2015 MLB Season Thread

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

From a marketing perspective, Wrigley is a key part of the Cubs brand.

It's not unlike the Brewers and tailgating. Certainly an urban stadium would have helped the city more, but in the long run, a big part of the Brewers brand is the parking lot. They need to keep the stadium where it was at.

Anybody that argues that the Cubs should have moved and built a different stadium doesn't understand branding, marketing, or long term revenue potential.

[MU82]

From a marketing perspective, Wrigley is a key part of the Cubs brand.

It's not unlike the Brewers and tailgating. Certainly an urban stadium would have helped the city more, but in the long run, a big part of the Brewers brand is the parking lot. They need to keep the stadium where it was at.

Anybody that argues that the Cubs should have moved and built a different stadium doesn't understand branding, marketing, or long term revenue potential.

Several years ago, when the Cubs were arguing constantly with the rooftop owners and city honchos who wouldn't even let them put their own money into keeping up the ballpark, a Chicago columnist wrote an intriguing piece about the possibility of the Cubs re-creating Wrigley somewhere in an easy-to-reach northern suburb.

They could have built an almost exact replica of Wrigley, but with all the modern conveniences. They could have surrounded the property with a neighborhood full of bars, restaurants, gift shops and, yes, rooftop decks. Parking facilities, too. And they could have owned it all, keeping every cent of revenue for themselves.

It's hard to believe Cubbie fans -- most of whom are indoctrinated at birth -- wouldn't have embraced such a facility.

I mean, Cubbie fans have been duped for generations into rooting for a team that  has never won a pennant in their lifetimes or a championship in their fathers' (and sometimes grandfathers') lifetimes. Lots of Baby Boomers became Cubbie fans long before Wrigley was seen as "cool." As recently as 1997, their attendance was below the NL average.

[GGGG]

Pakuni, I don't disagree with the history and why the Cubs are popular now.

I think that if the Cubs decided to move to Northbrook tomorrow, that the value of the television contract would be the most significant revenue source.

But I do think that you and Canned are right about Wrigley and the brand.

[JWags85]

Several years ago, when the Cubs were arguing constantly with the rooftop owners and city honchos who wouldn't even let them put their own money into keeping up the ballpark, a Chicago columnist wrote an intriguing piece about the possibility of the Cubs re-creating Wrigley somewhere in an easy-to-reach northern suburb.

They could have built an almost exact replica of Wrigley, but with all the modern conveniences. They could have surrounded the property with a neighborhood full of bars, restaurants, gift shops and, yes, rooftop decks. Parking facilities, too. And they could have owned it all, keeping every cent of revenue for themselves.

It's hard to believe Cubbie fans -- most of whom are indoctrinated at birth -- wouldn't have embraced such a facility.

I mean, Cubbie fans have been duped for generations into rooting for a team that  has never won a pennant in their lifetimes or a championship in their fathers' (and sometimes grandfathers') lifetimes. Lots of Baby Boomers became Cubbie fans long before Wrigley was seen as "cool." As recently as 1997, their attendance was below the NL average.

But what burb?  Evanston?  The Metra is nice but if its not off the CTA, it makes things harder.  Easy access is key to replicate the experience.  And again thats not a small area of space for a whole crafted neighborhood.

I know that WGN was a big piece of crafting my fanship as a kid.  Similar to the Braves and TBS all over the South.

[MU82]

But what burb?  Evanston?  The Metra is nice but if its not off the CTA, it makes things harder.  Easy access is key to replicate the experience.  And again thats not a small area of space for a whole crafted neighborhood.

I know that WGN was a big piece of crafting my fanship as a kid.  Similar to the Braves and TBS all over the South.

I can't remember the examples that columnist gave. Back then, you maybe could have found the space in a Northbrook or Glenview or Highland Park. Maybe not any more.

It's moot now, anyway. Current management is putting zillions into Wrigley. They're not going anywhere, certainly not in my lifetime.

[RushmoreAcademy]

I agree with not wanting to hold on to a losing culture. That's how I justify the supporting of all the renovations of the field.   Why preserve a poor history.  But moving it to the burbs goes beyond that.  It's just a terrible idea marketing wise. They are trying to wipe away years of losing, but that doesn't mean making more dumb decisions.

