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/4/p138103465#p138103465)
October 11, 2011
The Cubs' talks with Theo are reportedly on the verge of an agreement
Quote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckMeh. I'd prefer Andrew Friedman. (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/11/p138983705#p138983705) Because of reasons. I prefered him even before Theo was seen as a possibility (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/12/p139075526#p139075526).
October 12, 2011
Theo is reported to have accepted a 5-year/$15MM+ deal to helm Cubs
Quote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckThis could be big if Tom doesn't fuck it up like Mike McCaskey. (http://ivychat.blogspot.com/2011/10/big-time-move.html) Though, when you think about it, wouldn't this hire really just further highlight Tom's incompetence and 'fear'?
October 17, 2011
As talks between Chicago and Boston drag on, Theo officially remains Red Sox GM and the internet wrings its hands over the possibility of negotiations breaking down
Quote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckWho among us doesn't think Tom could still truly blow this thing? (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/17/p139717493#p139717493) The Sox would just as soon pay Theo to sit on a beach for a year than just let him walk from his contract early, so it'll probably take intervention from the commissioner to snatch him from Henry and Lucchino's neon claws (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/17/p139711355#p139711355).
October 25, 2011
The Cubs introduce Theo as President of Baseball Operations
Quote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet ChuckWhat the fuck took so long, Tom? (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/25/p140678711#p140678711)
Two and a Half Years Later...
In the sideways timeline
Quote from: Intrepid Reader: Internet and Real Life ChuckSure, I like everything Theo is doing for the Cubs, but does Tom really deserve any credit for hiring him?
I mean, Theo was already nothing more than a lame duck at his old job, just sitting there like an unemployed bum on a beach somewhere, drawing checks and waiting for someone else to come along and hire him. He was clearly the best available candidate. It was both a hail mary and a no-brainer (https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/449387678614577154).
Just like when Mike McCaskey hired Dave Wannstedt... Basically, what I'm saying is that Tom Ricketts is Mike McCaskey (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/7/20/p127969678#p127969678).
And that he should have hired Theo in 2006 (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/25/p140678711#p140678711). Or 2005 (http://www.desipio.com/messageboard/index.php?topic=7389.msg274157#msg274157). Or whatever.
Either way, it means that letting Crane bring in that Orthodox priest in 2008 (http://hje.me/ci/sbox/day/2011/10/26/p140769341#p140769341) wasn't even Tom's earliest boner as chairman.
Chuck fell asleep while tanning on Rhetorical Beach and we've never heard the end of it since.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on April 14, 2014, 03:10:09 AM
Chuck fell asleep while tanning on Rhetorical Beach and we've never heard the end of it since.
*not necessarily actual quotes
At midnight the Cubs dropped a story and a video that are, in essence, a six-minute-long 'fuck you' to the rooftop owners. (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-moving-forward-with-wrigley-restoration-plan?ymd=20140521&content_id=76326626&vkey=news_chc) It's about time. Some highlights...
QuoteCHICAGO -- The Ricketts family, which has delayed its efforts to renovate 100-year-old Wrigley Field while negotiating with the rooftop owners, now plans to go ahead with the ballpark's restoration and add additional signage in the outfield.
QuoteRicketts said they will submit a revised expansion plan to the Commission on Chicago Landmarks, asking for approval of additions to the original proposal to add several signs and a revised seating configuration in the outfield. If approved, Ricketts said they are prepared to begin construction.
QuoteThe new outfield signs will provide an additional revenue source to help fund other parts of the restoration, Ricketts said. The revised expansion plan will include additional seating and open spaces in the Budweiser Bleachers, including new group terraces in right and left field and enclosed hospitality areas. They are also asking for new outfield lights that will reduce shadows, allowing fly balls to be lit from both front and back. All lighting will be directed inside the ballpark and not outside to the community.
QuoteAlso, four additional LED signs of up to 650 square feet, and one additional 2,400-square foot videoboard in right field will be added to the ballpark.
QuoteThe Cubs also have adjusted the design modifications for the clubhouse. Currently, the Cubs players utilize approximately 11,000 square feet, and the original expansion plan increased the clubhouse size to 19,000 square feet. The new plan further expands the clubhouse to 30,000 square feet and it will be located beneath the new outdoor plaza.
QuoteThe visitor's clubhouse also will be expanded, and the home and visiting bullpens will be relocated from the field to an area under the expanded Budweiser Bleachers.
QuoteAs part of the bleacher expansion, the proposed video scoreboard in left field will be reduced to 3,990-square feet, which is smaller than the one approved by the Chicago City Council and the Commission on Chicago Landmarks in 2013.
Quote"I'm not saying Wrigley Field is the reason the Chicago Cubs haven't won a World Championship in more than 100 years," Ricketts said. "But I am saying it's time to invest in Wrigley Field and to do the things our competitors do."
QuoteThe Ricketts, who are privately financing the project, had previously said they would not begin large portions of the renovation plan until the Wrigleyville Rooftop Association agreed it would not sue the team over blocked views. But the rooftop owners have made it clear that despite the city's approval and the Cubs' contractual rights, they plan to file lawsuits to stop the renovation and expansion plans.
Quote"We've spent endless hours negotiating with the rooftop businesses," Ricketts said. "We've gotten nowhere in our talks with them to settle this dispute. It has to end. It's time to move forward."
QuoteRicketts said they hope to avoid "going to the courthouse" to deal with the rooftop owners.
Quote"Being unable to improve our park puts us in the hole by tens of millions of dollars every year," Ricketts said. "Our competitors in the Central Division don't suffer that restriction. They can put up signs in the outfield and create other revenue to invest in their baseball teams."
(http://i60.tinypic.com/jpu341.png)
DPD for a quote (via ESPN.com) from the mayor's office. Hmm, is Rahm on the Cubs' side or the rooftop owners? I just can't tell.
QuoteMayor Rahm Emanuel's spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton released a statement by email, saying: "Like all Cub fans, the mayor doesn't want to wait for next year, and if this proposal helps the Cubs get closer to a ballpark renovation this fall -- and the jobs and neighborhood investments that come with it -- it's worth taking a look at."
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 22, 2014, 05:58:14 AM
At midnight the Cubs dropped a story and a video that are, in essence, a six-minute-long 'fuck you' to the rooftop owners. (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-moving-forward-with-wrigley-restoration-plan?ymd=20140521&content_id=76326626&vkey=news_chc)
Quote from: ELWOODBLUESCubs chairman Tom Ricketts sent a letter and video to Cubs fans late Wednesday, saying they are going to "put the team and the fans first." --- The fact that this even needs to be stated says it all. I guess until now Ricketts has been putting Ricketts first? He's Don Sterling minus the racism. The guy just looks like he's full of ___.
Quote from: Cubs101nomoreEat my shorts Wreckitts
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 22, 2014, 08:20:46 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 22, 2014, 05:58:14 AM
At midnight the Cubs dropped a story and a video that are, in essence, a six-minute-long 'fuck you' to the rooftop owners. (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/chc/cubs-moving-forward-with-wrigley-restoration-plan?ymd=20140521&content_id=76326626&vkey=news_chc)
Quote from: ELWOODBLUESCubs chairman Tom Ricketts sent a letter and video to Cubs fans late Wednesday, saying they are going to "put the team and the fans first." --- The fact that this even needs to be stated says it all. I guess until now Ricketts has been putting Ricketts first? He's Don Sterling minus the racism. The guy just looks like he's full of ___.
Quote from: Cubs101nomoreEat my shorts Wreckitts
Christ, I hate Cubs fans.
I like this. Time to rename the thread
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 22, 2014, 06:00:45 AM
DPD for a quote (via ESPN.com) from the mayor's office. Hmm, is Rahm on the Cubs' side or the rooftop owners? I just can't tell.
QuoteMayor Rahm Emanuel's spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton released a statement by email, saying: "Like all Cub fans, the mayor doesn't want to wait for next year, and if this proposal helps the Cubs get closer to a ballpark renovation this fall -- and the jobs and neighborhood investments that come with it -- it's worth taking a look at."
I hope Chicago turns out to be as corrupt and machine-run as I've always heard it is.
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on May 22, 2014, 08:57:31 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 22, 2014, 06:00:45 AM
DPD for a quote (via ESPN.com) from the mayor's office. Hmm, is Rahm on the Cubs' side or the rooftop owners? I just can't tell.
QuoteMayor Rahm Emanuel's spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton released a statement by email, saying: "Like all Cub fans, the mayor doesn't want to wait for next year, and if this proposal helps the Cubs get closer to a ballpark renovation this fall -- and the jobs and neighborhood investments that come with it -- it's worth taking a look at."
I hope Chicago turns out to be as corrupt and machine-run as I've always heard it is.
Rahm is on Rahm's side. Toni Preckwinkle (whose gravitas should have taken a bit of a hit when she got all exercised about Bruce Rauner shaking hands with a guy who had a confederate flag patch on a multi-patched leather coat) is running against Rahm, and Karen Lewis will be throwing all of her resources into fucking Rahm any way she can, up to and including a months-long teacher's strike right into the teeth of the election. If Rahm can get a number of union votes and other votes supporting Ricketts, he will. If he can get a bunch of inbred Sox fans/Lakeview Residents to vote his way by supporting Julie Murphy's sad sack group he will.
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 12:33:30 PM
Toni Preckwinkle... is running against Rahm...
Maybe.
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Yeah, probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Both are from Illinois.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Yeah, probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Both are from Illinois.
Are you being seriously wrong, or is this a reference to someone else being wrong that I missed? It's hard to tell with you on the Internet.
EDIT: I am aware that you are, practically speaking, not wrong that most parties wouldn't be dumb enough to run that, but it's not unconstitutional for candidates to be from the same state. Just the electors from IL can't vote for them.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Yeah, probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Both are from Illinois.
It won't happen because both are Cub fans and the rest of the country knows that disqualifies them from public trust.
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 12:33:30 PM
Karen Lewis will be throwing all of her resources into fucking Rahm
PHRASING!
And gross.
Quote from: Bort on May 22, 2014, 03:15:44 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Yeah, probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Both are from Illinois.
Are you being seriously wrong, or is this a reference to someone else being wrong that I missed? It's hard to tell with you on the Internet.
EDIT: I am aware that you are, practically speaking, not wrong that most parties wouldn't be dumb enough to run that, but it's not unconstitutional for candidates to be from the same state. Just the electors from IL can't vote for them.
Hillary is a resident of New York, so it really doesn't matter.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on May 22, 2014, 05:21:02 PM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 12:33:30 PM
Karen Lewis will be throwing all of her resources into fucking Rahm
PHRASING!
And gross.
I bet Rahm gives a mean reverse shocker.
