southsider2k5 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines Sox appeal Nothing like a World Series run to make a team popular. A poll shows the South Siders are closing in on the Cubs and Bears. By David Haugh Tribune staff reporter August 4, 2006, 1:29 AM CDT A Bear market it remains. And the Cubs can still lay claim to being the most lovable baseball team in town despite this year's losses. But Sox appeal in Chicago has spread more quickly than a trade rumor, proof coming in a national survey that suggests the White Sox could become the most popular sports team in the city sooner rather than later if recent trends continue. "If I were to show you a graph or a trend line, you'd see the Cubs' and Sox's [popularity] is almost identical," said Howard Goldberg, senior vice president for Scarborough sports marketing. Indeed, according to data collected by Scarborough Research, a syndicated firm numerous professional sports teams use, 53 percent of Chicago consumers watched a Sox game on television, attended a game or listened to one on the radio last year, during their World Series-winning season. The Cubs and Bears enjoyed 56 percent penetration in the market, while the Bulls stood at 40 percent and the Blackhawks lagged behind at 10 percent. The Scarborough poll measured interest of 4,182 people from March 2005 through February 2006 and adequately represented the passion of Chicago sports fans, said Goldberg, who grew up in Chicago. His confidence level in the survey is "95 percent." The difference of 3 percent between the Sox and the Bears and Cubs makes it a statistical dead heat in the race to be the city's most popular sports team. "No question this proves the gap has narrowed," Goldberg said. Just two years ago, for example, the same survey exposed a gap of 24 percent when the Cubs were at 59 and the Sox 35. It was a 22 percent difference a year later. The spike in Sox popularity marked a 14 percent increase from the previous year and was 21 percent higher than the team's recent low mark of 32 in 2003. The Sox appeal was so widespread in '05 that even Cubs fans paid closer attention. In research not included in the survey, Goldberg found that 71 percent of Cubs fans surveyed watched, listened to or attended at least one Sox game—a 16 percent increase from the previous year. With another Sox run deep into October possibly coinciding with what could be one of the South Siders' biggest victory disparities over the Cubs, could the once unthinkable occur in Chicago baseball? Could the Sox finish higher than the Cubs in more than just the standings? "I don't know if I'd say it would be a Sox town yet," said Brooks Boyer, the Sox vice president of marketing. "If anything, I'd call it Baseball Town USA. New York and L.A. might draw more total fans, but they also have more population to draw from. So it's not like what's happening here." What's happening here is the Sox and Cubs are projected to draw a total of 6.1 million fans to U.S. Cellular Field and Wrigley Field this season, an unprecedented total for the city. Before Thursday's home doubleheader, the Cubs averaged 39,873 fans per game. That ranks sixth in the majors, compared with the Sox's 36,014, which is 10th. The Cubs' ability to outdraw the Sox one season after their city rivals won a World Series, in the middle of a year defined by disappointment at Clark and Addison, encouraged Cubs officials more than the survey discouraged them. John McDonough, senior vice president for marketing and broadcasting, complimented the Sox's marketing brass but credited his own fans for not allowing the history made on the South Side to lead to apathy on the North Side. McDonough dismissed any notion the Sox bandwagon filled up more quickly because of Cubs defectors jumping aboard, and local TV ratings this season support him. Changing baseball allegiances in Chicago, McDonough believes, would be as difficult for many true fans as changing their ethnicity. "The White Sox's success is not at the expense of the Cubs, and there has been absolutely no erosion of our fan base," McDonough said. "The greatest marketing tool ever invented, and the only brilliance in all of this, is winning. What this [survey] says is winning is paramount. The White Sox won the World Series, the Bears won the NFC North, the Bulls made the playoffs and we struggled." A closer look at the last five surveys would seem to confirm McDonough's belief. The Cubs' WAL number—an acronym for the percentage of fans who watched, attended or listened to a game—after the 2002 season dipped to 46 percent but rose to 59 after the NL Central Division title season of '03. The Bears' appeal to 56 percent of fans in the latest survey represented their best showing this decade and came after a surprise, defense-dominated season in which they reminded their fans of the '85 Super Bowl champs. Likewise, the Bulls' penetration total of 40 percent, still well short of the Jordan era, reflected renewed interest in the team after the stunning playoff appearance in 2005 and sustained competitiveness in '06. It would be easy to blame the Blackhawks' low WAL number of 10 on the NHL lockout, which wiped out the 2004-05 season. But the shortage of television exposure—a key component Scarborough uses to gauge popularity—contributed in no small way. The Sox, whose penetration percentages languished in the 30s until last season's surge, believe they started making progress the day in 2003 when U.S. Cellular purchased naming rights to Comiskey Park for $68 million over 23 years. Boyer said the revenue generated from that sponsorship resulted in ballpark improvements that included a roof over the upper deck, more interactive activities for kids and replacing 18,000 blue seats with green ones. "We invested right back into the ballpark," Boyer said. "And, of course, (general manager Ken Williams and manager Ozzie Guillen) have put a great face on the organization and put together a team that represents the city of Chicago well. "It's an honor to be at the same level of the Bears or the Cubs." