1_PROPOSED_MARQUEE_VIEWWarning: You will probably be angry, or at least annoyed, after reading this piece. When I write, I go to painstaking lengths to see both sides of a story, and to represent things in the most even-handed, fairest light. The Cubs aren’t always right, and I try to divorce myself from my fandom when it becomes necessary to do so. The best I can do in that regard today, however, is to say that there is a lot going on behind the scenes with respect to the Wrigley Renovation story, and we aren’t privy to the vast majority of it. Things may not be as they seem.

But if they are as they seem, the Chicago Cubs continue to get screwed by the power drill that is the Chicago political machine.

Earlier this week, the Ricketts Family announced that they’d partnered with the Chicago Athletic Club on plans to bring a state-of-the art facility to the proposed hotel across from Wrigley Field. It’s another job-generating, tax-generating, neighborhood-nicening, swell thing that the renovation plan will provide. It should have been met with, at worst, silence by those who remain discontented about the renovation.

Instead, it was met with a nasty response from each of Mayor Rahm Emanuel (indirectly) and Alderman Tom Tunney (very directly), the two men who hold the political cards necessary for the Chicago Cubs to actually proceed with their plans to renovate Wrigley Field.

First, from the Mayor. The Sun-Times reports that an anonymous “mayoral confidante” – aka, someone in the Mayor’s Office who has strategized together with everyone else in that office about just what they want to say to the media – says the Mayor was unmoved if the athletic club announcement was any kind of pressure tactic. From the confidante: “It didn’t work when the Cubs were demanding public financing and it won’t work now.”

As if the request for public funding and the offer to build a state-of-the-art facility in a very-desirable hotel are the same thing. As if the latter isn’t a good thing for Chicago citizens who live in the Wrigleyville area. As if the request for public funding that would have come from the absurdly high amusement tax on Cubs tickets was so deeply insane in the first place. As if anyone in the political machinery isn’t willing to say the most ridiculous, over-the-top, completely thoughtless, unsophisticated tripe so long as it advances their agenda. And gets them elected or re-elected, of course.

Alderman Tunney’s response was even more self-serving, and even more politically glib. From the Tribune:

Ald. Thomas Tunney, 44th, said Thursday that he would not sign off on a deal unless it included more parking, better police protection and “aesthetic” assurances sought by Wrigleyville residents and businesses — all issues that have yet to be settled.

Reminded that Mayor Rahm Emanuel is pushing for an agreement, in part because the Ricketts family that owns the Cubs is not asking for any government funding, Tunney replied, “Yeah, but it’s not going to be on the backs of my community, sorry.”

The Rickettses have maintained that a deal needs to get done by Opening Day in early April so they can line up the contractors and materials needed to fix up their aging ballpark, but Tunney dismissed that concern.

“You’re talking about one of the wealthiest families in America,” the alderman told a throng of City Hall reporters pressing him on the issue. “End of statement.”

So many noisome bits in two little statements. “Aesthetic” assurances? Yeah, I’m sure it’s the “aesthetics” of the Wrigley renovation that are troubling Tunney and his constituents. How’s that falling concrete treating the folks of the neighborhood? Is it aesthetically pleasing? Tunney does realize that the Chicago Cubs are his largest constituent, right?

And, oh, the Ricketts Family is super wealthy? Oh, ok. Well, then, in that case, they should not be permitted to run their business like any other business in the neighborhood. Grr! Rich people!

And, oh, let’s completely ignore the fact that the business at issue is the one that, historically, has propped up the very neighborhood Tunney seeks to protect.

Which gets me back to even-headedness, and calms me down. We can’t forget – and all sides would be well-reminded – that everyone in this dispute stands to benefit from the Wrigley renovation plan, if done properly. There is still so much incentive to work collaboratively – be it with the political elements, the Cubs, the owners, the rooftops, the other businesses, the neighborhood residents, the fans – that everyone just has to get over the idea that they’re going to get exactly everything they want. It seems to me that the Ricketts Family and the Cubs gave up on the idea that they could get their perfect solution a long time ago. So they bent, considerably.

