LDF Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 02:53 AM) And that would be relevant if the White Sox had also opened a beautiful new stadium in 2010. Minnesota averaged 27,408 last year when they had a playoff competitive, winning team for the entire season. In 2014, when they were terrible and had no young stars like Sano and Buxton coming up, 27,785. Horrible fans, right? They finally have a winning team after 4 years of rebuilding and attendance actually declined. The White Sox averaged roughly 33,000 per game the first five years of their new stadium, despite all the issues with the new facility. In year four, they were still averaging over 32000 per game. Year Five....1995....22,358 despite being one of the best teams in baseball. Now why did that happen? nice research.... when was the baseball strike???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:53 PM) And that would be relevant if the White Sox had also opened a beautiful new stadium in 2010. Minnesota averaged 27,408 last year when they had a playoff competitive, winning team for the entire season. In 2014, when they were terrible and had no young stars like Sano and Buxton coming up, 27,785. Horrible fans, right? They finally have a winning team after 4 years of rebuilding and attendance actually declined. The White Sox averaged roughly 33,000 per game the first five years of their new stadium, despite all the issues with the new facility. In year four, they were still averaging over 32000 per game. Year Five....1995....22,358 despite being one of the best teams in baseball. Now why did that happen? What would the Sox draw after 99, 96, 96, and 92 loss seasons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I like burgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I like burgers. That's exactly why the Sox ownership sucks. They charge so much for burgers, it drives the fans away, and then they don't have money to spend on players. If they lowered the price of burgers, they'd instantly become a 100 win team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (LDF @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 02:57 AM) nice research.... when was the baseball strike???? ok i google it, the strike was in the 94-95 season. i gave up my season tickets at the strike. i may be wrong, but i believe many around blame the owners for the strike or something like that. or was it the sox fans blame the sox owners. pls forgive, but my memory is kind of fuzzy on this fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:07 PM) You actually make the exact point. The Sox aren't a large market team, and expecting them to spend like one when they don't have that sort of revenue base is completely irrational. Sure, I agree. But then why do our Sox fans constantly get compared to Cubs' fans and found wanting? Two totally different markets/situations. If you compare Sox fans to the Mariners, A's, Indians, Blue Jays, Rockies, DBacks, Padres, Marlins, Reds, Pirates, Royals, Twins, etc., all those fanbases are remarkably similar. Other than the Cardinals (who obviously have a historic winning tradition) and Brewers, there just aren't many second-tier market fans (especially in the Midwest, which proportionately lost more fans due to the strike and financial crisis) who consistently support underperforming teams year in and year out. Edited February 16, 2016 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:59 PM) That's exactly why the Sox ownership sucks. They charge so much for burgers, it drives the fans away, and then they don't have money to spend on players. If they lowered the price of burgers, they'd instantly become a 100 win team. Burgers are priced high. I always wondered why they weren't a bigger part of baseball eating. Probably not as big of profit margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 02:59 AM) That's exactly why the Sox ownership sucks. They charge so much for burgers, it drives the fans away, and then they don't have money to spend on players. If they lowered the price of burgers, they'd instantly become a 100 win team. not the burgers the italian sausage .... in the old park, right behind 3b in the vending area, great sausage .... when the new park open... none. i was royally pissed about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 But the $1 hot dogs on July 4th weekend is a great promotion, given that their normal price is what, $5.50 now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 09:07 PM) But the $1 hot dogs on July 4th weekend is a great promotion, given that their normal price is what, $5.50 now? I think it is the cheaper dog they sell for $1. I was at a stand and a husband and wife got 6 each. That was the limit per purchase. You can't feel very well after eating 6 of those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Feb 16, 2016 -> 04:07 AM) But the $1 hot dogs on July 4th weekend is a great promotion, given that their normal price is what, $5.50 now? wow, can you imagine all the great marketing for fans, that the marketing team can aim at???? hot dogs for a $1. stay over nite with parents for the youngins. maybe 1/2 price monday games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:57 PM) What would the Sox draw after 99, 96, 96, and 92 loss seasons? That's as hypothetical as asking what would the Sox be drawing now with a second World Series appearance in 2006 and at least a competitive season in 2007... Even if they got down to the 1.3 million mark, subsidies would kick in to protect the franchise, although taxpayer sentiment wouldn't be very friendly with all the various budget shortfalls in the state and city in critical areas of social/public need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:22 PM) They ARE a large market team - they play in the city of Chicago. They don't operate as a large market team because they haven't ever figured out how to win in a sustainable fashion in order to build up this revenue base of which you speak. They don't operate like a large market team because their fan base operates like a small market team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 09:03 PM) Sure, I agree. But then why do our Sox fans constantly get compared to Cubs' fans and found wanting? Two totally different markets/situations. If you compare Sox fans to the Mariners, A's, Indians, Blue Jays, Rockies, DBacks, Padres, Marlins, Reds, Pirates, Royals, Twins, etc., all those fanbases are remarkably similar. Other than the Cardinals (who obviously have a historic winning tradition) and Brewers, there just aren't many second-tier market fans (especially in the Midwest, which proportionately lost more fans due to the strike and financial crisis) who consistently support underperforming teams year in and year out. Because fans expect them to be able to spend like large market teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 09:12 PM) That's as hypothetical as asking what would the Sox be drawing now with a second World Series appearance in 2006 and at least a competitive season in 2007... Even if they got down to the 1.3 million mark, subsidies would kick in to protect the franchise, although taxpayer sentiment wouldn't be very friendly with all the various budget shortfalls in the state and city in critical areas of social/public need. But you are comparing attendance with 4 consecutive 90 plus loss seasons vs. the White Sox new park which season 1 coming off of a 94 win season, and in 93 winning the division, and leading the division in 94 at the time of the strike.of,course attendance was dropping. 