Attendance is Actually up 8.1%

[Dick Allen]

I've posted it is still important but no longer makes or breaks a franchise. I believe that to be correct. I never stated it doesn't matter.

However, it is significant money. The Cubs on average draw about 18k more than the White Sox. Almost 1.5 million over the course of a season. Even if you conservatively put that at $50 a head, it's an additional $75 million, which, if you think the Sox are broken, and from your posts I think that would be a safe assumption, it definitely would help fix it. Considering the discrepancy in ticket prices, the Cubs probably will pull in close to $100 million more than the White Sox this year through ticket sales. It's is still important, not only for now, but the future. Once people stop going to games and find alternative things to do with their time and other ways to spend their entertainment funds, it can take a long time to get them back.

 

The White Sox are wise to keep their prices low for now. It will be interesting to see how much success they will need to pull the plug on things like family Sunday.

[southsider2k5]

However, it is significant money. The Cubs on average draw about 18k more than the White Sox. Almost 1.5 million over the course of a season. Even if you conservatively put that at $50 a head, it's an additional $75 million, which, if you think the Sox are broken, and from your posts I think that would be a safe assumption, it definitely would help fix it. Considering the discrepancy in ticket prices, the Cubs probably will pull in close to $100 million more than the White Sox this year through ticket sales. It's is still important, not only for now, but the future. Once people stop going to games and find alternative things to do with their time and other ways to spend their entertainment funds, it can take a long time to get them back.

 

The White Sox are wise to keep their prices low for now. It will be interesting to see how much success they will need to pull the plug on things like family Sunday.

 

Again that is $50 - 100 million extra dollars the Cubs get because their fans show up.

[iamshack]

Again that is $50 - 100 million extra dollars the Cubs get because their fans show up.

Great.

 

However, the Cubs are a very unique case that the White Sox are very unlikely to realize at any time in the near future. Continuing to mention them in relation to the White Sox' attendance situation is a waste of time and energy.

 

The good thing is, the fans have responded to the new direction, and presumably others will come back if things continue to progress on the field.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

Great.

 

However, the Cubs are a very unique case that the White Sox are very unlikely to realize at any time in the near future. Continuing to mention them in relation to the White Sox' attendance situation is a waste of time and energy.

 

The good thing is, the fans have responded to the new direction, and presumably others will come back if things continue to progress on the field.

 

Which is why the idea of viewing them as a "large market team" is such a waste of time. They are not anywhere near this grouping, and never will be.

[Thad Bosley]

But they are trying to fix it and yet you're still b****ing. Look, you have some legitimate points, but you repeat them over and over again despite the team doing exactly what you want them to do. This rebuild is going to be a lengthy process and you really need to give them time to execute on it before popping off with the same complaints ad nauseam.

So you have no skepticism whatsoever in the "they"/"them" part of the "trying to fix it" equation? That's really my main point. You have the same management team being led by the same owner (who once brought you Ken Harrelson as GM) who broke this thing in the first place but who are now running the "lengthy process" of "trying to fix it". Hmmmm...now why would anyone be skeptical or critical of that?

 

Look, what I want and what anyone who visits this site wants is winning Chicago White Sox baseball. We don't have that now, we haven't had it in quite some time, and it's uncertain at the moment as to when we'll see it again. This predicament is due to ineffective management of this organization, starting with the owner. Until the situation changes, until the results on the field change, be it due to the current management finally figuring it out and getting it right, or a new regime coming in and righting the ship, you should expect to continue to hear voices of dissent. It's only natural. If anything, you should feel lucky you don't read more complaints, quite frankly.

[Thad Bosley]

Which is why the idea of viewing them as a "large market team" is such a waste of time. They are not anywhere near this grouping, and never will be.

Utter nonsense. The team resides in Chicago. That is a large market. The Sox don't operate as a large market team because of ineffective ownership. I know it pains you to be told that, but that is the truth, and quite frankly, it should be pretty obvious by now.

[Lip Man 1]

However, it is significant money. The Cubs on average draw about 18k more than the White Sox. Almost 1.5 million over the course of a season. Even if you conservatively put that at $50 a head, it's an additional $75 million, which, if you think the Sox are broken, and from your posts I think that would be a safe assumption, it definitely would help fix it. Considering the discrepancy in ticket prices, the Cubs probably will pull in close to $100 million more than the White Sox this year through ticket sales. It's is still important, not only for now, but the future. Once people stop going to games and find alternative things to do with their time and other ways to spend their entertainment funds, it can take a long time to get them back.