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on May 22, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Bort on May 22, 2014, 03:15:44 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Yeah, probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Both are from Illinois.
Are you being seriously wrong, or is this a reference to someone else being wrong that I missed? It's hard to tell with you on the Internet.
EDIT: I am aware that you are, practically speaking, not wrong that most parties wouldn't be dumb enough to run that, but it's not unconstitutional for candidates to be from the same state. Just the electors from IL can't vote for them.
Hillary is a resident of New York, so it really doesn't matter.
That's right. So Chuck is wrong across the board. All is right with the universe.
Quote from: Tinker to Evers to Chance on May 22, 2014, 05:34:52 PM
Quote from: Bort on May 22, 2014, 03:15:44 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 01:13:28 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 22, 2014, 12:54:30 PM
Nah. Toni's waiting until Rahm becomes Hillary's VP. She'll take the job in 2017.
That's hilarious.
Yeah, probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster. Both are from Illinois.
Are you being seriously wrong, or is this a reference to someone else being wrong that I missed? It's hard to tell with you on the Internet.
EDIT: I am aware that you are, practically speaking, not wrong that most parties wouldn't be dumb enough to run that, but it's not unconstitutional for candidates to be from the same state. Just the electors from IL can't vote for them.
Hillary is a resident of New York, so it really doesn't matter.
I was joking. People were bitching about Bush and Cheney back in 2000 both being Texans. It was bullshit then as it is now.
Although Cheney was far more a Texan than a Wyomian back in 2000 than Hillary is an Illinoisian today.
Point is, Hillary-Rahm '16 is as likely as the Bears, Cubs, Bulls, White Sox, Fire, Wolves, Northwestern, UIC, Chicago State, Kane County Cougars, and Schaumburg Boomers each winning multiple postseason games before the Blackhawks win just one.
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 11:02:11 PM
Point is, Hillary-Rahm '16 is as likely as the Bears, Cubs, Bulls, White Sox, Fire, Wolves, Northwestern, UIC, Chicago State, Kane County Cougars, and Schaumburg Boomers each winning multiple postseason games before the Blackhawks win just one.
It would be fun to see my Facebook feed filled with memes if the Democrats decided to go with a woman/Jew ticket though, even if it's not those two.
Quote from: Fork on May 23, 2014, 08:57:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 11:02:11 PM
Point is, Hillary-Rahm '16 is as likely as the Bears, Cubs, Bulls, White Sox, Fire, Wolves, Northwestern, UIC, Chicago State, Kane County Cougars, and Schaumburg Boomers each winning multiple postseason games before the Blackhawks win just one.
It would be fun to see my Facebook feed filled with memes if the Democrats decided to go with a woman/Jew ticket though, even if it's not those two.
You calling Rahm a woman?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on May 23, 2014, 08:59:07 AM
Quote from: Fork on May 23, 2014, 08:57:38 AM
Quote from: Brownie on May 22, 2014, 11:02:11 PM
Point is, Hillary-Rahm '16 is as likely as the Bears, Cubs, Bulls, White Sox, Fire, Wolves, Northwestern, UIC, Chicago State, Kane County Cougars, and Schaumburg Boomers each winning multiple postseason games before the Blackhawks win just one.
It would be fun to see my Facebook feed filled with memes if the Democrats decided to go with a woman/Jew ticket though, even if it's not those two.
You calling Rahm a woman?
You calling Hillary a Jew?
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/472557773776236545
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on May 30, 2014, 09:01:36 PM
https://twitter.com/ivychat/status/472557773776236545
Tom Ricketts just doesn't sweat the details like wizard of management Steve Ballmer.
(http://i61.tinypic.com/23jg37k.jpg)
If you thought the Bulls coming out to Sirius was cool, just wait until you see the new Clippers player introductions. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc)
sonofabitch almost ran me over on Waveland yesterday.
Very informative (and long) New York Times article about the Ricketesses...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/sports/baseball/as-cubs-slowly-rebuild-theres-shouting-from-the-rooftops.html?ref=sports&_r=0
Quote from: Brownie on September 21, 2014, 09:24:20 AM
sonofabitch almost ran me over on Waveland yesterday.
Ha. I had forgotten that happened.
I wonder why.
Quote from: PANK! on September 22, 2014, 09:05:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on September 21, 2014, 09:24:20 AM
sonofabitch almost ran me over on Waveland yesterday.
Ha. I had forgotten that happened.
I wonder why.
He was doing his damnedest to escape a glad-handing GOP committeeman in search of a whale.
Quote from: PANK! on September 22, 2014, 09:05:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on September 21, 2014, 09:24:20 AM
sonofabitch almost ran me over on Waveland yesterday.
Ha. I had forgotten that happened.
I wonder why.
You weren't PAYING THE FUCK ATTENTION.
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
You get the Cubs as we think they might be in like five years. Who wouldn't leap at this chance.
Also no one in the national media is going to talk about the Cubs ever again.
Quote from: Slaky on October 14, 2014, 01:55:47 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
You get the Cubs as we think they might be in like five years. Who wouldn't leap at this chance.
Also no one in the national media is going to talk about the Cubs ever again.
Friedman will get all the free agents now, and Theo will get none. Nice choice Tom.
Quote from: Slaky on October 14, 2014, 01:55:47 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
You get the Cubs as we think they might be in like five years. Who wouldn't leap at this chance.
Also no one in the national media is going to talk about the Cubs ever again.
I don't think it's guaranteed that Friedman plus $$$ is going to automatically mean the Dodgers will win 110 games every year forever. I have nothing to back this up, but it SEAMS as if moves like this never work out how people expect.
Quote from: Eli on October 14, 2014, 02:13:03 PM
Quote from: Slaky on October 14, 2014, 01:55:47 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
You get the Cubs as we think they might be in like five years. Who wouldn't leap at this chance.
Also no one in the national media is going to talk about the Cubs ever again.
I don't think it's guaranteed that Friedman plus $$$ is going to automatically mean the Dodgers will win 110 games every year forever. I have nothing to back this up, but it SEAMS as if moves like this never work out how people expect.
Intrepid Reader: GordoJust like getting Theo.
Quote from: Eli on October 14, 2014, 02:13:03 PM
Quote from: Slaky on October 14, 2014, 01:55:47 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
You get the Cubs as we think they might be in like five years. Who wouldn't leap at this chance.
Also no one in the national media is going to talk about the Cubs ever again.
I don't think it's guaranteed that Friedman plus $$$ is going to automatically mean the Dodgers will win 110 games every year forever. I have nothing to back this up, but it SEAMS as if moves like this never work out how people expect.
No, it's true. Grant Brisbee wrote that smart dudes with money behave a lot like dumb dudes with money. They can now overspend on big names just because they can - even if they really don't want to. Theo did it. DiPoto did it. Friedman will probably do it. It's the rest of the organization that he can have a real impact on. The stuff we've been talking about with the Cubs is all we have - imagine that but buying big name guys to mask it all at the same time.
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
My LA loyalties are tied to the Angels as one of my groomsmen's dad was the Angels CFO from their founding until they sold to Disney. Wife's family out there are all Yankee fans as they only moved to LA from NYC in 1980.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 14, 2014, 03:37:52 PM
My LA loyalties are tied to the Angels as one of my groomsmen's dad was the Angels CFO from their founding until they sold to Disney.
Sorry, but this is so terribly Jew.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on October 14, 2014, 03:44:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 14, 2014, 03:37:52 PM
My LA loyalties are tied to the Angels as one of my groomsmen's dad was the Angels CFO from their founding until they sold to Disney.
Sorry, but this is so terribly Jew.
You left out the second sentence.
So Friedman will be running the Dodgers. You had to expect that at some point a money team would offer him the world to bring him in and handle their investment. Sure, it would have been better for the Cubs if an American League team had done it. But I'm pretty sure every team in the National league has been watching Jepstink and are now facing the reality that trips to Wrigley Field won't be pleasant for the next decade or so.
Friedman's challenge will be handling player development without the advantage the Cubs had by getting top-tier draft picks for years. That's not to say he can't. But when there's always a Bryant or Schwarber on the board, it makes it a whole lot easier.
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on October 14, 2014, 03:44:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 14, 2014, 03:37:52 PM
My LA loyalties are tied to the Angels as one of my groomsmen's dad was the Angels CFO from their founding until they sold to Disney.
Sorry, but this is so terribly Jew.
He's not. Well, half. But his dad was not that half. So, technically he is, but he keeps a green pagan pine plant in his house in December.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 14, 2014, 04:35:48 PM
Quote from: J. Walter Weatherman on October 14, 2014, 03:44:53 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on October 14, 2014, 03:37:52 PM
My LA loyalties are tied to the Angels as one of my groomsmen's dad was the Angels CFO from their founding until they sold to Disney.
Sorry, but this is so terribly Jew.
He's not. Well, half. But his dad was not that half. So, technically he is, but he keeps a green pagan pine plant in his house in December.
I think he's referring to you.
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Which massively overpaid Dodger would become the new Soriano? They've go so many to choose from. And Yasiel Puig's base running and other assorted boneheadery would make his head explode.
Quote from: Shooter on October 14, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Which massively overpaid Dodger would become the new Soriano? They've go so many to choose from. And Yasiel Puig's base running and other assorted boneheadery would make his head explode.
Hanley, Hanley, and probably Hanley.
Quote from: ChuckD on October 14, 2014, 07:46:53 PM
Quote from: Shooter on October 14, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Which massively overpaid Dodger would become the new Soriano? They've go so many to choose from. And Yasiel Puig's base running and other assorted boneheadery would make his head explode.
Hanley, Hanley, and probably Hanley.
My darkhorse is that Chuck would find a way to hate Clayton Kershaw.
Quote from: Eli on October 14, 2014, 09:18:29 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on October 14, 2014, 07:46:53 PM
Quote from: Shooter on October 14, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Which massively overpaid Dodger would become the new Soriano? They've go so many to choose from. And Yasiel Puig's base running and other assorted boneheadery would make his head explode.
Hanley, Hanley, and probably Hanley.
My darkhorse is that Chuck would find a way to hate Clayton Kershaw.
Well he said this (http://ivychat.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.html):
QuoteAs noted, Cub fans should be proud of themselves for not only failing to cheer the team for a "successful" season as they left the field on Saturday, but actually booing the pathetic play of the star performers: Alfonso Soriano, Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez.
After a three game playoff sample size in 2007, so I have no trouble seeing him roast Clayton for his postseason shortcomings
Quote from: SKO on October 14, 2014, 09:43:44 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 14, 2014, 09:18:29 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on October 14, 2014, 07:46:53 PM
Quote from: Shooter on October 14, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Which massively overpaid Dodger would become the new Soriano? They've go so many to choose from. And Yasiel Puig's base running and other assorted boneheadery would make his head explode.
