2016 is the 25th anniversary of "New Comiskey Park" or USCF

[Bananarchy]

The miserable upper deck is standard at every park built the last 25 years.

Except PNC. That is an inspired ballpark. It's like if Wrigley field were more fan centric and not a complete garbage pile.

[Quin]

LMAO! Who's talking about Reinsdorf? I thought we were talking about the USCF upper deck, whose construction you tried to somehow pass off as "standard"? If you have nothing else to say on the matter, then just don't say anything. It's really that easy.

 

As for Mr. Reinsdorf, since you brought him up yet again, the only thing "unhealthy" is the effect he's had on the White Sox organization throughout his tenure as owner. You know it, I know it. As the Cubs benefitted by getting out from under the long term yet highly ineffective ownership of the Tribune Co. a few years ago, so will the White Sox come the post-Reinsdorf era, whenever that is.

 

Thad, come on man. You mention Reinsdorf in almost every single post.

 

Except PNC. That is an inspired ballpark. It's like if Wrigley field were more fan centric and not a complete garbage pile.

 

This is an A+ description.

[southsider2k5]

Wrong again. Quite wrong, actually. Name one other stadium that is as architecturally flawed as was the new Comiskey Park where they built an upper deck with the same obnoxious incline AND complicated matters by putting the opening to that deck down at the base, vs. somewhere in the middle. Talk about discrimination. One might infer they didn't want any elderly and/or obese people sitting in the upper rows given how difficult it would be to get up there, and never mind any up and down trips needed to go the bathroom, etc.

 

Reinsdorf admits he screwed up big time on that upper deck, which would explain why he ended up lopping off about nine rows back in the early 2000s. Has that been standard, too, Dick Allen? Has any other team gone in and taken a buzz saw to their upper deck and literally taken out a third of it? No? Yeah, didn't think so. Hence, the rather wrong nature of you claiming the new Comiskey/USCF upper deck is somewhat par for the course.

 

 

LMAO! Who's talking about Reinsdorf? I thought we were talking about the USCF upper deck, whose construction you tried to somehow pass off as "standard"? If you have nothing else to say on the matter, then just don't say anything. It's really that easy.

 

As for Mr. Reinsdorf, since you brought him up yet again, the only thing "unhealthy" is the effect he's had on the White Sox organization throughout his tenure as owner. You know it, I know it. As the Cubs benefitted by getting out from under the long term yet highly ineffective ownership of the Tribune Co. a few years ago, so will the White Sox come the post-Reinsdorf era, whenever that is.

 

Um, you did... in your very previous post.

[Thad Bosley]

Um, you did... in your very previous post.

I made a reference to him, yes, but we were talking about the upper deck, which my reference was relevant to. Big difference.

[southsider2k5]

I made a reference to him, yes, but we were talking about the upper deck, which my reference was relevant to. Big difference.

 

So in talking about him, you weren't talking about him. That makes perfect sense that you weren't talking about him.

[Thad Bosley]

So in talking about him, you weren't talking about him. That makes perfect sense that you weren't talking about him.

Lol - ok, SS2K5, whatever. You are obviously in the mood to share some throw-away comments today, so have at it. Enjoy yourself!

[southsider2k5]

Thad, come on man. You mention Reinsdorf in almost every single post.

 

 

Lol - ok, SS2K5, whatever. You are obviously in the mood to share some throw-away comments today, so have at it. Enjoy yourself!

 

This said it perfectly. Apparently to the point where you don't even know you are saying it. It is like Obama to a rightwinger, or Bush to a leftwinger.

[iamshack]

This said it perfectly. Apparently to the point where you don't even know you are saying it. It is like Obama to a rightwinger, or Bush to a leftwinger.

Enough of the picking at one another.

 

How about we discuss the issue on the merits?

 

Thad clearly has a point. JR held the City/State hostage in order to get his way. Other teams have used this as a model. That was a bit dirty of him.

 

Case closed. Move on.

[Soxfest]

JR was warned not to build upper deck the way it was built, but he insisted on more suites.

[Dick Allen]

Enough of the picking at one another.

 

How about we discuss the issue on the merits?

 

Thad clearly has a point. JR held the City/State hostage in order to get his way. Other teams have used this as a model. That was a bit dirty of him.

 

Case closed. Move on.

Why is securing another offer considered dirty? If Rick Hahn is talking about making a trade, would it be considered dirty to play other offers off of each other?

 

I could maybe see it as perhaps dirty if he really had no intention of leaving, ball the accounts I ever read where the White Sox were gone if this stadium wasn't built. Ironiically JR did build his own stadium a couple of years later at around the same cost. Of course he was only in 50%.

Edited February 7, 2016 by Dick Allen

[southsider2k5]

Enough of the picking at one another.

 

How about we discuss the issue on the merits?

 

Thad clearly has a point. JR held the City/State hostage in order to get his way. Other teams have used this as a model. That was a bit dirty of him.