It’s time for everyone else to start bending, and to stop saying ridiculous things to curry political favor.

  • wkk881

    Ruby, I’m in! I’ll move out to this city in the suburbs purely out of spite and contempt.

    • jtcubbies

      Tunney is just taking care of the people who voted for him rather than what’s better for the Cubs and their overall fan base.
      He is biased and needs to be taken out of the equation.
      If the mayor was backing the Cubs financing plan this would already be a done deal but he’s sticking it to the Ricketts and their white collar middle to upper class fan base.
      I go to different stadiums all over country to see the Cubs play and have a way better experience at the actual ball game because of the stadiums and the amenities.
      Don’t get me wrong Wrigleyville is a good time but I’m not 22 years old anymore looking to get hammered before and after the game.
      The Ricketts are leaving a load a money on the table just on the parking revenue they lose year in and year out.
      The Cubs should actually look into new stadium locations rather just threaten the city.
      I’ve been to both old Yankee Stadium and new Yankee Stadium.
      Old Yankee Stadium was actually in better shape than Wrigley and they still dozed it.
      Not one person I spoke to from NY misses the old one.
      Wrigley Field is the biggest dump in all of professional sports its time to build a new stadium!

      • Meredith

        What is wrong about Tunney taking care of the people who elected him?
        I live here and don’t agree he is actually taking care of the people who live here, but in your example, why should he care for the Cubs over his constituents?

  • DPRagen

    The Cubs need a new park similar to the Brewer’s field but larger. Wasting money on their current facility is foolish. A new domed facility is the obvious answer.

  • Frank Baron

    The “Rich” are the political class… they own everything! Don’t believe me try not paying your real estate taxes. You’ll find out fast who “really” owns your house. The political guys have figured this out. A long time ago actually. I have said for a few posts here that the Cubs need to get out of the “Peoples Paradise” that is Chicago and move else where. Lots of land in Du Page County. There is a HUGH market out in the burbs… lots of people who don’t like the thrill of public transporation forced on them to be attend games, over priced food and drinks and taxes on top of taxes. I for one would like Tom R to tell “Ram” E and Tom T to shove it! Oh and he can tell all those greedy neighbors who are steeling the Cubs product to shove it too! Tom grow a pair!

  • Lets be real

    Funny ,, Let be real now, Brett has always been a cheer leader for the front office and the Rickets family and not the product that Cubs put on the field. He has his reasons and he is entitled to his views,

    Its a pity that the Cubs feel that they need to negotiate in the media and not with City Hall. The Cubs are dysfunctional. They sold their idea to the fans and not city hall or the residents of Wrigleyville.. The Cubs tried to backdoor the City and Roof Top Owners . Not to mention the fiasco during the Presidential election. The Cubs need to improve on negotiating . I find it disturbing that Brett would imply that the lack of bribes to Tunney is the reason this renovation.. Please correct me if I am wrong.

    And yes The Rickets family .can move – let them.

    • Kirbs414

      If the Cubs were backdooring everyone, why would they be bending their plan in order to try and fit what the city and Tunney want? They are making cuts and concessions on this, but the city and Tunney are absolutely not budging right now. I don’t think anyone else got that Brett was implying Tunney needs to be bribed. He’s being unreasonable just to make it look like he’s protecting his neighborhood. This has nothing to do with the Cubs product on the field. It has everything to do with the business of the Chicago Cubs, and right now Rahm and Tom are showing their political roots by being unneccesarily rigid on their position in terms of commerce. So in other words, yes, I do think you are wrong.

