Originally Posted by Frontman
They'll get some sort of money from the state eventually; but not enough to cover everything they want it to cover. Sadly, the Ricketts were blind fans instead of shrewd business people when they bought the team. None of them seem to realize the only thing worth anything IS the ballpark.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: IF the Cubs were to move from Wrigley, no matter what they did, they would become one of the worst drawing teams in MLB. They spent nearly thirty years promoting the ballpark, not the team itself. When you run radio ads about the history that happened at Wrigley, and mention "be a part of the experience" enough times, fans get conditioned to that aspect of your product.
That depends on where the new ballpark would be built and how it was designed. If Ricketts or any other future owner makes the decision that it is better to build a new ballpark than renovate Wrigley, I would think they would try to duplicate the design and slightly modernize it.
There was talk a few years ago about the Tribune company buying up some land near Northwestern and planning to build a clone of Wrigley in the event they could not come to terms with the city on a renovation plan with additional night games.
A ballpark in the design of the 70s era multi-purpose saucers would not work, but a larger, more modern Wrigley Field clone nestled into another north side neighborhood would probably work.