[WI inferiority Complexes]

Lots of Baby Boomers became Cubbie fans long before Wrigley was seen as "cool." As recently as 1997, their attendance was below the NL average.

It's starting to be a long time since going to a Cubs game wasn't considered "cool." 1997 saw the Cubs start 0-14, and they still outdrew over half of the NL teams, (they were below the average largely due to record-breaking crowds in Colorado and a one-year popularity of the Marlins).

The Cubs popularity really took off in 1984; since then the only years they were below the NL average were the terrible 1997, and the last-place, final season before the installation of lights (1987).

[TallTitan34]

The Cubs have a huge fanbase because of WGN and it's national reach.  Not because of Wrigley Field.

Colorado used to have a large Cubs fandom before the Rockies came.  That was because they could see all of the games on WGN; not because of Wrigley Field.  Why would they care about the atmosphere at a park hundred of miles away that they likely would rarely if ever go to?

Sure there are people that go to Wrigley just to drink and party but the same can be said about Brewer fans who just go to games to tailgate in the parking lot.

[GGGG]

The Cubs have a huge fanbase because of WGN and it's national reach.  Not because of Wrigley Field.

Colorado used to have a large Cubs fandom before the Rockies came.  That was because they could see all of the games on WGN; not because of Wrigley Field.  Why would they care about the atmosphere at a park hundred of miles away that they likely would rarely if ever go to?

Sure there are people that go to Wrigley just to drink and party but the same can be said about Brewer fans who just go to games to tailgate in the parking lot.

But I am not sure that a team is tied as an identity more to its ballpark than the Cubs or Red Sox.  And I do think that means something distinct.

I think the only team in the NFL that can remotely mentioned in the same manner are the Packers.  Now if the Packers hadn't gotten the Brown County referendum approved 15 years ago, and moved to Menomonee Falls or something, would they still be popular?  Most certainly.  But something would be lost.

[TallTitan34]

I agree the Cubs, Red Sox, and Packers all are closely tied to their stadium, but if the Yankees can move from Yankee Stadium, the Packers, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. can move from their venues.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Wrigley is PART of the brand, but not the ONLY part.

Certainly the Cubs could move someplace else, win a lot, and be fine.

McDonald's could eliminate the Big Mac, and they would still sell a ton of food... but the Big Mac is a key part of their entire branding. Losing that is not inconsequential.

What about MU? Everybody LOVES the Warrior name, but how much has it actually hurt MU? No way to know for sure, but maybe it hasn't hurt as much as we all think?

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I agree the Cubs, Red Sox, and Packers all are closely tied to their stadium, but if the Yankees can move from Yankee Stadium, the Packers, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. can move from their venues.

If somehow they could build in the same vicinity, I think you're right.

But, moving them out to Downer's Grove would definitely change the vibe.

[BrewCity83]

What about MU? Everybody LOVES the Warrior name, but how much has it actually hurt MU? No way to know for sure, but maybe it hasn't hurt as much as we all think?

Or, maybe it has hurt more than we all think....

[Pakuni]

I agree the Cubs, Red Sox, and Packers all are closely tied to their stadium, but if the Yankees can move from Yankee Stadium, the Packers, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. can move from their venues.

Yes, the Cubs absolutely could move away from Wrigley and still be successful.
But why would they? Wrigley is a huge asset to them, a huge part of the team's identity and its popularity. What do they gain by throwing that away?

My guess is that this is something the Ricketts have looked at, and probably the Tribune Company before them, and both decided that the benefits Wrigley offers for their brand (and bottom line)easily  outweigh whatever benefits they'd get from moving to a new ballpark with more modern amenities. The fact that they're pouring millions into renovating Wrigley rather than building something new elsewhere is a pretty good indication they've reached that conclusion.

[WI inferiority Complexes]

Colorado used to have a large Cubs fandom before the Rockies came.  That was because they could see all of the games on WGN; not because of Wrigley Field.  Why would they care about the atmosphere at a park hundred of miles away that they likely would rarely if ever go to

I know this sounds strange, but a day game at Wrigley has always looked awesome on TV. I watch nothing but Extra Innings all summer long, and some stadiums translate to television better than others.