    • Greenroom

      Lets be real, I am a professor of Sociology at a mid-sized university. I spend 1/3 of my courses in social inequality discussing the unequal distribution of wealth in this country. I could go on, but that is not the point of this comment. I applaud the Ricketts for what they are trying to do. Using their own money to update/upgrade the stadium and the surrounding area is very admirable. At the end of the day, will they make a profit based on their profits, most definitely. But not asking for public funding or support should be supported and not condemned. The fiasco in Miami, the numerous examples of corporations using tax payers to fund their re-locations or to remain in the area are the exact opposite of what the Ricketts are trying to do. As someone who usually condemns the practices of the 1%, I am extremely impressed with how the Ricketts are handling this situation, and it is the opposite of dysfunctional. I would be leading the charge in being critical of their ideas or motives if I thought this was another example of the rich taking advantage of the poor and middle class. So now that I have given my full disclosure. “lets be real” what are your motives? You sound like one of the roof top owners. I love Wrigley and lord only knows, I would never want the Cubs to leave. But the city, Tunney, are being unreasonable. The Cubs have asked for very little support/changes and then receive these responses from the City and Tunney. Ridiculous. It breaks my hear to say this. But maybe it’s time for the Cubs to move. peace~

    • Leo L

      “And yes The Rickets family .can move – let them”

      the thing is they dont want them to move. that woudl be stupid for the city to let that happen. yet they act like all they are doing is favors for the cubs. Ofcourese they know the rickets dont want to move. but as some point the ricketes are goign to have to say we are looking at moving. then see how the rrof top owners and neeghborhood bussiness feel about the concesssions. the ony problem is selling the bluff,

  • cubfanincardinalland

    It is just way past the time for the Ricketts to take off the gloves. From the start, this is personal. Can you imagine any other mayor’s office in America treating one of their community icons in this manner? It is a doomed excercise the Cubs are undertaking. Get on with what needs to be done.
    Just reading this morning about the spirit of cooperation in Atlanta building a new billion dollar stadium. 200 million in funds from the city and state. Progress all around.

  • wkk881

    Can we all agree that Tom Tunney and a handful of rooftop owners > the entire fanbase, neighborhood residents and welfare of the local businesses?

    This quote from George Loukas still cracks me up…

    “The Cubs might not have been here if it wasn’t for Murphy’s Bleachers building a new facility and the Cubby Bear creating an entertainment theme in Wrigleyville that people, not only go to the ballpark for the baseball, but post-baseball and pre-baseball, they get to be entertained by restaurants and bars in the community that have reputations.”

    Beth Murphy added: “There is a reason the Cubs (draw) when they have losing seasons, and we’ve had quite a few now. There’s a reason.”

  • Alex

    Look at what a perceived threat of moving to Maples, FL did to building a new spring training complex in Mesa. I’m sure a real threat to move would get all the bar and restaurant owners around the ballpark who also contribute to the “Tunney Fund” to motivate him to change his mind.

    • Edwin

      I don’t know if the spring training situation is that similar. Fans don’t care as much where their favorite team plays in spring training. They care a lot more about where their favorite team plays regular season games.

      Think about what moving the team gains the Cubs, and what it costs the Cubs. Unless it’s clear that the Cubs break even in that type of move, I don’t think the city/bar owners would take a threat to move the team too seriously.

      • Alex

        Regarding Mesa, that’s not the point. The city knew that if the Cubs bolted for Florida, they would lose a lot of revenue. The Cubs are always one of the top revenue teams in the Cactus League. They moved quickly to keep the Cubs.

        As for the local bar owners near Wrigley, they would absolutely sweat out a move out of the neighborhood by the team. The Cubs are the center point of all the bars and restaurants in the area. They know this. That’s why they opened up for business there in the first place. If the Cubs move; within a few years, “Wrigleyville” would once again be known as Lakeview. The bars and restaurants would close up and move elsewhere.

        • Edwin

          The threat to move worked because it was a real threat; the Cubs would have been able to make the move because they knew that whether in Florida or Arizona they were going to make money. All it would mean is fans change their Arizona tickets to Florida tickets. Plus it’s such a small amount of revenue anyways, that getting a better facility would easily outweigh any risk of losing fan support.