Hanley, Hanley, and probably Hanley.
My darkhorse is that Chuck would find a way to hate Clayton Kershaw.
Well he said this (http://ivychat.blogspot.com/2007_10_01_archive.html):
QuoteAs noted, Cub fans should be proud of themselves for not only failing to cheer the team for a "successful" season as they left the field on Saturday, but actually booing the pathetic play of the star performers: Alfonso Soriano, Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez.
After a three game playoff sample size in 2007, so I have no trouble seeing him roast Clayton for his postseason shortcomings
Fucking hell, Internet Chuck.
Quote from: Eli on October 14, 2014, 09:18:29 PM
Quote from: ChuckD on October 14, 2014, 07:46:53 PM
Quote from: Shooter on October 14, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
Quote from: R-V on October 14, 2014, 01:52:05 PM
Chuck, any chance you want to become a Dodgers fan now that your beloved Andrew Friedman is taking over baseball operations there? Magic Johnson is just hands down a better owner than Tom Ricketts.
Which massively overpaid Dodger would become the new Soriano? They've go so many to choose from. And Yasiel Puig's base running and other assorted boneheadery would make his head explode.
Hanley, Hanley, and probably Hanley.
My darkhorse is that Chuck would find a way to hate Clayton Kershaw.
Strikeouts and shutouts are selfish.
Seriously, though -- it's definitely Hanley.
Quote from: ChuckD on October 14, 2014, 10:44:36 PM
Strikeouts and shutouts are selfish.
I believe the term is "fascist." Ground balls are more "democratic."
Dempster and DeRosa at the Cubs Convention
Quote from: Slaky on October 17, 2014, 01:38:10 PM
Dempster and DeRosa at the Cubs Convention
Still not going
Quote from: Slaky on October 17, 2014, 01:38:10 PM
Dempster and DeRosa at the Cubs Convention
The convention really isn't for us. It's for simpletons like Al who will tell their grandkids until the day they die about the time they related a mildly amusing anecdote to Dempster and DeRosa and both Cubs legends chortled.
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
I liked DeRosa...like I like Fresca!
Quote from: Bort on October 17, 2014, 05:04:16 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
I liked DeRosa...like I like Fresca!
I heard you go to Corner Bakery because they have Fresca on tap.
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing
wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
Of course there was nothing wrong with him. He was a useful player. Not the best on those teams by a long shot, but a nice contributor who Hendry, amazingly enough, actually sold high on. I bear him no ill will, I just laugh at the fact that a decent contributor on two playoff teams that went nowhere is now a Cubs Legend basically because he had stubble and the appropriate lack of melanin. To again put this in the Bears analogy I speak best it's as odd to me as referring to "Bears Legend Roosevelt Colvin" or something. A nice player, not one you hang onto five years after his last appearance in your team's uniform.
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
If Jepstink had signed him, he would have gotten flipped for prospects in his first year.
Quote from: Fork on October 18, 2014, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
If Jepstink had signed him, he would have gotten flipped for prospects in his first year.
I can't tell if this is a compliment or insult to Jepstink.
Quote from: Eli on October 18, 2014, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on October 18, 2014, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
If Jepstink had signed him, he would have gotten flipped for prospects in his first year.
I can't tell if this is a compliment or insult to Jepstink.
I don't think Jepstink is going to be trading for future assets when he has a roster built to win 97 games. Goddammit, Fork
Quote from: SKO on October 18, 2014, 02:28:06 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 18, 2014, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on October 18, 2014, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
If Jepstink had signed him, he would have gotten flipped for prospects in his first year.
I can't tell if this is a compliment or insult to Jepstink.
I don't think Jepstink is going to be trading for future assets when he has a roster built to win 97 games. Goddammit, Fork
DeRosa's ilk would be a great addition to the current team. And I think he'd be overshadowed in the hearts of the simpletons by Rizzo and Bryant.
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
Meh. I'm over it.
Quote from: PANK! on October 18, 2014, 06:15:58 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
Meh. I'm over it.
You are absolutely not over it.
Quote from: CT III on October 18, 2014, 11:23:21 PM
Quote from: PANK! on October 18, 2014, 06:15:58 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
Meh. I'm over it.
You are absolutely not over it.
Odds that Mark DeRosa isn't tied to a radiator in Huey's basement right now?
Quote from: Eli on October 18, 2014, 02:05:55 PM
Quote from: Fork on October 18, 2014, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
If Jepstink had signed him, he would have gotten flipped for prospects in his first year.
I can't tell if this is a compliment or insult to Jepstink.
Neither. He was a fine for that team, and became overrated because he was a passenger on Dave Otto's fucking train. But those same numbers over the last few years would have nabbed a couple prospects.
Quote from: CT III on October 18, 2014, 11:23:21 PM
Quote from: PANK! on October 18, 2014, 06:15:58 PM
Quote from: Eli on October 17, 2014, 09:05:48 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 17, 2014, 04:20:17 PM
Is there any other player that has made a bigger, dumber impression on the fanbase in a shorter amount of time than DeRo the HeRo? Good god. 6th or 7th most useful player on two fruitless playoff teams. This is like Bears fans freaking out over Tom Wad---ohhhhhh
There was nothing wrong with DeRosa either. Just because a certain segment of fans overrated him doesn't mean we all need to reflexively underrate him. The guy put up about $29 million of value while getting paid about 1/4 of that. Given that he was basically signed as a bench bat, he was a nice surprise.
And I'd also like to add a pre-emptive, "Huey is not a meatball" based on what I'm sure will be forthcoming.
Meh. I'm over it.
You are absolutely not over it.
Okay.
The Ricketts family has already cost Chicago a World Series champ: (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-jackie-robinson-west-little-league-boundaries-met-20150211-story.html)
QuoteIt was then that Jackie Robinson West officials provided documentation and a boundaries map, signed off on by the necessary officials, that appeared to show everything was in order.
The issue was considered closed. But Keener said DNAinfo.com reporter, Mark Konkol, who broke the story about the allegations late last year, "kept after us."
That led the national organization to call for the meetings in Chicago with officials from all of the local leagues involved in the boundary issue, Keener said. At those meetings, officials from the other leagues confirmed that the map's boundaries were incorrect.
DNAInfo? Who's that? (http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/about-us/our-team/ceo-founder/joe-ricketts)
Looks like one of the rooftop owners may be looking at metal bars well past May 15.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/475206/wrigley-field-rooftop-owner-charged-ripping-chicago-cubs
Quote from: thehawk on March 27, 2015, 11:30:58 AM
Looks like one of the rooftop owners may be looking at metal bars well past May 15.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/475206/wrigley-field-rooftop-owner-charged-ripping-chicago-cubs
De-lish-ous!
Barry, were you with me at a game there once? I recall the place was grossly oversold
Quote from: Brownie on March 27, 2015, 12:00:12 PM
Quote from: thehawk on March 27, 2015, 11:30:58 AM
Looks like one of the rooftop owners may be looking at metal bars well past May 15.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/475206/wrigley-field-rooftop-owner-charged-ripping-chicago-cubs
De-lish-ous!
Barry, were you with me at a game there once? I recall the place was grossly oversold
Was that where/when Norm Van Lier bummed a cigar off you? And left Chet Coppock behind to hang with us?
Quote from: Brownie on March 27, 2015, 12:00:12 PM
Quote from: thehawk on March 27, 2015, 11:30:58 AM
Looks like one of the rooftop owners may be looking at metal bars well past May 15.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/475206/wrigley-field-rooftop-owner-charged-ripping-chicago-cubs
De-lish-ous!
Barry, were you with me at a game there once? I recall the place was grossly oversold
I think that may had been the rooftop. Reading the indictment, it looks like his employees and accountant turned states evidence on him.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on March 27, 2015, 01:45:30 PM
Quote from: Brownie on March 27, 2015, 12:00:12 PM
Quote from: thehawk on March 27, 2015, 11:30:58 AM
Looks like one of the rooftop owners may be looking at metal bars well past May 15.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chicago/7/71/475206/wrigley-field-rooftop-owner-charged-ripping-chicago-cubs
De-lish-ous!
Barry, were you with me at a game there once? I recall the place was grossly oversold
Was that where/when Norm Van Lier bummed a cigar off you? And left Chet Coppock behind to hang with us?
Yes, that was it.
Well the Rooftop owners injunction ruling came out today. The technical legal term I believe is "the rooftop owners got their asses kicked"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-wrigley-field-rooftop-cubs-ruling-20150402-story.html
Quote from: thehawk on April 02, 2015, 07:51:00 PM
Well the Rooftop owners injunction ruling came out today. The technical legal term I believe is "the rooftop owners got their asses kicked"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-wrigley-field-rooftop-cubs-ruling-20150402-story.html
Hey, you're the lawyer. I mean, you're no GLEN LERNER, but still.
Quote from: Fork on April 02, 2015, 08:45:27 PM
Quote from: thehawk on April 02, 2015, 07:51:00 PM
Well the Rooftop owners injunction ruling came out today. The technical legal term I believe is "the rooftop owners got their asses kicked"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-wrigley-field-rooftop-cubs-ruling-20150402-story.html
Hey, you're the lawyer. I mean, you're no GLEN LERNER, but still.
While I dream of the day I can wear the Extra-Medium Brooks Brothers suit, alas I never will be Glen.
The judge basically made it clear that none of the roof tops substantive arguments are likely to succeed. i had not realized they were arguing an anti-trust claim, but of course baseball has an anti-trust exemption (and then the judge dinged that claim on the merits for good measure). Their contract claim was basically summarized to "you thought the landmarks commission would bail you out, they didn't, tough luck"
When the judge turned to the elements of the injunction, she basically called the roof top owners frauds... its pretty remarkable.
Quote from: thehawk on April 02, 2015, 09:02:37 PM
Quote from: Fork on April 02, 2015, 08:45:27 PM
Quote from: thehawk on April 02, 2015, 07:51:00 PM
Well the Rooftop owners injunction ruling came out today. The technical legal term I believe is "the rooftop owners got their asses kicked"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-wrigley-field-rooftop-cubs-ruling-20150402-story.html
Hey, you're the lawyer. I mean, you're no GLEN LERNER, but still.
While I dream of the day I can wear the Extra-Medium Brooks Brothers suit, alas I never will be Glen.
The judge basically made it clear that none of the roof tops substantive arguments are likely to succeed. i had not realized they were arguing an anti-trust claim, but of course baseball has an anti-trust exemption (and then the judge dinged that claim on the merits for good measure). Their contract claim was basically summarized to "you thought the landmarks commission would bail you out, they didn't, tough luck"
When the judge turned to the elements of the injunction, she basically called the roof top owners frauds... its pretty remarkable.
But after that, the
...suspense is killing me?