 

Case closed. Move on.

 

This was being done for generations before JR came along. Raiders anyone? Royals? A's? Braves? Dodgers? Giants?

 

Teams have been moving for generations because they wanted greener opportunities. But JR does it, and it is "dirty". Please.

[caulfield12]

The counterpoint is how mamy MLB teams have 100% privately financed stadiums?

 

That said, it sucks when the owner is threatening to move your favorite team halfway across the country. That's not easy to overlook for some fans.

[Doc Edwards Shot]

Oh, there sure was. There sure was, the last time being back in the mid-to-late 80s. That was when our current esteemed owner Jerry Reinsdorf, fresh off of the failure of his first get-rich scheme with the SportsVision debacle, turned his greedy attention to the taxpayers of Illinois. He and his co-owners engaged in a highly public and shameful exercise where they literally blackmailed the state into publicly funding the construction of a new stadium for them, one designed to generate revenues the likes of which they could have never seen at the old ballpark.

 

The blackmail came in the form of threats to move our White Sox to Tampa if the state did not only agree to fund the ballpark construction, but also throw in a sweetheart lease deal on top of it to boot. And if not for some last minute, 11th hour efforts in June of 1988 by former Gov. Jim Thompson to convince some legislators to cave into Jerry and his goons, the blackmail would have prevailed and our White Sox would be playing in Tropicana Field today as we speak.

 

Jerry Reinsdorf - what a guy, eh? He's sure done a mighty fine job of getting a huge return on his investment in the Sox over these past 35 years. Too bad the White Sox faithful can't say the same.

 

With the horrendous state of Illinois finances these days, there is probably no way another deal like that will be given out to a professional Chicago sports team.

 

Back in the day, I wanted the Sox to stay so badly that I supported the taxpayers paying for the current stadium. But if it were to happen again, I would say no. The Sox could just move as far as I'm concerned. They've only won one World Series in the past 100 years anyway - it's not like they're kicking so much ass that the taxpayers absolutely have to keep them.

 

 

[harfman77]

Always remember the following:

1) The City of Chicago offered to build a new baseball stadium for the White Sox in the South Loop at Roosevelt and Clark.

2) JR turned down the offer and wanted to build a stadium in Addison/DuPage county. Keep in mind that the stadium would of been built with tax payer money on land owned by JR.

3) When the stadium in Addison didn't work out, the City of Chicago offer in the south Loop was off the table.

4) The State of Illinois agreed to build the new park at its present location. If they hadn't agreed to that the White Sox would have moved to Florida.

5) I've tried to simplify this as much as possible but JR should have taken the original offer from the City of Chicago and had the new stadium built in the South Loop. EVERYBODY would have been better off. The White Sox franchise, the White Sox fans and the City of Chicago. Its bad enough the stadium was built where it is now, JR is responsible for the miserable upper deck which nobody likes and has ruined the park. The lower deck is wonderful and the upper deck sucks.

6) Sometime, somewhere and someday the White Sox will have a new owner. The new owner is going to inherit a franchise that has a stadium in a location that is not popular and a stadium with a lousy upper deck. It will be interesting to see if the new owner tries to get another stadium for the White Sox or if he renews the lease when it expires in 2027.

7) Looking back at the whole situation I wish JR would not have bought the White Sox. I wish DeBartolo would have purchased the team.

 

Jerry has definitely made a ton of $$ on this deal, the real crime is in how that money has been re-invested into the franchise. The Sox perennially rank as one of the teams that spend the least on amateur talent. That has opened up a bit since the new CBA and pools were implemented but they still are near the bottom.

 

The difference between what JR has and other teams have done is that he got a sweetheart deal for himself and his investors rather than for the franchise.

 

Tampa's lease is up in 2028, its not going to stop them from moving. It won't stop the next owner that is serious about being competitive from moving the Sox either.

 

[Dick Allen]

Jerry has definitely made a ton of $$ on this deal, the real crime is in how that money has been re-invested into the franchise. The Sox perennially rank as one of the teams that spend the least on amateur talent. That has opened up a bit since the new CBA and pools were implemented but they still are near the bottom.

 

The difference between what JR has and other teams have done is that he got a sweetheart deal for himself and his investors rather than for the franchise.

 

Tampa's lease is up in 2028, its not going to stop them from moving. It won't stop the next owner that is serious about being competitive from moving the Sox either.

So JR got a sweetheart deal, but if the next owner is serious about being competitive, he or she would need to break that sweetheart deal? What would they do, go some place and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a new stadium? It makes no sense. For one thing, the team makes money, and will make more in a couple of years. For another, they have a sweet deal. They aren't breaking it to spend more money elsewhere, and also get a smaller TV contract.

[caulfield12]

In one of those ESPN pieces, the two best markets were supposedly going back to Montreal (for Tampa) and the San Jose area (for the A's).