 

The White Sox are wise to keep their prices low for now. It will be interesting to see how much success they will need to pull the plug on things like family Sunday.

 

I think the Sox have been broken for a decade but they are taking proactive steps to try to solve matters. Given the limitations both self imposed and outside of their control this was the wisest course of action they could take.

 

My point though is in reply to the original poster that the Sox will not go bankrupt tomorrow if they "only" draw 1.5 million.

 

Because of the massive and different revenue streams for MLB they are fine financially. Now throw in what is arguably the best stadium deal in all of MLB and the last thing any fan has to worry about is their financial solvency.

 

When (if) they start winning again attendance will be fine. History shows with this franchise you have to win for fans to come out. It takes time but eventually they do.

 

Now if you want to KEEP fans coming out you have to win consistently, which the Sox with rare exceptions (1951-1967, 1981-1983, 2000-2006) have not done.

Edited July 4, 2017 by Lip Man 1

[Dick Allen]

I think the Sox have been broken for a decade but they are taking proactive steps to try to solve matters. Given the limitations both self imposed and outside of their control this was the wisest course of action they could take.

 

My point though is in reply to the original poster that the Sox will not go bankrupt tomorrow if they "only" draw 1.5 million.

 

Because of the massive and different revenue streams for MLB they are fine financially. Now throw in what is arguably the best stadium deal in all of MLB and the last thing any fan has to worry about is their financial solvency.

 

When (if) they start winning again attendance will be fine. History shows with this franchise you have to win for fans to come out. It takes time but eventually they do.

 

Now if you want to KEEP fans coming out you have to win consistently, which the Sox with rare exceptions (1951-1967, 1981-1983, 2000-2006) have not done.

But to dismiss attendance is crazy. In 2012 the White Sox were in first place most of the season, and came in 24th in attendance. The Cubs lost 101 games and averaged 36k a game. There are a lot of things the Cubs were able to do with their rebuild that other teams like the White Sox will not. I know if you and Thad Bosley were running the team there would be a $300 million payroll and $5 face value seats right behind the dugout with almost free beer for everyone, and the team would undoubtedly make the World Series more often than not, but reality says that doesn't happen.

[southsider2k5]

Utter nonsense. The team resides in Chicago. That is a large market. The Sox don't operate as a large market team because of ineffective ownership. I know it pains you to be told that, but that is the truth, and quite frankly, it should be pretty obvious by now.

 

This is Trumpian fantasy. Existing in a big market does not make you a big market team. The White Sox fan base is a fraction of the Cubs. The Cubs own Chicago. Anyone who doesn't get that is delusional or irrationally angry.

[SonofaRoache]

This is Trumpian fantasy. Existing in a big market does not make you a big market team. The White Sox fan base is a fraction of the Cubs. The Cubs own Chicago. Anyone who doesn't get that is delusional or irrationally angry.

 

 

Chicago is large enough where even if what you say is correct, the Sox will have more fans than most teams.

[Thad Bosley]

This is Trumpian fantasy. Existing in a big market does not make you a big market team. The White Sox fan base is a fraction of the Cubs. The Cubs own Chicago. Anyone who doesn't get that is delusional or irrationally angry.

Existing in a big market SHOULD make you a big market team. That's a no-brainer, and only an irrational angry mindset would not allow one to reach this easy conclusion.

 

It's the embarrassingly ineffective management of the past several decades that has precluded this organization from taking advantage of the great market that is Chicago.

[SCCWS]

Existing in a big market SHOULD make you a big market team. That's a no-brainer, and only an irrational angry mindset would not allow one to reach this easy conclusion.

 

It's the embarrassingly ineffective management of the past several decades that has precluded this organization from taking advantage of the great market that is Chicago.

 

Although a little dated, I think this article summarizes the market pretty well. It classifies the White Sox as the highest rated mid-market.

 

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/961412-...-by-market-size

[Chicago White Sox]

Although a little dated, I think this article summarizes the market pretty well. It classifies the White Sox as the highest rated mid-market.