93 was lowere than 91, and 94 was lower than 93 on average, so the strike probably saved the "they need to make the playoffs in consecutive year for attendance to really climb" excuse alive. Edited February 16, 2016 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSox13 Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:58 PM) I like burgers. I like this post. I too, am a fan of burgers and would take them any time over a fricken hot dog. Anyone like seafood? I know Ian Desmond does because according to twitter, he was fishing last week. I wonder how possible it is to be able to sit down to watch some White SOX Baseball, eat some salmon and watch Desmond mash HR's on the South side. Hmmmmm. Sorry. Had a Homer J Simpson moment. I now return you to this threads tragic derailment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 10:13 PM) They don't operate like a large market team because their fan base operates like a small market team. The current team that manages how this team operates, JR, KW & RH, are 2 for 13 as a team, with a homer (grand slam in '05), and a bunt single (in '08). That pencils out to a .154 avg, which I'm sure you would agree is not very good. You ought to be benched for that lack of performance, but we all know that's not going to happen, so we're stuck with them until further notice. So let's just hope as we enter Year #14 of their collective stewardship that the stars somehow align with the team this year and the team goes on a long run of sustained success, one worthy of a dedicated fan base, and then the fans will reward as appropriate. Edited February 16, 2016 by Thad Bosley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 09:17 PM) But you are comparing attendance with 4 consecutive 90 plus loss seasons vs. the White Sox new park which season 1 coming off of a 94 win season, and in 93 winning the division, and leading the division in 94 at the time of the strike.of,course attendance was dropping. 93 was lowere than 91, and 94 was lower than 93 on average, so the strike probably saved the "they need to make the playoffs in consecutive year for attendance to really climb" excuse alive. Sure, but the White Sox were also 20% higher...and that was 20-25 years ago, before baseball attendance really exploded. Are you going to argue Twins' fans are better? Well, considering I keep hearing how White Sox fans are at best 1/3rd of Chicago, the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan market of 3.4-3.8 million fans is still much bigger. Plus they have the ability to draw regionally from outside the city and surrounding states. The White Sox largely do not because of the Cubs, Twins, Brewers, Royals, Cardinals and Tigers, to name six neighboring competitors. Fwiw, every team that builds a new stadium or wins the World Series has a five year window to reap the gains before the predictable falloff. It has been proven time and time again. Edited February 16, 2016 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 09:27 PM) Sure, but the White Sox were also 20% higher...and that was 20-25 years ago, before baseball attendance really exploded. Are you going to argue Twins' fans are better? Well, considering I keep hearing how White Sox fans are at best 1/3rd of Chicago, the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan market of 3.4-3.8 million fans is still much bigger. Plus they have the ability to draw regionally from outside the city and surrounding states. The White Sox largely do not because of the Cubs, Twins, Brewers, Royals, Cardinals and Tigers, to name six neighboring competitors. Again you are wrong. There are plenty of out of town fans at White Sox games. Most games vs. Detroit sound like road games. It is getting that way vs. KC. It was that way vs. Cleveland for years, but now they don't watch the Indians anywhere. The White Sox draw a fairly decent amount of opposing team fans throughout the summer months. People like to come to Chicago. I wonder if they are going to start to get scared they might get shot. Edited February 16, 2016 by Dick Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
103 mph screwball Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Soxtalk needs a rumor!!!! Please! Someone make a fake twitter account and say you saw someone at the airport coming to Chicago for a physical. Yes! I know fake twitter accounts are for scumbags! But do it for the sake of Soxtalk. The ends justify the means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (103 mph screwball @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 10:08 PM) Soxtalk needs a rumor!!!! Please! Someone make a fake twitter account and say you saw someone at the airport coming to Chicago for a physical. Yes! I know fake twitter accounts are for scumbags! But do it for the sake of Soxtalk. The ends justify the means. I was literally going to post something like this. Has definitely been an ugly couple months for Soxtalk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 08:22 PM) They ARE a large market team - they play in the city of Chicago. They don't operate as a large market team because they haven't ever figured out how to win in a sustainable fashion in order to build up this revenue base of which you speak. The Mets operate in mostly the same fashion. They play in New York City. The Cubs and Yankees exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 11:23 PM) The Mets operate in mostly the same fashion. They play in New York City. The Cubs and Yankees exist. Angels and Dodgers, Red Sox... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Feb 15, 2016 -> 09:35 PM) Again you are wrong. There are plenty of out of town fans at White Sox games. Most games vs. Detroit sound like road games. It is getting that way vs. KC. It was that way vs. Cleveland for years, but now they don't watch the Indians anywhere. The White Sox draw a fairly decent amount of opposing team fans throughout the summer months. People like to come to Chicago. I wonder if they are going to start to get scared they might get shot. Obviously I was referring to the White Sox developing their own base of younger fans outside of the metropolitan Chicago area ...not populating USCF with fans of other teams, although it's still positive revenue for the team in the end. Edited February 16, 2016 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knackattack Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I don't think the Sox being in on Desmond is the thread to be talking about attendance so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.webp.29cc6c9fee0f01ceeb4f722593e5e3ba.webp)
Recommended Posts