 

Charlotte, San Antonio, Portland, Mexico City, OKC, Las Vegas....were some of the main options mentioned.

 

[harfman77]

So JR got a sweetheart deal, but if the next owner is serious about being competitive, he or she would need to break that sweetheart deal? What would they do, go some place and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a new stadium? It makes no sense. For one thing, the team makes money, and will make more in a couple of years. For another, they have a sweet deal. They aren't breaking it to spend more money elsewhere, and also get a smaller TV contract.

 

You are assuming that JR would pass on his sweetheart deal and not try to function as a middle man to continue to get his cut.

 

Yes they would go someplace that was willing to build them a stadium where they could get a large prime TV contract and draw a more consistent attendance figure. Anywhere they will move they will get a better TV contract than where they are now, they have the lowest ratings of any regional sports franchise. The team makes money, there is no guarantee they will make any more, they are a poor draw on TV and in person. The players have little to no national exposure so they can not compete with major market team because of the lack of national endorsements. Why would any TV network pay the White Sox one dollar more than what they get now for a season? Who will pay them if CSN doesn't? Its not like WGN is going to pony up for it. I would not be surprised if the Cubs TV contract doubles what the Sox get.

 

TV money is what is going to drive the Sox out of Chicago. All the periphery sweetheart deal stuff is not impacting the budget of the roster and will not have any impact on a new owner that wants to be competitive. If the Sox were to move to OKC, Indy, or SLC they would be a huge target for the RSN's in those areas that are desperate for live sports in the summer. It would be a market size downgrade, but the Sox already act like a small-mid market team despite being in Chicago moving to a market that size would bring the revenue and competitive pieces that teams of that size are able to get.

[WBWSF]

The White Sox TV ratings were almost equal to the Cubs a few years ago. Their ratings doubled on Comcast last year when the team got hot. When the team started losing again the ratings went bad. As long as JR or one of his investors own the White Sox/Bulls there are more than enough TV stations in the Chicagoland area that will want the White Sox on their channel.

 

[Jose Abreu]

The White Sox TV ratings were almost equal to the Cubs a few years ago. Their ratings doubled on Comcast last year when the team got hot. When the team started losing again the ratings went bad. As long as JR or one of his investors own the White Sox/Bulls there are more than enough TV stations in the Chicagoland area that will want the White Sox on their channel.

Clarification, are you referring to our winning streak in July? Where Melky hit like .600?

[WBWSF]

Nobodys talking about this yet but from I know the Cubs are going to have all of their games on cable when they have their own TV station. I would like to think that WGN will give the White Sox some serious money to have some of their games on Channel 9. The White Sox will be the only baseball team in Chicago with some of their games on free TV.

[harfman77]

Nobodys talking about this yet but from I know the Cubs are going to have all of their games on cable when they have their own TV station. I would like to think that WGN will give the White Sox some serious money to have some of their games on Channel 9. The White Sox will be the only baseball team in Chicago with some of their games on free TV.

 

I am not sure that the Cubs are really going to jump in and create their own station, I think they would really struggle to find quality programming, even MLB and BTN struggle to find a lot of solid programming. I think the threat of creating their own network is more of a negotiating ploy to increase the value of their next TV contract and bring a "wildcard" bidder into the mix.

[southsider2k5]

I am not sure that the Cubs are really going to jump in and create their own station, I think they would really struggle to find quality programming, even MLB and BTN struggle to find a lot of solid programming. I think the threat of creating their own network is more of a negotiating ploy to increase the value of their next TV contract and bring a "wildcard" bidder into the mix.

 

So if the old theory that SportsVision destroyed the White Sox is true, a standalone cable network should destroy the Cubs, right? Even places like LA can't their network into the mass audience, and seeing as Comcast isn't going to help them in Chicago because they have deals with the rest of the teams in Chicago (exept for the Bears), it shouldn't see a full viewing audience.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I am not sure that the Cubs are really going to jump in and create their own station, I think they would really struggle to find quality programming, even MLB and BTN struggle to find a lot of solid programming. I think the threat of creating their own network is more of a negotiating ploy to increase the value of their next TV contract and bring a "wildcard" bidder into the mix.

 

 

They are absolutely going to get their own network. That's the plan.

[Iwritecode]

So if the old theory that SportsVision destroyed the White Sox is true, a standalone cable network should destroy the Cubs, right? Even places like LA can't their network into the mass audience, and seeing as Comcast isn't going to help them in Chicago because they have deals with the rest of the teams in Chicago (exept for the Bears), it shouldn't see a full viewing audience.

 

It's certainly a possibility. But I think the biggest problem with SportsVision is that people simply weren't used to paying for any TV channels. These days there are multiple ways to pay to see an MLB game broadcast and many don't think twice about it.

[caulfield12]

And Dodgers fans in general are a bit more passive than Cubs' faithful...not to mention so many things to do year-round out there compared to the 2-3 month window of reaally nice weather in Chicago.