 

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/961412-...-by-market-size

While I'm not sure I agree with that article's write-up, I do think of us a high-end mid-market club. Just being in Chicago provides us with some advantages in terms of media deals despite only a fraction of the city being diehard fans. Ultimately the Cubs will always hold us back from being a true big market franchise. Sure, there's theoretically the potential for us to radically increase our share of the market, but so much would have to happen (starting with a new stadium on the lake or in the burbs) that it's incredibly unlikely to happen anytime soon. Us "acting like a big market club" (i.e. spending ridiculously) will not turn us into one overnight despite what Thad Bosley believes.

[Eminor3rd]

Existing in a big market SHOULD make you a big market team. That's a no-brainer, and only an irrational angry mindset would not allow one to reach this easy conclusion.

 

It's the embarrassingly ineffective management of the past several decades that has precluded this organization from taking advantage of the great market that is Chicago.

 

Chicago Metro population = 9,512,999

 

Ok, let's assume the Cubs and White Sox can each capture half the market on average:

 

Chicago Metro population divided by 2 = 4,756,500

 

Ok, now let's compare that to other market sizes:

 

Atlanta = 5,710,795

San Diego = 3,263,000

Dallas/Ft. Worth = 6,426,214

Seattle = 3,733,580

Washington DC = 6,097,684

Phoenix = 4,574,531

Miami = 5,008,000

 

The White Sox are a mid-market team because, although Chicago is a large market by itself, the market is divided by additional competition, whereas most other baseball markets are not.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

Chicago Metro population = 9,512,999

 

Ok, let's assume the Cubs and White Sox can each capture half the market on average:

 

Chicago Metro population divided by 2 = 4,756,500

 

Ok, now let's compare that to other market sizes:

 

Atlanta = 5,710,795

San Diego = 3,263,000

Dallas/Ft. Worth = 6,426,214

Seattle = 3,733,580

Washington DC = 6,097,684

Phoenix = 4,574,531

Miami = 5,008,000

 

The White Sox are a mid-market team because, although Chicago is a large market by itself, the market is divided by additional competition, whereas most other baseball markets are not.

 

Chicago is the nations smallest multiple team market.

 

And that is with the crazy assumption that the Sox and Cubs evenly share Chicago. Realistically it is probably more like 2/3 to 1/3.

[southsider2k5]

Existing in a big market SHOULD make you a big market team. That's a no-brainer, and only an irrational angry mindset would not allow one to reach this easy conclusion.

 

It's the embarrassingly ineffective management of the past several decades that has precluded this organization from taking advantage of the great market that is Chicago.

 

If you can get past the most simple of concepts, you could understand that it is a little more complex than what you want it to be to fit your grudge.

[Chicago White Sox]

Chicago Metro population = 9,512,999

 

Ok, let's assume the Cubs and White Sox can each capture half the market on average:

 

Chicago Metro population divided by 2 = 4,756,500

 

Ok, now let's compare that to other market sizes:

 

Atlanta = 5,710,795

San Diego = 3,263,000

Dallas/Ft. Worth = 6,426,214

Seattle = 3,733,580

Washington DC = 6,097,684

Phoenix = 4,574,531

Miami = 5,008,000

 

The White Sox are a mid-market team because, although Chicago is a large market by itself, the market is divided by additional competition, whereas most other baseball markets are not.

I'm not sure it's that simple though. Some people watch and support both teams. There are definitely benefits to having access to 9.5M people, even if the hardcore fanbase is split across two teams. And your list above represents some of the largest markets in this country. So unless you only consider L.A. & New York large markets, half of Chicago should no doubt be included in that group as well. It's the Cubs factor and their draw with casuals that really prevents us from being in that group.

[Eminor3rd]

I'm not sure it's that simple though. Some people watch and support both teams. There are definitely benefits to having access to 9.5M people, even if the hardcore fanbase is split across two teams. And your list above represents some of the largest markets in this country. So unless you only consider L.A. & New York large markets, half of Chicago should no doubt be included in that group as well. It's the Cubs factor and their draw with casuals that really prevents us from being in that group.

 

You're right, it isn't that simple. But it illustrates the magnitude of the effect of the market being split by two teams, which si the point that Thad Bosley is trying to deflect. While you're correct that SOME people watch both, the overwhelming majority of consumers in the market are going to spend the bulk of their purchasing dollars consuming one of the two teams.

 

The examples I provided are the markets of the Rangers, Mariners, Nationals, Braves, Padres, Diamondbacks, and the Marlins, which are just some random teams off the top of my head that I think most would consider to be "mid-market" teams.