Quote from: PenFoe on April 02, 2015, 10:00:36 PM
Quote from: thehawk on April 02, 2015, 09:02:37 PM
Quote from: Fork on April 02, 2015, 08:45:27 PM
Quote from: thehawk on April 02, 2015, 07:51:00 PM
Well the Rooftop owners injunction ruling came out today. The technical legal term I believe is "the rooftop owners got their asses kicked"
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-wrigley-field-rooftop-cubs-ruling-20150402-story.html
Hey, you're the lawyer. I mean, you're no GLEN LERNER, but still.
While I dream of the day I can wear the Extra-Medium Brooks Brothers suit, alas I never will be Glen.
The judge basically made it clear that none of the roof tops substantive arguments are likely to succeed. i had not realized they were arguing an anti-trust claim, but of course baseball has an anti-trust exemption (and then the judge dinged that claim on the merits for good measure). Their contract claim was basically summarized to "you thought the landmarks commission would bail you out, they didn't, tough luck"
When the judge turned to the elements of the injunction, she basically called the roof top owners frauds... its pretty remarkable.
But after that, the
...suspense is killing me?
Oops, I effectively get paid by the word, had a couple of extra ones.
Kris Bryant is such a standup guy he's been saving his homers for Cubs fans in the bleachers. Won't have to wait much longer (http://m.cubs.mlb.com/news/article/122393344/two-wrigley-bleacher-sections-open-monday).
Edited to add: Ever wanted to watch a game from 400 feet away only to have the whole thing ruined by being forced to sit down for three hours? Good news, now you can kill your knees in the brand-new Left Field Well and root for extra innings:
(http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/chc/images/ticketing/y2015/814x332_bleacherslide5.jpg)
DPD. From MLBTR:
QuoteAs team president Theo Epstein enters his walk year in 2016, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts is expected to start discussing a new deal with him soon. If he can't offer him enough money to stay in Chicago, Cafardo wonders aloud if he could go elsewhere or maybe even circle back to the Red Sox.
Look, we give Ricketts plenty of shit, but there's no way he doesn't extend Theo. Right? First, apparently Cafardo gets his financial information about the Cubs from the Sun-Times, and second, this reads like someone who's just viewing things through a Red Sox filter.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 16, 2015, 12:26:15 PM
DPD. From MLBTR:
QuoteAs team president Theo Epstein enters his walk year in 2016, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts is expected to start discussing a new deal with him soon. If he can't offer him enough money to stay in Chicago, Cafardo wonders aloud if he could go elsewhere or maybe even circle back to the Red Sox.
Look, we give Ricketts plenty of shit, but there's no way he doesn't extend Theo. Right? First, apparently Cafardo gets his financial information about the Cubs from the Sun-Times, and second, this reads like someone who's just viewing things through a Red Sox filter.
I just read something about this. I don't remember where but the gist is that Friedman is getting $7MM from The Dodgers. Offer Theo $8MM and we're all good. I guess it also may depend on what Dombrowski gets (and, he may end up in Boston). I'm not worried that Theo is going anywhere.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 16, 2015, 12:26:15 PM
DPD. From MLBTR:
QuoteAs team president Theo Epstein enters his walk year in 2016, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts is expected to start discussing a new deal with him soon. If he can't offer him enough money to stay in Chicago, Cafardo wonders aloud if he could go elsewhere or maybe even circle back to the Red Sox.
Look, we give Ricketts plenty of shit, but there's no way he doesn't extend Theo. Right? First, apparently Cafardo gets his financial information about the Cubs from the Sun-Times, and second, this reads like someone who's just viewing things through a Red Sox filter.
I have a feeling that if Theo doesn't come back, it's not because the Ricketts are cheap. It's because Theo goes outside of baseball. Hell, Ricketts himself kind of laid that ground in an article where he praised Theo saying that he'd be a success in whatever industry he would be in.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 16, 2015, 08:54:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 16, 2015, 12:26:15 PM
DPD. From MLBTR:
QuoteAs team president Theo Epstein enters his walk year in 2016, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts is expected to start discussing a new deal with him soon. If he can't offer him enough money to stay in Chicago, Cafardo wonders aloud if he could go elsewhere or maybe even circle back to the Red Sox.
Look, we give Ricketts plenty of shit, but there's no way he doesn't extend Theo. Right? First, apparently Cafardo gets his financial information about the Cubs from the Sun-Times, and second, this reads like someone who's just viewing things through a Red Sox filter.
I have a feeling that if Theo doesn't come back, it's not because the Ricketts are cheap. It's because Theo goes outside of baseball. Hell, Ricketts himself kind of laid that ground in an article where he praised Theo saying that he'd be a success in whatever industry he would be in.
Once he wins the Series with the Cubs, he moves onto the Detroit Lions.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 16, 2015, 08:58:58 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 16, 2015, 08:54:04 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 16, 2015, 12:26:15 PM
DPD. From MLBTR:
QuoteAs team president Theo Epstein enters his walk year in 2016, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts is expected to start discussing a new deal with him soon. If he can't offer him enough money to stay in Chicago, Cafardo wonders aloud if he could go elsewhere or maybe even circle back to the Red Sox.
Look, we give Ricketts plenty of shit, but there's no way he doesn't extend Theo. Right? First, apparently Cafardo gets his financial information about the Cubs from the Sun-Times, and second, this reads like someone who's just viewing things through a Red Sox filter.
I have a feeling that if Theo doesn't come back, it's not because the Ricketts are cheap. It's because Theo goes outside of baseball. Hell, Ricketts himself kind of laid that ground in an article where he praised Theo saying that he'd be a success in whatever industry he would be in.
Once he wins the Series with the Cubs, he moves onto the Detroit Lions Chicago Bears.
Pace is terrible'd
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Yep. I think that's a big reason why Jed's name doesn't come up for other jobs: The Cubs job will be his soon. I mean, Kenny Williams for Toronto over Jed Hoyer?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 08:11:19 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Yep. I think that's a big reason why Jed's name doesn't come up for other jobs: The Cubs job will be his soon. I mean, Kenny Williams for Toronto over Jed Hoyer?
Yeah, I think Theo's plan has kind of always been to turn the show entirely over to Jed at some point, it's just a matter of when.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
Yeah he's not going anywhere. He wants to be known as the greatest GM ever by ending all the droughts. Not the guy that won because he already had two roided up stars in Boston and then left the Cubs before they got really good.
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
Fair enough. For what it's worth I think he gets extended as well, I just saw that as maybe one possible explanation for why it wouldn't be STOOPID RICKETZ if he leaves. I hope he stays, I just also think Jed's been a pretty big part of this and Jason McLeod sure seems to be a pretty good scouting director, so if he does leave, I'll be far from panicked as long as those two are still there.
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
Just found the nearest tribe member.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
I'm sticking with Chuck-got-his-Mark Shapiros-confused, because it's funny.
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
But now you know that Chuck knows this guy. So it was a worthy discussion.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:31:46 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
I'm sticking with Chuck-got-his-Mark Shapiros-confused, because it's funny.
I agree. I think he thought Mark Shapiro left the Indians to work in TV. Which may actually be less embarrassing than what is currently happening in this thread.
Are we going to start speculating about our fantasy careers for Theo now? I want him to become a globe-trotting adventurer seeking treasure and fighting a vast cabal of shady art dealers.
Barring that, speaking of globe-trotting, he could coach the Washington Generals and really turn them around.
Or we can give up on this shit-for-brains discussion.
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 09:56:27 AM
Are we going to start speculating about our fantasy careers for Theo now? I want him to become a globe-trotting adventurer seeking treasure and fighting a vast cabal of shady art dealers.
Barring that, speaking of globe-trotting, he could coach the Washington Generals and really turn them around.
Or we can give up on this shit-for-brains discussion.
I've heard he's always wanted to be a freelance dramaturg.
In conclusion, while I don't want to diminish Hoyer's contributions in any way, this is for goddamned sure Theo's Team and that's how it should be.
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 09:56:27 AM
Or we can give up on this shit-for-brains discussion.
Or at least wait till The Cubs win something before cementing The Great Epstink Legacy?
Quote from: Oleg on August 17, 2015, 11:13:02 AM
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 09:56:27 AM
Or we can give up on this shit-for-brains discussion.
Or at least wait till The Cubs win something before cementing The Great Epstink Legacy?
How dare you.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Ok I'll say it: This is just dumb. If everyone else will remember this is the team Theo built, why would he leave early just so five of those people might remember Jed Hoyer's name? When has that ever happened, ever, and why would Theo of all people (remember the butthurt gorilla suit?) be the one to do it? I'll give you that Theo likes Hoyer way more than Lucchino but still.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
Well, let's just step aside for the man who bestowed SportsCentury upon us all.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:22:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Ok I'll say it: This is just dumb. If everyone else will remember this is the team Theo built, why would he leave early just so five of those people might remember Jed Hoyer's name? When has that ever happened, ever, and why would Theo of all people (remember the butthurt gorilla suit?) be the one to do it? I'll give you that Theo likes Hoyer way more than Lucchino but still.
I have no idea? I don't think this will happen. I just know he handpicked Jed Hoyer so if he does leave it's probably because he thinks Jed can run the whole show and maybe he's just fucking bored or something. My point, which was poorly expressed, was that if Theo does leave I don't think it'll be Ricketts fault, it'll just be because he wants to do something else.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 01:26:52 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:22:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Ok I'll say it: This is just dumb. If everyone else will remember this is the team Theo built, why would he leave early just so five of those people might remember Jed Hoyer's name? When has that ever happened, ever, and why would Theo of all people (remember the butthurt gorilla suit?) be the one to do it? I'll give you that Theo likes Hoyer way more than Lucchino but still.
I have no idea? I don't think this will happen. I just know he handpicked Jed Hoyer so if he does leave it's probably because he thinks Jed can run the whole show and maybe he's just fucking bored or something. My point, which was poorly expressed, was that if Theo does leave I don't think it'll be Ricketts fault, it'll just be because he wants to do something else.
I'd entertain this - here, Jed, let's see what you can do with it - after a World Series title, but before? I don't think there's any way he leaves voluntarily until he's won at least one, unless Ricketts is just entirely unreasonable, like he insists Theo run all draft picks by Crane Kenney or something. Remember his Bill Walsh "ten years per team" timeline too.
As for the here and now I agree it's not going to be Ricketts' fault because there's no question he'll offer enough money.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 01:26:52 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:22:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Ok I'll say it: This is just dumb. If everyone else will remember this is the team Theo built, why would he leave early just so five of those people might remember Jed Hoyer's name? When has that ever happened, ever, and why would Theo of all people (remember the butthurt gorilla suit?) be the one to do it? I'll give you that Theo likes Hoyer way more than Lucchino but still.