          I’m not saying it wouldn’t be bad for the city or for the business owners. They have a strong incentive to see the Cubs stay. I just think that from a Business standpoint, it doesn’t make sense for the Cubs to move, since they’d be risking quite a lot. And the City/bar owners know this.

          Threatening to move only works if it’s a viable option for the team, and right now I don’t see how moving would be a realistic idea for the Cubs.

          • Alex

            To your first paragraph; again; this is why Mesa moved so quickly. There was a perceived threat that the Cubs were going to move to Florida. The Cubs probably never had any intentions of moving to Florida. And why would they, since they have a huge fan base in Arizona. It was a risk that the city of Mesa wasn’t going to take.

            Neither one of us knows if moving out of the city is a viable option for the Cubs. And maybe you’re right, it might not be a viable option for the team to move. But they have to get it out there. There is no doubt that the bars and restaurants add to the Wrigley experience, but maybe a move to Rosemont would be an option. And I’m just throwing it out there. You can make a case for other suburbs too. Rosemont is close to the CTA, they have a lot of great restaurants and bars in the area. Having a new ballpark that generates more revenue with more seats, more skyboxes, more night games, no restrictions on ads in the park, a video scoreboard, outdoor festival and last but not least.. parking. From a business standpoint, I think the Cubs would make out MUCH better with a move than to put up with all the political bullcrap from the politicians.

            If the Ricketts family wants to continue to put their eggs in the Wrigley Field basket, then they shouldn’t be surprised to see guys like Tunney use political leverage to make matters miserable for the Cubs. The Cubs need options.

      • Alex

        I’m not advocating for the Cubs to move out of Wrigley. But Tunney needs to get a fire lit under his backside from business owners that are NOT the rooftop owners. Even the chance of a move would change the playing field for Tunney. Every avenue needs to be explored. If the Cubs paint themselves into a corner by not even considering a move away from Wrigley, they have very little leverage in negotiations with the city and Tunney can pull whatever crap he wants.

  • Larry Bittner

    Just build the improved replica of Wrigley field in the Northwest suburbs already. Then we can all see the gnashing of teeth that these Wrigleyville idiots deserve. The Cubs are the neighborhood. They can have Wrigley while the rest of us can have a winning team with a modern and accessible ballpark. IMO the City should be kissing Ricketts ass for staying put, and putting money into the area. These politicians are so drunk with their own power that they fail to see beyond their next bowel movement, which I’m sure they are impressed with.

    • itzscott

      Actually, that would be a good architecture school project….. Take Wrigley Field as it is and see how someone can recreate it elsewhere with all the bells & whistles an owner and fans would want while trying to retain the aesthetics and intent of the original without it coming out like Soldier Field.

      • D.G.Lang

        Wrigley as it stands is far from perfect but a close replica would be great as long as a few problems are dealt with. Building a new stadium would be the best way of getting everything that they need and even though it might cost a little more “up front” there would be much money saved due to lower maintenance costs for several years.

        I would support an enclosed stadium due to the inclement weather early and late in the year. I would propose building it with the ability to also be used for football games as well.

        As an aside, I wonder how long the Bears are stuck in Soldiers field and if they could be induced to move to a better Stadium in the Burbs.

        If the Cubs are forced to relocate elsewhere, they may as well build a Stadium that is the very best possible with the greatest year round usage to get the best return on their investment.

        I wonder if it is even possible to build a stadium that could accomodate not only baseball and football but also basketball and hockey as well.

        I wonder if the thought of having all of their professional teams move out would have any effect. On the other hand, just think of all the money the city can extort from anyone wanting to rebuild on the old Wrigley site.

    • Boogens

      “These politicians are so drunk with their own power that they fail to see beyond their next bowel movement, which I’m sure they are impressed with.”