[Dick Allen]

One thing would be to look at all time top attendance figures. You can blame JR all you want but there are only 5 teams that have an all time top attendance mark lower than the White Sox.

 

That to me indicates they are not in reality a large market team. Even when everything goes right, the people don't come out like they do under similar circumstances in other cities.

[Iwritecode]

One thing would be to look at all time top attendance figures. You can blame JR all you want but there are only 5 teams that have an all time top attendance mark lower than the White Sox.

 

That to me indicates they are not in reality a large market team. Even when everything goes right, the people don't come out like they do under similar circumstances in other cities.

 

Actually, there are 6. The A's, Nationals, Royals, Reds, Rays and Pirates. What's interesting in looking through all of them individually, is that most of them set their all-time attendance records in a year where one of the following happened.

 

1) They had 2 or more consecutive playoff appearances in the years prior. Or in the case of the 2011 Giants, they were in the middle of an every other year WS championship streak.

 

2) It was their first year of existence. The 1993 Marlins and Rockies. The 1998 Rays, The 2005 Nationals.

 

3) It was their first (or last) year at a stadium. 2008 Mets, 2010 Twins, 2004 Padres.

 

The only real anomalies are the 2007 Dodgers, the 1997 Orioles, the 2008 Tigers and the 2011 Brewers. I'm not sure what was special about the years they hit their attendance highs.Even the teams that have lower records than the Sox fit into one of these categories.

 

• 1993 Rockies 4,483,350 first year of existence
• 2008 Yankees 4,298,655 It's the Yankees. The one year out of an 18-year span they didn't make the playoffs.
• 1993 Blue Jays 4,057,947 2nd of back to back WS wins. Skydome had a capacity of over 53,000
• 2008 Mets 4,042,045 Last season at Shea Stadium
• 1993 Braves 3,884,720 3 consecutive playoff appearances (including 2 WS) in 91, 92 and 93.
• 2007 Dodgers 3,857,036 Consistently around 3 million pretty much every year. Not sure what's special about this specific year.
• 2010 Phillies 3,777,322 Consecutive playoff appearances from 2007 - 2011. Won WS in 2008.
• 1997 Orioles 3,711,132 team drew over 3 million every year between 1992 and 2001 (minus strike year). 97 was second playoff appearance in a row
• 1998 Dbacks 3,610,290 first year of existence
• 2007 Cards 3,552,180 6 playoff appearances in 7 years prior. WS win in 2006.
• 2002 Mariners 3,542,938 Went to ALCS in 2000 and 2001. Won 116 games in 2001. Attendance steadily declined in following years.
• 1999 Indians 3,468,456 midst of sellout record, won division 4 years prior
• 2012 Rangers 3,460,280 went to WS in 2010 and 2011.
• 2006 Angels 3,406,790 Consecutive playoff appearance 2 years prior and 3 years after.
• 2011 Giants 3,387,303 Middle of an every other year WS championship. Won it in 2010, 2012 and 2014.
• 2008 Cubs 3,300,200 First back to back playoff appearance since 1908. Steadily declined until next playoff appearance in 2015.
• 2010 Twins 3,223,640 first year of new stadium (has gone down every year since)
• 2008 Tigers 3,202,645 no idea? WS 2 years prior. Payroll jumped about 45 million
• 2004 Astros 3,087,872 Pretty good jump from 2003. Went to NLCS. 2005 attendance was actually lower.
• 2011 Brewers 3,071,373 No idea? Pretty good jump from 2010. Went to NLCS in 2011.
• 1993 Marlins 3,064,847 first year of existence
• 2009 Red Sox 3,062,699 Build up from previous years. Didn't go down much 2 years after either. Haven't cracked 3 million mark since 2012
• 2004 Padres 3,016,752 first year of new stadium Never above 3 million since.
• 2006 White Sox 2,957,414 year after WS win
• 1990 A's 2,900,217 3rd consecutive WS appearance.
• 2005 Nationals 2,731,993 First year of current iteration
• 2015 Royals 2,708,549 2nd consecutive WS appearance.
• 1976 Reds 2,629,708 2nd of back to back WS wins
• 1998 Rays 2,506,293 First year of existence
• 2015 Pirates 2,498,596 Third consecutive year of playoff appearances

 

 

The problem is that 2005 pretty much came out of nowhere. The fans came out about as well as you can expect for a team that was predicted to finish 3rd or 4th in the division and hadn't shown a lot of promise in the years past. Then in 2006 we came out in droves ready to support the team as much as we could. But they fell short and then 2007 happened and we all figured it was back to the same ole, same old once again. Sure we got teased a little in 2008 but I don't think anyone really believed that team would do much. And we've gotten nothing since then.