I have no idea? I don't think this will happen. I just know he handpicked Jed Hoyer so if he does leave it's probably because he thinks Jed can run the whole show and maybe he's just fucking bored or something. My point, which was poorly expressed, was that if Theo does leave I don't think it'll be Ricketts fault, it'll just be because he wants to do something else.
I'd entertain this - here, Jed, let's see what you can do with it - after a World Series title, but before? I don't think there's any way he leaves voluntarily until he's won at least one, unless Ricketts is just entirely unreasonable, like he insists Theo run all draft picks by Crane Kenney or something. Remember his Bill Walsh "ten years per team" timeline too.
As for the here and now I agree it's not going to be Ricketts' fault because there's no question he'll offer enough money.
Yeah I don't really see him leaving next year if they haven't won it all, but I could absolutely see him walking out at a high point and leaving it all to Jed if they do. At that point, for a guy as accomplished as Theo, he could only take a hit to his legacy (albeit small) by staying. This core will eventually have an off year or bad year and miss the playoffs or whatever and because this fanbase and media sucks some idiots will complain, and he'll undoubtedly say "Jesus Christ, why am I still dealing with Gordon fucking Wittenmyer? I don't need this."
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 01:43:09 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 01:26:52 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:22:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Ok I'll say it: This is just dumb. If everyone else will remember this is the team Theo built, why would he leave early just so five of those people might remember Jed Hoyer's name? When has that ever happened, ever, and why would Theo of all people (remember the butthurt gorilla suit?) be the one to do it? I'll give you that Theo likes Hoyer way more than Lucchino but still.
I have no idea? I don't think this will happen. I just know he handpicked Jed Hoyer so if he does leave it's probably because he thinks Jed can run the whole show and maybe he's just fucking bored or something. My point, which was poorly expressed, was that if Theo does leave I don't think it'll be Ricketts fault, it'll just be because he wants to do something else.
I'd entertain this - here, Jed, let's see what you can do with it - after a World Series title, but before? I don't think there's any way he leaves voluntarily until he's won at least one, unless Ricketts is just entirely unreasonable, like he insists Theo run all draft picks by Crane Kenney or something. Remember his Bill Walsh "ten years per team" timeline too.
As for the here and now I agree it's not going to be Ricketts' fault because there's no question he'll offer enough money.
Yeah I don't really see him leaving next year if they haven't won it all, but I could absolutely see him walking out at a high point and leaving it all to Jed if they do. At that point, for a guy as accomplished as Theo, he could only take a hit to his legacy (albeit small) by staying. This core will eventually have an off year or bad year and miss the playoffs or whatever and because this fanbase and media sucks some idiots will complain, and he'll undoubtedly say "Jesus Christ, why am I still dealing with Gordon fucking Wittenmyer? I don't need this."
Once the Cubs win the World Series, maybe Theo moves on. But he's going to get paid more than one fuckload of money by the Ricketts family to stick around, and it's Crane's job to deal with Gordo.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 01:43:09 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:37:21 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 01:26:52 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 01:22:12 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
Ok I'll say it: This is just dumb. If everyone else will remember this is the team Theo built, why would he leave early just so five of those people might remember Jed Hoyer's name? When has that ever happened, ever, and why would Theo of all people (remember the butthurt gorilla suit?) be the one to do it? I'll give you that Theo likes Hoyer way more than Lucchino but still.
I have no idea? I don't think this will happen. I just know he handpicked Jed Hoyer so if he does leave it's probably because he thinks Jed can run the whole show and maybe he's just fucking bored or something. My point, which was poorly expressed, was that if Theo does leave I don't think it'll be Ricketts fault, it'll just be because he wants to do something else.
I'd entertain this - here, Jed, let's see what you can do with it - after a World Series title, but before? I don't think there's any way he leaves voluntarily until he's won at least one, unless Ricketts is just entirely unreasonable, like he insists Theo run all draft picks by Crane Kenney or something. Remember his Bill Walsh "ten years per team" timeline too.
As for the here and now I agree it's not going to be Ricketts' fault because there's no question he'll offer enough money.
Yeah I don't really see him leaving next year if they haven't won it all, but I could absolutely see him walking out at a high point and leaving it all to Jed if they do. At that point, for a guy as accomplished as Theo, he could only take a hit to his legacy (albeit small) by staying. This core will eventually have an off year or bad year and miss the playoffs or whatever and because this fanbase and media sucks some idiots will complain, and he'll undoubtedly say "Jesus Christ, why am I still dealing with Gordon fucking Wittenmyer? I don't need this."
What the fuck kind of weird conspiracy shit are you concocting in your free time?
1. Let's wait till The Cubs win before we talk about any sort of collapses.
2. He's had 4 years of Gordo and it hasn't run him out of town yet so how would dealing with an insufferable Gordo after winning a WS accomplish that?
3. If The Cubs win a WS in the next couple of year, you really think one bad year will tarnish his legacy? Frankly, seeing how Ditka is treated, if Theo wins a WS he could kill 14 hobos and he'll never pay for a dinner or drink in Chicago again.
There's no chance Theo goes anywhere. He came to Chicago for a reason. It's not to just leave when things are getting good. But, things aren't that good yet...so...nope. Theo's not going anywhere. Furthermore, I'm not so sure that Hoyer is just going to be handed an MLB team presidentship just because Theo thinks he should be the successor (and I have no idea where that idea comes from).
Quote from: Oleg on August 17, 2015, 01:51:18 PM
What the fuck kind of weird conspiracy shit are you concocting in your free time?
1. Let's wait till The Cubs win before we talk about any sort of collapses.
2. He's had 4 years of Gordo and it hasn't run him out of town yet so how would dealing with an insufferable Gordo after winning a WS accomplish that?
3. If The Cubs win a WS in the next couple of year, you really think one bad year will tarnish his legacy? Frankly, seeing how Ditka is treated, if Theo wins a WS he could kill 14 hobos and he'll never pay for a dinner or drink in Chicago again.
There's no chance Theo goes anywhere. He came to Chicago for a reason. It's not to just leave when things are getting good. But, things aren't that good yet...so...nope. Theo's not going anywhere. Furthermore, I'm not so sure that Hoyer is just going to be handed an MLB team presidentship just because Theo thinks he should be the successor (and I have no idea where that idea comes from).
You guys really overreacted to the Gordo joke. It was just a joke about Gordo being bad.
Anyways, I'm not jinxing a championsip or predicting a collapse or whatever. The whole thing started because someone said "there's no way Ricketts let's him walk, is there?"
My answer to that was "no, Ricketts won't let him get away, but maybe Theo would just want to leave anyway." The contract isn't up till after next year, so we're not talking about right now when they haven't accomplished anything yet.
My
hypothetical was that maybe he'd ride off into the sunset if, at the end of 2016, they HAVE won a title and he decides he wants to see what the next challenge is. It's entirely possible he'd see "maintaining the Cubs dynasty" as something he's already done in Boston and want to see what else is out there, then again he might just take a fuckton of money to stay. Then I made bad jokes about Gordon Wittenmyer.
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation. All I meant to say was "I dunno, maybe?" to "Will Theo leave?" because, well, I dunno, maybe?
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 17, 2015, 01:51:18 PM
What the fuck kind of weird conspiracy shit are you concocting in your free time?
1. Let's wait till The Cubs win before we talk about any sort of collapses.
2. He's had 4 years of Gordo and it hasn't run him out of town yet so how would dealing with an insufferable Gordo after winning a WS accomplish that?
3. If The Cubs win a WS in the next couple of year, you really think one bad year will tarnish his legacy? Frankly, seeing how Ditka is treated, if Theo wins a WS he could kill 14 hobos and he'll never pay for a dinner or drink in Chicago again.
There's no chance Theo goes anywhere. He came to Chicago for a reason. It's not to just leave when things are getting good. But, things aren't that good yet...so...nope. Theo's not going anywhere. Furthermore, I'm not so sure that Hoyer is just going to be handed an MLB team presidentship just because Theo thinks he should be the successor (and I have no idea where that idea comes from).
You guys really overreacted to the Gordo joke. It was just a joke about Gordo being bad.
Anyways, I'm not jinxing a championsip or predicting a collapse or whatever. The whole thing started because someone said "there's no way Ricketts let's him walk, is there?"
My answer to that was "no, Ricketts won't let him get away, but maybe Theo would just want to leave anyway." The contract isn't up till after next year, so we're not talking about right now when they haven't accomplished anything yet.
My hypothetical was that maybe he'd ride off into the sunset if, at the end of 2016, they HAVE won a title and he decides he wants to see what the next challenge is. Then I made bad jokes about Gordon Wittenmyer.
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation. All I meant to say was "I dunno, maybe?" to "Will Theo leave?" because, well, I dunno, maybe?
That was me, I have a name, but I also didn't derp it with a typo.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:22:02 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Quote from: Oleg on August 17, 2015, 01:51:18 PM
What the fuck kind of weird conspiracy shit are you concocting in your free time?
1. Let's wait till The Cubs win before we talk about any sort of collapses.
2. He's had 4 years of Gordo and it hasn't run him out of town yet so how would dealing with an insufferable Gordo after winning a WS accomplish that?
3. If The Cubs win a WS in the next couple of year, you really think one bad year will tarnish his legacy? Frankly, seeing how Ditka is treated, if Theo wins a WS he could kill 14 hobos and he'll never pay for a dinner or drink in Chicago again.
There's no chance Theo goes anywhere. He came to Chicago for a reason. It's not to just leave when things are getting good. But, things aren't that good yet...so...nope. Theo's not going anywhere. Furthermore, I'm not so sure that Hoyer is just going to be handed an MLB team presidentship just because Theo thinks he should be the successor (and I have no idea where that idea comes from).
You guys really overreacted to the Gordo joke. It was just a joke about Gordo being bad.
Anyways, I'm not jinxing a championsip or predicting a collapse or whatever. The whole thing started because someone said "there's no way Ricketts let's him walk, is there?"
My answer to that was "no, Ricketts won't let him get away, but maybe Theo would just want to leave anyway." The contract isn't up till after next year, so we're not talking about right now when they haven't accomplished anything yet.
My hypothetical was that maybe he'd ride off into the sunset if, at the end of 2016, they HAVE won a title and he decides he wants to see what the next challenge is. Then I made bad jokes about Gordon Wittenmyer.
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation. All I meant to say was "I dunno, maybe?" to "Will Theo leave?" because, well, I dunno, maybe?
That was me, I have a name, but I also didn't derp it with a typo.
I can't be expected to go back two whole pages, man. This is a hobby, not work.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
For god's sake Andy, just give me the MODS for this place already.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
You mean the hypothetical you're still defending? Right, we've totally overestimated your commitment.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:38:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
You mean the hypothetical you're still defending? Right, we've totally overestimated your commitment.