      That is one of the funniest things I have read in a long time. It’s so good I wish I had thought of it!

  • Frank Baron

    Lets Be Real… The political class is looking out for the “people”. The “people” they are looking out for, is themselves… the political class, “The boys”.Those are the only “people” they are concerned about in this matter. How much money going where is the issue and will continue to be… it has never been about any thing else. When the numbers get straight, a deal will be announced. Simple as that! You know very little about Chicago… there is a Federal Prison in Wisconsin (and other places) that have housed more than a few Aldermen, Representatives and Governors over the years. Their only crime was “looking out for the People” Thinking otherwise is …. (fill in the blank).

    • Edwin


      Sorry, I suck at these games. Normally mad libs tell me when to use nouns, verbs, or others.

  • Fastball

    Move the Cubs Tom. Rent out Wrigley to Northwestern for all their sports programs. turn it into a fulltime concert venue make it a movie in the park venue during the summer. or just abandon the piece of shit and build a dome stadium anywhere. leave Illinois is what I would do. screw Chicago and the whole state. no tax revenue for anyone. if this were a corporation you would have moved your HQ already. Tom stop being a bitch and act like your in charge. you let the tail wag the dog long enough. you get no respect because your not turf enough. your getting run over because goodies scared of you. Chicago is used ro fires. Burn Wrigley to the ground and blame it on faulty wiring that would have fixed in the restoration. take your insurance money and leave the rubble pile sitting there to remind the assholes they got what they deserved.

    • Red Baron 42

      Yep..I couldn’t understand why he didn’t drive a harder bargin with that elf Zell when Zell threatened to sell Wrigley separate from the club…I mean the thing is broken down, in horrible need of repair and has very little value if the team no longer plays there.

  • Dan

    I am reallly getting frustrated with the whole wrigley renavation saga. I think the Cubs need two things to happen that are KEY for them to ever win another championship. 1 the Cubs must renavate wrigley, or move into a brand new park. 2 and this is the bigges one of the 2. THEY MUST START PLAYING AS MANY NIGHT GAMES AS THE REST OF THE LEAGUE! I love the tradition of Cubs day baseball but I would love even more for the cubs to be competitive. I firmly believe that the 2003 and 2008 teams were both easily the best teams in baseball but both ran out of gas especially the team in 2008. So night games please!

    • Noah

      I don’t see how you could possibly argue that the 2003 Cubs were the best team in baseball in the regular season. The Cubs won only 88 games despite being in one of the only two divisions in baseball where at least half the teams were under .500. The Cubs had less regular season wins than ANY other team that made the playoffs in either League.

      You have an argument that the Cubs were the best regular season team in the NL in 2008, but the playoffs are a crapshoot and the Cubs didn’t have a team built wonderfully for the playoffs: their only “star” quality player was Soriano, they had a bunch of 2/3 types as starting pitchers with no 1s and they faced a team in the Dodgers, who had a ton of quality RHP at the team, who were just rough for a team like the Cubs who had pretty much all of their quality hitting at that time of the year from the right side of the plate.

      If the players and coaches say they want more night games, that’s fine, but the real reason the Cubs haven’t been winning World Series is because they haven’t built as good of teams as their competition historically.

      • DocPeterWimsey

        The nature of the roster had nothing to do with why the Cubs lost the ’08 playoffs. Since the new playoff system began, 75% of first round series are won by the team that played better baseball in September. The ’08 Dodgers had approximately a +50 run differential in September. The ’08 Cubs had a -5 run differential in September. Thus, there was a very high probability of the Dodgers trouncing the Cubs. (The ’08 Phillies had a +35 RD in September, so they would very probably have trounced the Cubs, too.)

        “But the Cubs were resting their players…” one whines. Well, so were a lot of the teams that had low September run-differentials and then got eliminated in the first round. Either resting your regulars is a bad idea or it actually has so little effect on month-to-month performance (the “rest” usually is a couple of games off and getting removed for a pinch-hitter or fielding replacement after the 7th inning) that it’s not relevant. Lots of playoff teams rest their regulars and still post high September run-differentials: oh, and they usually win the first round, too.