 

I'm positive the Sox would support a consistant winner/contender. We just haven't been given the chance yet.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Iwritecode

[southsider2k5]

Actually, there are 6. The A's, Nationals, Royals, Reds, Rays and Pirates. What's interesting in looking through all of them individually, is that most of them set their all-time attendance records in a year where one of the following happened.

 

1) They had 2 or more consecutive playoff appearances in the years prior. Or in the case of the 2011 Giants, they were in the middle of an every other year WS championship streak.

 

2) It was their first year of existence. The 1993 Marlins and Rockies. The 1998 Rays, The 2005 Nationals.

 

3) It was their first (or last) year at a stadium. 2008 Mets, 2010 Twins, 2004 Padres.

 

The only real anomalies are the 2007 Dodgers, the 1997 Orioles, the 2008 Tigers and the 2011 Brewers. I'm not sure what was special about the years they hit their attendance highs.Even the teams that have lower records than the Sox fit into one of these categories.

 

• 1993 Rockies 4,483,350 first year of existence
• 2008 Yankees 4,298,655 It's the Yankees. The one year out of an 18-year span they didn't make the playoffs.
• 1993 Blue Jays 4,057,947 2nd of back to back WS wins. Skydome had a capacity of over 53,000
• 2008 Mets 4,042,045 Last season at Shea Stadium
• 1993 Braves 3,884,720 3 consecutive playoff appearances (including 2 WS) in 91, 92 and 93.
• 2007 Dodgers 3,857,036 Consistently around 3 million pretty much every year. Not sure what's special about this specific year.
• 2010 Phillies 3,777,322 Consecutive playoff appearances from 2007 - 2011. Won WS in 2008.
• 1997 Orioles 3,711,132 team drew over 3 million every year between 1992 and 2001 (minus strike year). 97 was second playoff appearance in a row
• 1998 Dbacks 3,610,290 first year of existence
• 2007 Cards 3,552,180 6 playoff appearances in 7 years prior. WS win in 2006.
• 2002 Mariners 3,542,938 Went to ALCS in 2000 and 2001. Won 116 games in 2001. Attendance steadily declined in following years.
• 1999 Indians 3,468,456 midst of sellout record, won division 4 years prior
• 2012 Rangers 3,460,280 went to WS in 2010 and 2011.
• 2006 Angels 3,406,790 Consecutive playoff appearance 2 years prior and 3 years after.
• 2011 Giants 3,387,303 Middle of an every other year WS championship. Won it in 2010, 2012 and 2014.
• 2008 Cubs 3,300,200 First back to back playoff appearance since 1908. Steadily declined until next playoff appearance in 2015.
• 2010 Twins 3,223,640 first year of new stadium (has gone down every year since)
• 2008 Tigers 3,202,645 no idea? WS 2 years prior. Payroll jumped about 45 million
• 2004 Astros 3,087,872 Pretty good jump from 2003. Went to NLCS. 2005 attendance was actually lower.
• 2011 Brewers 3,071,373 No idea? Pretty good jump from 2010. Went to NLCS in 2011.
• 1993 Marlins 3,064,847 first year of existence
• 2009 Red Sox 3,062,699 Build up from previous years. Didn't go down much 2 years after either. Haven't cracked 3 million mark since 2012
• 2004 Padres 3,016,752 first year of new stadium Never above 3 million since.
• 2006 White Sox 2,957,414 year after WS win
• 1990 A's 2,900,217 3rd consecutive WS appearance.
• 2005 Nationals 2,731,993 First year of current iteration
• 2015 Royals 2,708,549 2nd consecutive WS appearance.
• 1976 Reds 2,629,708 2nd of back to back WS wins
• 1998 Rays 2,506,293 First year of existence
• 2015 Pirates 2,498,596 Third consecutive year of playoff appearances

 

 

The problem is that 2005 pretty much came out of nowhere. The fans came out about as well as you can expect for a team that was predicted to finish 3rd or 4th in the division and hadn't shown a lot of promise in the years past. Then in 2006 we came out in droves ready to support the team as much as we could. But they fell short and then 2007 happened and we all figured it was back to the same ole, same old once again. Sure we got teased a little in 2008 but I don't think anyone really believed that team would do much. And we've gotten nothing since then.