Fair point, I just never meant for it to be "THIS IS WHAT I THINK HAPPENS" so much as "I guess it's not impossible Theo would leave". My bad.
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:40:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:38:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
You mean the hypothetical you're still defending? Right, we've totally overestimated your commitment.
Fair point, I just never meant for it to be "THIS IS WHAT I THINK HAPPENS" so much as "I guess it's not impossible Theo would leave". My bad.
SKO vs. Sterling has now reached "Colts/Patriots 2015 AFC Championship Game" status. At halftime I was thinking this was going to be a game but now SKO's getting his arse felt by a better, more equipped, more physical opponent. Check the balls if you want, SKO. They're draped across your forehead.
Quote from: InternetApex on August 17, 2015, 03:29:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:40:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:38:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
You mean the hypothetical you're still defending? Right, we've totally overestimated your commitment.
Fair point, I just never meant for it to be "THIS IS WHAT I THINK HAPPENS" so much as "I guess it's not impossible Theo would leave". My bad.
SKO vs. Sterling has now reached "Colts/Patriots 2015 AFC Championship Game" status. At halftime I was thinking this was going to be a game but now SKO's getting his arse felt by a better, more equipped, more physical opponent. Check the balls if you want, SKO. They're draped across your forehead.
I thought you were going to say you wanted them both to lose.
Quote from: InternetApex on August 17, 2015, 03:29:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:40:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:38:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
You mean the hypothetical you're still defending? Right, we've totally overestimated your commitment.
Fair point, I just never meant for it to be "THIS IS WHAT I THINK HAPPENS" so much as "I guess it's not impossible Theo would leave". My bad.
SKO vs. Sterling has now reached "Colts/Patriots 2015 AFC Championship Game" status. At halftime I was thinking this was going to be a game but now SKO's getting his arse felt by a better, more equipped, more physical opponent. Check the balls if you want, SKO. They're draped across your forehead.
You either die a PenFoe hating hero or post so goddamn much you see yourself become the villain in an argument with the fucking Northwestern kid. Sigh.
We're also in the commonly-seen territory where Chuck never circles back to a thread in which he made some bizarre comment, probably thankful that things were derailed.
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
Six Flags is media? The only site I'll ever need!
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 04:43:42 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
Six Flags is media? The only site I'll ever need!
So, people who don't run Major League Baseball teams switch careers sometimes. Some of them happen to be Jewish and may or may not have gotten head from someone's sister that we know. And they're exactly like Theo Epstein, jerks.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 04:43:42 PM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 09:30:28 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:25:01 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 09:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on August 17, 2015, 09:20:04 AM
Quote from: Eli on August 17, 2015, 08:53:39 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 08:37:08 AM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on August 17, 2015, 08:27:53 AM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 07:26:56 AM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 03:10:13 AM
Professionally, I can't see Theo leaving things as they are. His work isn't done.
I could see it, if only because he may want to see his pal Jed finally get the credit, having built a base for sustained success.
Look, I'm really happy with everything Theo Epstein has done here, and I'm sure he's an OK guy. But he's never been particularly long on humility.
Yeah but if the Cubs win the series this year, or next year, or in 2017 or 2018 after Theo leaves, he's going to get the credit. This will always be the team that Theo built. Leaving just ensures that maybe people will at least remember that Jed did some of it, too.
I don't think he's going to ride off into the sunset to play golf just to give his buddy a shot at the spotlight. People like him are way too driven.
He wouldn't go play golf. He'd go do something like be the president of HBO or something. Go look at a guy like Mark Shapiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Shapiro_%28media_executive%29) for the model.
.....did you think that Mark Shapiro is the one that's currently the president of the Indians? Or did you just randomly pick a TV sports executive?
No, I picked the guy that used to work at ESPN, invented Sports Century, then ran an in-person consumer entertainment company, who left to run sports media.
From an customer economic model standpoint, amusement parks and sports teams are very similar.
And he grew up with my sister.
I don't see how he parallels Theo at all. He worked in one industry for his entire career and now ... he still works in that same industry.
Six Flags is media? The only site I'll ever need!
I think it's pretty common to hear entertainment/media combined as one industry. And even if you split them out in a nitpicking exercise, we're not talking about a drastic career change here.
Can we all just agree to step away from this thread and pretend today's posts just never happened?
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 07:55:35 PM
Can we all just agree to step away from this thread and pretend today's posts just never happened?
This is what happens when the Cubs aren't playing.
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 07:55:35 PM
Can we all just agree to step away from this thread and pretend today's posts just never happened?
I didn't read any of them. I feel better for it
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 08:03:01 PM
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 07:55:35 PM
Can we all just agree to step away from this thread and pretend today's posts just never happened?
This is what happens when the Cubs aren't playing.
These day offs are just going to get worse and worse as we approach season's end, aren't they?
Thank gord for the Cleveland and KC rainouts from earlier this year.
Quote from: PANK! on August 17, 2015, 08:30:36 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 08:03:01 PM
Quote from: Bort on August 17, 2015, 07:55:35 PM
Can we all just agree to step away from this thread and pretend today's posts just never happened?
This is what happens when the Cubs aren't playing.
These day offs are just going to get worse and worse as we approach season's end, aren't they?
Thank gord for the Cleveland and KC rainouts from earlier this year.
I did mow my lawn when I came home from work.
Also did some
manscaping edging, weeding and trimming.
All the the things I would have put off until another day if there was a game this evening.
..cleans kitchen pantry, paces around house, thinks about that bedroom ceiling fan and when was the last time it got vacuumed?
Quote from: InternetApex on August 17, 2015, 03:29:11 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:40:11 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:38:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:29:39 PM
Quote from: Sterling Archer on August 17, 2015, 02:26:50 PM
Quote from: SKO on August 17, 2015, 02:16:07 PM
Anyways, this is a dumb conversation.
Hmm. Who was it who forced his way to the front seat, grabbed the wheel, and crashed it in the ditch toward Crazytown? I can't be expected to remember what happened ten minutes ago, man.
I'm admitting we're in crazy town. I think you are all overestimating how committed I am to my hypothetical. I doubt Theo just up and walks away either. I was just saying that if the Cubs do win a title this year or next year and he opts to walk away after cementing himself as Curse Breaker, I get it and it wouldn't be Ricketts fault.
If my original statement had just been "I could see Theo leaving if they've won a series and he wants another challenge elsewhere, and if he does leave it wouldn't be because Ricketts is too cheap to extend him, but I'm about 90% sure he'll be extended" would that be okay? I'd like to amend my statement to that.
You mean the hypothetical you're still defending? Right, we've totally overestimated your commitment.
Fair point, I just never meant for it to be "THIS IS WHAT I THINK HAPPENS" so much as "I guess it's not impossible Theo would leave". My bad.
SKO vs. Sterling has now reached "Colts/Patriots 2015 AFC Championship Game" status. At halftime I was thinking this was going to be a game but now SKO's getting his arse felt by a better, more equipped, more physical opponent. Check the balls if you want, SKO. They're draped across your forehead.
I approve of this terminology.
QuoteAmazingly, Ricketts pulled out the old line Monday that spending money on players is not a panacea.
"The correlation between the dollars you spend and the wins you get on the field is going down every single year," he said.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-theo-epstein-can-name-his-price-20150929-column.html
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
The payroll slashing started with the arrival of Theo, 2 years after they bought the team and 6 years after they started due diligence. That's when everything changed.
The Ricketts didn't know what to do when they bought the team. They thought current practice was good enough. Took them 5 1/2 years to figure out it wasn't.
There is not enough praise in the universe for Theo Epstein. Ricketts gets a shitton of credit for closing that deal and following through by staying out of his way.
But there's still annoyance for blowing two years not realizing there was a problem that was obvious to nearly everyone.
Yes, yes it is time to end this thread.
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Bah. I'll be impressed when the Cardinals hack them.
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 16, 2015, 02:04:18 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Bah. I'll be impressed when the Cardinals hack them.
As soon as the article mentioned that database I immediately wondered about how strong the password requirements are.
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Honestly, as someone who works in the technology industry in sales, $6MM isn't that much money. Shit, there are companies that spend that on Oracle licensing alone each year.
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 02:04:56 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 16, 2015, 02:04:18 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Bah. I'll be impressed when the Cardinals hack them.
As soon as the article mentioned that database I immediately wondered about how strong the password requirements are.
Since Theo didn't leave his passwords on a Cardinals' server, I think we may be safe from the MLB version of North Korea.
Quote from: Oleg on October 16, 2015, 02:29:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Honestly, as someone who works in the technology industry in sales, $6MM isn't that much money. Shit, there are companies that spend that on Oracle licensing alone each year.
DPD
Its a decent chunk of change for what is an essentially 300 person company. Not enough to buy a Cray though (http://www.cray.com/blog/crays-mystery-mlb-team-revealed/#comments)
Quote from: thehawk on October 16, 2015, 02:41:41 PM
Quote from: Oleg on October 16, 2015, 02:29:04 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Honestly, as someone who works in the technology industry in sales, $6MM isn't that much money. Shit, there are companies that spend that on Oracle licensing alone each year.
DPD
Its a decent chunk of change for what is an essentially 300 person company. Not enough to buy a Cray though (http://www.cray.com/blog/crays-mystery-mlb-team-revealed/#comments)
I like how they tied it to the payroll slashing, as though the two were related. HOW MANY PLAYERS DID THE CUBS LOSE OUT ON FOR WANT OF $6MM THEO?!?
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
I thought I had read this before somewhere. (http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10622213/theo-epstein-plans-rebuild-chicago-cubs-blueprint-boston-espn-magazine)
QuoteIt's a big change from the previous regime, whose old-school methods prompted the overhaul. When one of Epstein's hires told scouts they'd be using Microsoft Excel for scheduling, one asked, "Sorry, but what is Excel?"
Quote"Hendry is a great guy, but this was the Stone Age," says a player-development source no longer with the team. "A report would be, 'Plus-plus makeup -- I love this kid.' What does that even mean?" Scouts did not take video of players -- a basic and invaluable task with today's technology. The job of one executive under the computer-shy Hendry consisted of scanning the Internet for relevant stories and distributing printouts twice a day. "Theo finally told him to stop," the source says. "They let the guy go, which is sad, but nobody needs stuff that's three hours old when they have MLB Trade Rumors up on their computers and the app on their phone."
DPD, but there are a lot of quotes in that article that are rather prescient.
QuoteScouting/player development VP Jason McLeod dubbed Baez, Bryant, Almora and Soler the Core Four. If even three of them come close to fulfilling their potential, they'll represent a homegrown Cubs trio unseen since the days of Banks, Williams and Santo. Analysts who project prospects for a living rank the Core Four among baseball's top 30, with Baez and Bryant in the top 15.