[Pakuni]

The Cubs have a huge fanbase because of WGN and it's national reach.  Not because of Wrigley Field.

Colorado used to have a large Cubs fandom before the Rockies came.  That was because they could see all of the games on WGN; not because of Wrigley Field.  Why would they care about the atmosphere at a park hundred of miles away that they likely would rarely if ever go to?

Sure there are people that go to Wrigley just to drink and party but the same can be said about Brewer fans who just go to games to tailgate in the parking lot.

The same people could have seen the the Braves play on TBS (and not in the middle of the afternoon, but at times when people actually were home watching TV). They'd have seen a much more interesting team that won consistently with Hall of Fame players and coaches.
So what made them tune into the Cubs instead?

[Benny B]

If somehow they could build in the same vicinity, I think you're right.

But, moving them out to Downer's Grove would definitely change the vibe.

Not as much as if you moved it to Orland.

 

[WI inferiority Complexes]

The same people could have seen the the Braves play on TBS (and not in the middle of the afternoon, but at times when people actually were home watching TV). They'd have seen a much more interesting team that won consistently with Hall of Fame players and coaches.
So what made them tune into the Cubs instead?

I think you answered that yourself. The Cubs were on from 1:00-4:00 during the week. A lot of people chose to watch the Cubs because it was better background noise than Sally Jesse Raphael.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

I agree the Cubs, Red Sox, and Packers all are closely tied to their stadium, but if the Yankees can move from Yankee Stadium, the Packers, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. can move from their venues.

The Yankees did build a new stadium but they didn't really move - I believe the new stadium was built right next to the old one.  That's a key and distinct difference. 

[MU82]

I know this sounds strange, but a day game at Wrigley has always looked awesome on TV. I watch nothing but Extra Innings all summer long, and some stadiums translate to television better than others.

Doesn't sound strange at all. A day game at Wrigley looks awesome in person, too! And I'm a non-Cubbie fan saying that.

Even when the park was completely falling apart and they had to put up nets to catch the concrete falling from the upper deck, the actual field and environs were awesome to behold. Still is, though I really do think the replay board was unnecessary. I doubt it results in one extra fan coming to the park.

[GGGG]

Doesn't sound strange at all. A day game at Wrigley looks awesome in person, too! And I'm a non-Cubbie fan saying that.

Even when the park was completely falling apart and they had to put up nets to catch the concrete falling from the upper deck, the actual field and environs were awesome to behold. Still is, though I really do think the replay board was unnecessary. I doubt it results in one extra fan coming to the park.

I have been there three times.  It was nice.  But if given a choice between Wrigley and Miller Park, I'm going to choose the latter.  Probably in part because of the Brewers, but also I like to have leg room and the assurance that the game will go on rain or shine.

[brandx]

The same people could have seen the the Braves play on TBS (and not in the middle of the afternoon, but at times when people actually were home watching TV). They'd have seen a much more interesting team that won consistently with Hall of Fame players and coaches.
So what made them tune into the Cubs instead?

The Cubs were on every day long before TBS came along.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Doesn't sound strange at all. A day game at Wrigley looks awesome in person, too! And I'm a non-Cubbie fan saying that.

Even when the park was completely falling apart and they had to put up nets to catch the concrete falling from the upper deck, the actual field and environs were awesome to behold. Still is, though I really do think the replay board was unnecessary. I doubt it results in one extra fan coming to the park.

I don't think the jumbotron will have a material impact on attendance (the quality of the team will) but it will add to the fan experience.  The jumbotron is necessary for the added revenue it will bring in. 

[Pakuni]

The Cubs were on every day long before TBS came along.

TBS began broadcasting the Braves in 1972 and went cable in 1976.
WGN went cable in 1978.

[brandx]

TBS began broadcasting the Braves in 1972 and went cable in 1976.
WGN went cable in 1978.

Misunderstanding.

I was talking about being on WGN every day - not just after they went to cable.