 

I'm positive the Sox would support a constant winner/contender. We just haven't been giving the chance yet.

 

I remember when Sox fans used to say that a playoff appearance was enough. Then it became a World title would be enough. Now they have to win every single year. Knowing this fan base, they would turn into the Atlanta Braves who didn't even sell out playoff games.

[The Mighty Mite]

One thing would be to look at all time top attendance figures. You can blame JR all you want but there are only 5 teams that have an all time top attendance mark lower than the White Sox.

 

That to me indicates they are not in reality a large market team. Even when everything goes right, the people don't come out like they do under similar circumstances in other cities.

 

In the 50s and 60s, Chicago was a White Sox town often outdrawing the Cubs by a 2-1 margin.

When JR bought the Sox in 1981 the town was equally divided.

The Sox were the first Chicago team to draw 2 million in 1983, so things were still looking good but JR started a run of disaster moves that lost a couple of generations to the Cubs, those moves and the great marketing job by the Tribune and Harry Caray that made Wrigley Field the greatest place ever to watch a baseball game really hurt the Sox. Press coverage in the town was really lopsided. So now we are in this situation were the Cubs out draw us by a 2-1 margin. I have no idea what kinds of moves the Sox can make to rectify the situation, it would probably take a new ball park in a better location and an extended run of first place finishes and a couple of WS Championships and that still might not do the trick. Don't count on this hapenning, this franchise has never made the post season 2 years in a row in their 117 years.

When the lease is up in a decade or so, my guess is there will be about 3 or 4 towns that will throw out some sweetheart deals to get the Sox to move.

 

[Iwritecode]

I remember when Sox fans used to say that a playoff appearance was enough. Then it became a World title would be enough. Now they have to win every single year. Knowing this fan base, they would turn into the Atlanta Braves who didn't even sell out playoff games.

 

 

We just need to stop comparing ourselves to the Cubs who are the biggest attendance anomaly in baseball and compare ourselves to what "normal" teams do when they don't play well. Just look at the teams in our own division. The Royals had attendance around 1.3 to 1.5 million every year for years. Then they went to the WS and *only* drew 1.9 million. Then 2.7 million the next year when they won. Last year they missed the playoffs and their attendance went down. I'm sure it will go down even more if they miss the playoffs again this year.

 

The Indians, even with a WS appearance last year haven't cracked 2 million since 2008.

 

The Twins attendance has been steadily declining since they moved into their new stadium. They've been to the playoffs once since then.

 

We need to quit acting like the White Sox attendance isn't completely normal for what this team is and has been for several years.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Iwritecode

[Eminor3rd]

I remember when Sox fans used to say that a playoff appearance was enough. Then it became a World title would be enough. Now they have to win every single year. Knowing this fan base, they would turn into the Atlanta Braves who didn't even sell out playoff games.

 

The only chance we'll have to find out will be to actually see it happen. Will sustained relevance make it cool/fashionable/fun to be a White Sox fan, or will it simply get old and boring?

 

I'll join the Doomsday Bandwagon if we actually see a few consecutive years of contention and the figure still doesn't climb, but not until then.

[southsider2k5]

We just need to stop comparing ourselves to the Cubs who are the biggest attendance anomaly in baseball and compare ourselves to what "normal" teams do when they don't play well. Just look at the teams in our own division. The Royals had attendance around 1.3 to 1.5 million every year for years. Then they went to the WS and *only* drew 1.9 million. Then 2.7 million the next year when they won. Last year they missed the playoffs and their attendance went down. I'm sure it will go down even more if they miss the playoffs again this year.

 

The Indians, even with a WS appearance last year haven't cracked 2 million since 2008.

 

The Twins attendance has been steadily declining since they moved into their new stadium. They've been to the playoffs once since then.

 

We need to quit acting like the White Sox attendance isn't completely normal for what this team is and has been for several years.

 

Maybe if people get over the idea that the White Sox are a big market team those comps would disappear. There is just nothing about this organization that shows that is realistic.