Quote...Will it work? Not this year. Barring something unforeseen, the eternal mantra of the Cubs fan -- wait 'til next year -- applies for at least one more summer. "We're not naive, but we do feel we're on the right track," Hoyer says. "We knew it would take time."
Yeah, that's about right.
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 02:04:56 PM
Quote from: Median Desipio Chucklehead on October 16, 2015, 02:04:18 PM
Quote from: SKO on October 16, 2015, 01:54:12 PM
Can we end this thread yet? http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-cubs-emerged-from-the-stone-age-1445014187
QuoteThe office Tom Ricketts inherited when he took over the Chicago Cubs in 2009 was a windowless room beneath the upper deck of Wrigley Field. A closet just outside his door contained all of the team's computer servers, which were covered by a cafeteria tray to shield them from the water that would leak through the ceiling when it rained.
QuoteBut the most dramatic overhaul had more to do with how the team operates than its surroundings. While slashing the major-league payroll, the Cubs spent nearly $6 million on technology upgrades. Those have enabled executives to collect and carve up data on prospective customers and prospective sluggers alike.
When Ricketts hired Theo Epstein as president of baseball operations in late 2011, the Cubs started using technology in ways they never had before. They built a proprietary computer database called Ivy, which houses everything from scouting reports to advanced statistics. They trained scouts to shoot and instantly upload video of amateur players.
These were not revolutionary advances within the industry. But for the Cubs, it felt like the space age. The team's previous information hub was a lone secretary who kept player contracts in file cabinets.
Bah. I'll be impressed when the Cardinals hack them.
As soon as the article mentioned that database I immediately wondered about how strong the password requirements are.
Words and numbers. Nobody could ever guess "cubs1908"
So we finally know the name of the system, since some in the baseball media have been obsessed with finding it out after Theo left Carmine behind in Boston. Great. It's Ivy. Hooray.
Quote from: Sterling Archer on October 16, 2015, 07:20:24 PM
So we finally know the name of the system, since some in the baseball media have been obsessed with finding it out after Theo left Carmine behind in Boston. Great. It's Ivy. Hooray.
Guess we know what they call the IM system.
QuoteWittenmyer reports that president of business operations Crane Kenney has signed a contract extension that will keep him with the organization through at least the 2020 season.
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
Chuck's just going to say some dumb shit about how he should have fired Hendry sooner, the TV deal should be done, Crane Kenney, blah blah fucking blah.
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
Let's see if anybody can take a leak on Opening Night.
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
Ummm, TJ's the one who started this thread.
What sayeth thou, Thomas?
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
How?
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
If we ended every thread where Chuck was wrong, what would we have left?
Quote from: Shooter on December 15, 2015, 06:52:08 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
If we ended every thread where Chuck was wrong, what would we have left?
Nothing. We would have nothing.
Quote from: PANK! on December 15, 2015, 04:28:19 PM
Quote from: R-V on December 15, 2015, 02:36:18 PM
Chuck was wrong about Tom Ricketts. Can we end this thread?
Ummm, TJ's the one who started this thread.
What sayeth thou, Thomas?
The Ricketts family (J. Joseph, Marlene, Pete, Tom, Laura and Todd) are the best Cubs owners in history, and that includes William Wrigley Jr., the gum magnate whose death in the early 1930s derailed what would have been a fantastically successful dynasty. They have kept Crane Kenney off the street, exposed Rahm Emanuel as a petulant jerk, annoyed Chuck, signed off on an extensive rebuilding that most owners would not endure, rebuilt Wrigley Field with mostly private dollars, and invited me to their receptions before Game 3 of the NLDS and NLCS.
Tom Ricketts runs the team with some assist from Laura and a little bit from Todd, who would probably remind all of you that "Fuck, it's silent in here," as he and J. Joseph are busy with their PACs. Pete is busy running Nebraska, and enjoys a 60 percent approval rating, so yes, Chuck is probably wrong.
Tom Ricketts also has bumped into me three times. Once, it was on Waveland as he was pulling his Beamer out onto Clark following a Cubs win over the Dodgers in Sept. 2014 (heretofore known as the "Chris Coghlan game"). Those who might have witnessed that might have wondered why Tom did not take the opportunity to run me over. Next time he bumped into me, I asked him if he's ever been seen in the same room as Ted Cruz, which made me only the 728,000th person to bring that up to him.
(But really:
(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/omaha.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/1/f8/1f8c8465-f395-579b-b368-70fbd7426a3a/53761283cdd3a.image.jpg?resize=300%2C200)
(http://i.dailyherald.com/stories/206/normal/206943.jpg))
As for Todd, he's not as dumb as he looks. Misunderestimate him at your own risk.
On most of the non-baseball stuff, they can kindly get fucked.
However, they're doing great things with the baseball team, so yay
Quote from: Brownie on December 17, 2015, 11:39:52 PM
The Ricketts family (J. Joseph, Marlene, Pete, Tom, Laura and Todd) are the best Cubs owners in history, and that includes William Wrigley Jr., the gum magnate whose death in the early 1930s derailed what would have been a fantastically successful dynasty.
They have a way to go to match up to the cascading triumvirate of Lasker, Weeghman, and Wrigley who modernized the ballpark and won 3 pennants before Bill died.
But I'll give you they are in the top 10 owners in franchise history.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on December 18, 2015, 09:25:27 AM
Quote from: Brownie on December 17, 2015, 11:39:52 PM
The Ricketts family (J. Joseph, Marlene, Pete, Tom, Laura and Todd) are the best Cubs owners in history, and that includes William Wrigley Jr., the gum magnate whose death in the early 1930s derailed what would have been a fantastically successful dynasty.
They have a way to go to match up to the cascading triumvirate of Lasker, Weeghman, and Wrigley who modernized the ballpark and won 3 pennants before Bill died.
But I'll give you they are in the top 10 owners in franchise history.
You're a funny guy, Chuck.
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
Told you this, did he?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
Joe is annoyed Pete appointed so many squishy types to his cabinet. True story.
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
So now we tolerate Todd Ricketts bullshit around here. Does Andy know about this?
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
That's exactly what I was thinking as I read through TJ's fawning bullshit toleration.
What the hell did Danny Heap do to hurt the Cubs?
Quote from: Eli on January 19, 2016, 09:38:46 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
That's exactly what I was thinking as I read through TJ's fawning bullshit toleration.
A couple bike shops are pretty damn impressive, though. I bet Papa Ricketts is punch-proud.
Need Tonker to jump in here and loudly proclaim how awful this thread is.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Full disclosure was given.
Besides Chuck lumping "political contributions" in with "charitable donations" (if he can't discern the difference, I'm sadly disappointed), it's even more puzzling that Chuck would refuse support a candidate or a political cause he believes in. Mike D. showed how so many Presidents going back to Hoover came from humble origins. Would Chuck rather allow the government to be run only by those who are independently wealthy (Rauner, Trump) or those supported by the likes of Michael Madigan (or George Soros or the Koch Brothers or Michael Bloomberg or Todd and Joe Ricketts)?
I'm not sure what costs Chuck's D-30 caucus committee incurred to run in just a portion of Glenview and Northbrook for, what, 3500 votes?
But sure, dump on Todd Ricketts. Go Mets.
Quote from: PANK! on January 19, 2016, 10:11:32 AM
What the hell did Danny Heap do to hurt the Cubs?
I always thought he was a thorn in the Cubs' side, and he looked kind of a like a prick/potential felon. So I looked him up .715 OPS and .265 BA lifetime against the Cubs. But he did most of his damage in 1982 and 1983, years the Cubs finished fifth and the Mets sixth. Screw him. And Matt Harvey.
UPDATE: Heep played with Houston in 1982, so maybe this colored my opinion of him. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/NYN/NYN198306140.shtml)
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Full disclosure was given.
Besides Chuck lumping "political contributions" in with "charitable donations" (if he can't discern the difference, I'm sadly disappointed), it's even more puzzling that Chuck would refuse support a candidate or a political cause he believes in. Mike D. showed how so many Presidents going back to Hoover came from humble origins. Would Chuck rather allow the government to be run only by those who are independently wealthy (Rauner, Trump) or those supported by the likes of Michael Madigan (or George Soros or the Koch Brothers or Michael Bloomberg or Todd and Joe Ricketts)?
I'm not sure what costs Chuck's D-30 caucus committee incurred to run in just a portion of Glenview and Northbrook for, what, 3500 votes?
But sure, dump on Todd Ricketts. Go Mets.
I support political causes I believe in. With votes, not dollars.
And in terms of what costs the D-30 caucus committee incurred, it was dead even with the effort Todd gave to get where he got: Nada.
I did spend my own money on my own campaign in 2009 for re-election. Not a penny of mine, or anyone elses, before or since.
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Full disclosure was given.
Besides Chuck lumping "political contributions" in with "charitable donations" (if he can't discern the difference, I'm sadly disappointed), it's even more puzzling that Chuck would refuse support a candidate or a political cause he believes in. Mike D. showed how so many Presidents going back to Hoover came from humble origins. Would Chuck rather allow the government to be run only by those who are independently wealthy (Rauner, Trump) or those supported by the likes of Michael Madigan (or George Soros or the Koch Brothers or Michael Bloomberg or Todd and Joe Ricketts)?
I'm not sure what costs Chuck's D-30 caucus committee incurred to run in just a portion of Glenview and Northbrook for, what, 3500 votes?
But sure, dump on Todd Ricketts. Go Mets.
Wait, did you suggest that contributions to PACs are charitable in nature and not political?
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 01:45:23 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Full disclosure was given.
Besides Chuck lumping "political contributions" in with "charitable donations" (if he can't discern the difference, I'm sadly disappointed), it's even more puzzling that Chuck would refuse support a candidate or a political cause he believes in. Mike D. showed how so many Presidents going back to Hoover came from humble origins. Would Chuck rather allow the government to be run only by those who are independently wealthy (Rauner, Trump) or those supported by the likes of Michael Madigan (or George Soros or the Koch Brothers or Michael Bloomberg or Todd and Joe Ricketts)?
I'm not sure what costs Chuck's D-30 caucus committee incurred to run in just a portion of Glenview and Northbrook for, what, 3500 votes?
But sure, dump on Todd Ricketts. Go Mets.
I support political causes I believe in. With votes, not dollars.
And in terms of what costs the D-30 caucus committee incurred, it was dead even with the effort Todd gave to get where he got: Nada.
I did spend my own money on my own campaign in 2009 for re-election. Not a penny of mine, or anyone elses, before or since.
So offices held only by those who can afford it? No paid staff, no travel expenses, no advertising, no signage, no compliance costs (that can easily cost five figures for a small Congressional campaign, by the way), no legal costs (ditto), no renting of space to host an event in which people can meet said candidate?