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 MEDIA BIAS!!!! I'm sorry. I had to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 07:33 AM) MEDIA BIAS!!!! I'm sorry. I had to. Which is pretty ironic considering this is the lead story in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE sports page... Funny, if I am trying to keep someone down, I sure don't run the LEAD STORY on how much people love them. But maybe I don't know how to keep the man down or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan76 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 07:33 AM) MEDIA BIAS!!!! I'm sorry. I had to. So one story can complete wipe out media bias? I know people here prefer to ignore media bias, but it is still prevalent. Not as much, but it's definitely there. This is just the beginning of th eventual switch to this city being owned by the Sox. Not that it bothers me being the 2nd team, but this is just the reality of the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFan76 @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 08:20 AM) So one story can complete wipe out media bias? I know people here prefer to ignore media bias, but it is still prevalent. Not as much, but it's definitely there. This is just the beginning of th eventual switch to this city being owned by the Sox. Not that it bothers me being the 2nd team, but this is just the reality of the situation. When this shows up in the Tribune, it's more than the beginning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 08:35 AM) Which is pretty ironic considering this is the lead story in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE sports page... Funny, if I am trying to keep someone down, I sure don't run the LEAD STORY on how much people love them. But maybe I don't know how to keep the man down or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerfan1995 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines The only reason the Sox are catching the Cubs in popularity is because the Sox are good right now. if both teams were good, or both teams sucked, it would definately be the Lovable Losers in front of everyones heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 07:35 AM) Which is pretty ironic considering this is the lead story in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE sports page... Funny, if I am trying to keep someone down, I sure don't run the LEAD STORY on how much people love them. But maybe I don't know how to keep the man down or something. No....the Trib isnt giving the SOX credit, theyre still saying that HEY even though the SOX won, theres still more people attending Wrigley (never mentions Wrigley was expanded and is bigger than the Cell) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 The argument changes every day to suit one's perspective. I expected that. Now I'll just tootle along and go play somewhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 01:10 PM) The argument changes every day to suit one's perspective. I expected that. Now I'll just tootle along and go play somewhere else. Yeah, Im betting the Trib made that Story #1, just to quietly rub this in the SOX' face. If both our parks were equal, we'd have the same attendance (hahahahahaah, I said Attendance!). Story doesnt acknowlegde this notice. Also notice how the story doesnt acknowledge concretely how the SOX are Dominating the Cubs in TV ratings right now (there was a separate story in the SunTimes, but not the Trib about this) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 4, 2006 Author Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 01:10 PM) The argument changes every day to suit one's perspective. I expected that. Now I'll just tootle along and go play somewhere else. I'll second that And raise you a of course its a negative. The Sox are at the height of their historical popularity, its being highlighted on the front page of the biggest newspaper in Chicago, and its a negative towards the Sox. How could I have been so blind as to not get it?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I don't know about you guys, but I'm incredibly offended by a lead story that says the Sox fan base has grown... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Yeah, Im betting the Trib made that Story #1, just to quietly rub this in the SOX' face. Oh my God. Stop the madness. Every time I read gibberish like this I'm reminded of that old song "For What It's Worth", particularly the following lines ... "Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep, it starts when you're always afraid, step outta line, the men come and take you away". Mike's in his post is right on the mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zygoat Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 hopefully we can get on track and start winning some games, that will really take the wind out of the cubs sails Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 We're defending champs and in the heart of a race, their defending chumps and dead in the sorry NL, and we're still a little behind. It shows how long a way we still have to go IMO. But the progress also shows it can be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 I'll put it to some of you this way. Let's say about 100 people I know were fans of eigher the sox or cubs/both/undecided. Before last season about 65% of them were cub fans. 30% were sox fans and 5% were fans of both. Now.. I would say about 48% cub fans and 45% sox fans and 7% still fans of both/undecided. so... 65% > 48% cub fans (decrease) 30% 5% I'm not gonna say this is all of Chicago but at least from what I've seen where I live/ from classes/ even from Florida (more sox clothing from people than cub clothing) I can say we are really close to becomming a sox town and if we win it again, there's no doubt that those undecided will be sox fans/cub fans changing up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 A poll shows the South Siders are closing in on the Cubs and Bears. And speaking of the Cubs and Bears, they're (unfortunately) beginning to look a lot like the same organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rangercal Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 QUOTE(WCSox @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 06:09 PM) And speaking of the Cubs and Bears, they're (unfortunately) beginning to look a lot like the same organization. explain? Im confused. I see no similarities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keystone Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I'm sorry but i have a hard time believing this poll. Only 56 percent of the people in chicago watched at least one bears game? You would think its more than that. But only 53 percent watched a sox game? there is no way that is true. they were on tv 174 times last year. odds are, people are gonna watch at least one. i can almost guarentee that over 53 percent of the city was watching the world series considering all the cubs fans who were watching to cheer against the sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonik22 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 QUOTE(WCSox @ Aug 4, 2006 -> 06:09 PM) And speaking of the Cubs and Bears, they're (unfortunately) beginning to look a lot like the same organization. You have actually pissed me off by saying that. In what ways are they the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 QUOTE(Sonik22 @ Aug 5, 2006 -> 12:31 AM) You have actually pissed me off by saying that. In what ways are they the same? I hate both teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonik22 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 QUOTE(Heads22 @ Aug 5, 2006 -> 12:38 AM) I hate both teams. Colts Suck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.