Again, Chuck, you can cover your D-30 area with your bicycle. How much did your state representative spend to win District 17 last year? CD-10 might be a bit of an anomaly because it is a swing district, but what do you think it costs Nancy Rotering, who has little name recognition outside of Highland Park, to get her name out there and differentiate herself from a former Congressman running opposite her (Brad Schneider)? Then the winner of the primary has to get his or her message out and cut through the noise of all the other campaigns (and life) going on and compete against Bob Dold, a sitting Congressman.
Fact is, it all costs money. And the fact is, what constitutes a donation, monetary or in-kind (and there's no discernment there)?
Todd Ricketts (https://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.php?sort=N&name=Ricketts&state=IL&zip=&employ=&cand=&soft=&cycle=All) actually gives relatively very little directly to campaigns. His PACs work independently, running issue ads, direct mail pieces, etc. for or against someone.
Quote from: Yeti on January 19, 2016, 01:50:09 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Full disclosure was given.
Besides Chuck lumping "political contributions" in with "charitable donations" (if he can't discern the difference, I'm sadly disappointed), it's even more puzzling that Chuck would refuse support a candidate or a political cause he believes in. Mike D. showed how so many Presidents going back to Hoover came from humble origins. Would Chuck rather allow the government to be run only by those who are independently wealthy (Rauner, Trump) or those supported by the likes of Michael Madigan (or George Soros or the Koch Brothers or Michael Bloomberg or Todd and Joe Ricketts)?
I'm not sure what costs Chuck's D-30 caucus committee incurred to run in just a portion of Glenview and Northbrook for, what, 3500 votes?
But sure, dump on Todd Ricketts. Go Mets.
Wait, did you suggest that contributions to PACs are charitable in nature and not political?
Chuck suggested that, not me.
Paging Tonker
Quote from: Slaky on January 19, 2016, 02:18:31 PM
Paging Tonker
I think I'm kind of lost in this thread and I'm not sure I want to dig out.
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 02:08:10 PM
but what do you think it costs Nancy Rotering, who has little name recognition outside of Highland Park, to get her name out there and differentiate herself from a former Congressman running opposite her (Brad Schneider)? Then the winner of the primary has to get his or her message out and cut through the noise of all the other campaigns (and life) going on and compete against Bob Dold, a sitting Congressman.
Fact is, it all costs money.
Probably over $1.5mm per campaign. So what. Go ahead and spend it. You ain't getting mine to help elect a backbencher. Or even a front bencher.
I'll give Trump this, he's spent $1,909,577 of his own money (https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/candidate.php?id=N00023864) and only raised $3,910,228 from contributors. 33% self financed. $-0- from PACs. Good for him. He's right: He's in the pocket of no one other than himself.
Bet he's spent more of his own money than Rotering, Schneider or Dold have and will in all their campaigns combined.
How much has Dold gotten for pledging his fealty to Grover Norquist? Does Norquist even live in IL-10? Oh yeah... I wonder how much Schneider got for doing the same to Pelosi? Or Rotering for kissing Durbin's toes?
Hello! I like beer, and boobs.
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2016, 02:47:30 PM
Hello! I like beer, and boobs.
That qualifies you to be a congressman. But for wide stance senators.
Quote from: Tonker on January 19, 2016, 02:47:30 PM
Hello! I like beer, and boobs.
Well then, welcome to Barstool Sports!
Quote from: Slaky on January 19, 2016, 01:21:28 PM
Need Tonker to jump in here and loudly proclaim how awful this thread is.
Is that what he's become? The angry old man, yelling at clouds?
Quote from: Canadouche on January 19, 2016, 03:33:59 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 19, 2016, 01:21:28 PM
Need Tonker to jump in here and loudly proclaim how awful this thread is.
Is that what he's become? The angry old man, yelling at clouds?
Become?
Quote from: Canadouche on January 19, 2016, 03:33:59 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 19, 2016, 01:21:28 PM
Need Tonker to jump in here and loudly proclaim how awful this thread is.
Is that what he's become? The angry old man, yelling at clouds?
Not until he pays all the back dues that he owes.
Quote from: CBStew on January 19, 2016, 03:56:07 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on January 19, 2016, 03:33:59 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 19, 2016, 01:21:28 PM
Need Tonker to jump in here and loudly proclaim how awful this thread is.
Is that what he's become? The angry old man, yelling at clouds?
Not until he pays all the back dues that he owes.
Maybe he should start a PAC?
Quote from: Bort on January 19, 2016, 04:20:47 PM
Quote from: CBStew on January 19, 2016, 03:56:07 PM
Quote from: Canadouche on January 19, 2016, 03:33:59 PM
Quote from: Slaky on January 19, 2016, 01:21:28 PM
Need Tonker to jump in here and loudly proclaim how awful this thread is.
Is that what he's become? The angry old man, yelling at clouds?
Not until he pays all the back dues that he owes.
Maybe he should start a PAC?
He's a foreign national. Don't think that's allowed.
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 02:08:47 PM
Quote from: Yeti on January 19, 2016, 01:50:09 PM
Quote from: Brownie on January 19, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 19, 2016, 09:02:53 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 18, 2016, 12:20:38 PM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 12:09:18 PM
Quote from: CT III on January 18, 2016, 11:21:53 AM
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on January 18, 2016, 08:35:41 AM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 18, 2016, 12:32:34 AM
Quote from: Brownie on January 17, 2016, 10:11:23 PM
Quote from: Saul Goodman on January 17, 2016, 02:21:25 PM
Todd's gonna Todd. (http://nypost.com/2016/01/16/cubs-co-owner-unloads-on-matt-harvey-obnoxious-mets-fans/)
Fuck the Mets. Sylvie and Todd are OK by me.
If you don't enjoy watching the Mets lose, there's something wrong with you.
That's fine for fans but it sounded pretty unprofessional for an owner.
It sounded dead on for a guy whose dad has major plans for all his kids, but only runs a bike shop.
It's almost like parents shouldn't plan out their kids lives in advance for them.
Pretty sure only Pete is living up to dad's standards.
To be fair, Todd has held a few executive positions with TD Ameritrade along with a couple other financial firms. (http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=359116&privcapId=359086) He also owns a couple bike shops, is a director of a Major League Baseball team, runs a couple PACs, and dabbles in VC along with his wife, who also runs a couple non-profits. In other words, he does roughly what Chuck would be doing if Chuck was the sole jackpot Powerball winner last week.
And Todd is not ashamed to admit he hates the New York Mets, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Bud fucking Harrelson, Danny Goddam Heap, Darryl Motherfucking Strawberry, David Wright and the rest of them. Go get 'em, Todd!
...and he gives his dad's money to political candidates TJ likes. Full disclosure.
And you'd never see me giving money to any politician not named Chuck Gitles. Given I'm never running for anything ever again, pretty sure all my future charitable donations are going to deserving people, not wannabe reality TV stars who want a public paycheck to rant and rail and do nothing.
Full disclosure was given.
Besides Chuck lumping "political contributions" in with "charitable donations" (if he can't discern the difference, I'm sadly disappointed), it's even more puzzling that Chuck would refuse support a candidate or a political cause he believes in. Mike D. showed how so many Presidents going back to Hoover came from humble origins. Would Chuck rather allow the government to be run only by those who are independently wealthy (Rauner, Trump) or those supported by the likes of Michael Madigan (or George Soros or the Koch Brothers or Michael Bloomberg or Todd and Joe Ricketts)?
I'm not sure what costs Chuck's D-30 caucus committee incurred to run in just a portion of Glenview and Northbrook for, what, 3500 votes?
But sure, dump on Todd Ricketts. Go Mets.
Wait, did you suggest that contributions to PACs are charitable in nature and not political?
Chuck suggested that, not me.
Sorry, when I read yours, I saw your original bolded part.
It's Secretary of Commerce Todd or Ambassador to Canada Todd to you.
Quote from: Brownie on November 19, 2016, 08:00:09 PM
It's Secretary of Commerce Todd or Ambassador to Canada Todd to you.
NVRTRMP until it serves them.
Quote from: Brownie on November 19, 2016, 08:00:09 PM
It's Secretary of Commerce Todd or Ambassador to Canada Todd to you.
But I thought the Cubs sucked and were terribly run.
Besides, he'll be Secretary of Ending Spending (annual budget: 2.3 billion).
Joe Ricketts:
Shut down your unprofitable news site and layoff 115 people? Understandable.
Delete the archives of their work a week after they vote to unionize which only serves to make it harder for your employees to find a new job? Asswipe.
Quote from: Chuck to Chuck on November 02, 2017, 05:51:07 PM
Joe Ricketts:
Shut down your unprofitable news site and layoff 115 people? Understandable.
Delete the archives of their work a week after they vote to unionize which only serves to make it harder for your employees to find a new job? Asswipe.
Yeah. That was an absolute dick move.
Deadspin ranks the Ricketts among the top idiots of the year:
"Picking any MLB owner over another one for this esteemed honor is truly sticking your hand in a pile of goo and trying to guess this chunk might be. But the Ricketts family has been particularly foul in every way, from incompetence to malice to their tightwad handling of the Cubs. They rolled out their new network along with societal pox Sinclair, and it had all the production value and creativity of a college station at 3am. They tried to claim that 70% of their revenue was lost thanks to having no fans. They?ve spent two years not adding to their contending team, and crying poor and threatening to strip it down because they can?t afford it, even though they laugh about their ballpark and neighborhood improvements running $500 million over budget. One of them was the fundraising chair for Donald Trump. They got landmark status for Wrigley which will get them tens of millions in tax breaks, and yet still held the city of Chicago up for a delay on a $250,000 payment on minor improvements on the property around Wrigley until 2024. They are the crystalized symbol of modern sports wealth?incompetence feeling entitled thanks to money they had nothing to do with earning and utterly shocked that the majority don?t see the world the way they do, and yet facing no consequences for any of it."
Quote from: CBStew on January 07, 2021, 09:09:58 PM
Deadspin ranks the Ricketts among the top idiots of the year:
"They rolled out their new network along with societal pox Sinclair, and it had all the production value and creativity of a college station at 3am.
I've gotten WHPK to play "Halifax" by the Hampton Grease Band around that hour. They win.
It's pretty impressive how quickly they flushed all the goodwill that came from ending a 108 year World Series drought. If they sold the team today, there would be celebrations all over the city.
Quote from: Quality Start Machine on January 15, 2021, 01:13:18 PM
It's pretty impressive how quickly they flushed all the goodwill that came from ending a 108 year World Series drought. If they sold the team today, there would be celebrations all over the city.
That's the problem with promising a perennial contender. People get pissed when you stop trying to contend.