        At any rate, the “The ’08 Cubs couldn’t hit righties as well as lefties” idea obviously is bogus: you don’t win 98 games when you are weak against 2/3rds of the opposing starters.

        Now, why were the ’08 Cubs so bad in September? Well, probably for the same reason that most Cubs teams are worse in September than in other months, and why Cubs players fade more strongly at the end of the year than other players: other teams play more night games.

        • Coal

          You had me until that last sentence. There are plenty of teams that fade in September that play lots and lots of night games. I understand the players don’t like the day games, and it *may* have an effect. But there are WAY too many other variables in play to make the claim that the day games is THE explanation.

          Couldn’t it just as easily be that the Cubs having to deal with a cramped locker-room, no batting cage or relaxing training room / clubhouse builds up over time also to make them more fatigued at the end of the year?

          Not to be flippant, but did the thin air in Denver finally “get” to the Broncos defense in the last minute of the playoff game against the Ravens?

          The Day/Night theory holds about as much water as the “Cubs are too right handed” theory. They peaked at the wrong time in 2008 and came up against a really really hot team. (One that was aided by a juicer.) It happens.

  • hawkcub

    This almost seems as if the politicians said hey the Cubs went this far maybe we can make them go ever further. This has been such a one sided negotiation it is pitiful. The moving part is still not a good option. But it seems to be coming closer to a viable option. At some point it will get to a point where it’s worth it. Even if it get to a 50/50 proposition it may be better for them to move just to get away from the Chicago political BS.

  • Dan

    You make some good points Noah, However there are plenty of former Cubs players who admit the day games in the heat of summer take its toll by the end of the year, which leads one to believe that more night games would leave the cubs more fresh for the stretch run of the season and into the playoffs. The 2003 cubs didnt have the best lineup in baseball but i do believe they had the best rotation in the game at that time.

  • notcubbiewubbie

    once again this is really about the chicago way. all the scum political parasites don’t really care about what happens to any thing in our city or state as long as they get their cut. that is the real reason why chicago and the state of illinois are broke, but the super soft media here never tells the truth.

  • Ron


    What would happen to the current TV contracts if the Cubs moved to ethier the burbs or another state say Tennessee? The reason I ask is because it could be an achor that makes a move next to impossible or it could free them of the contract and they could start a new deal in a new location.

    Personally I think the Cubs are getting screwed by the city and why we are hearing so much about it is TR way of swaying public support and laying the foundation for a worst case scenario of a move.

  • Curt

    Freaking unbelievable , quit kissing the mayors and that douschenozzle Tunney , quit already, tell them to screw themselves and find a way to move out of this city.

  • Spencer

    This is something I’ve thought about with some other sports teams I like…but how many people would still be Cubs fans if they relocated to a city other than Chicago? Would it matter at all?

    • Edwin

      Another city, or another state?

  • Sully

    Where does Tunney live.

    • bpaoni

      Here is everything you need to know, direct from Tunney’s website.

      Address: 1057 W. Belmont, Chicago, IL, 60657
      Phone: 773.525.6034
      Fax: 773.525.5058

  • Pingback: Wrigley is Magic()

  • Bob Malkowski

    Let Tunney read your comments about him.

    Cut and paste your comments to Ald. Tunney to:

  • Asad

    Screw the mayor and the stupid alderman. Move the cubs too lake county il and rename them the lake county cubs. Enough with Chicago and its politics!

  • Section 409 Row 2

    If I’m the Ricketts I call Rahm and Tunney’s bluff here. I would never make a threat to leave move to the suburbs but rather make the statement that if renovation plans are not agreed by opening day then the Cubs would scrap all Wrigley renovation plans. Moving to the suburbs should be the very last option. I would first look to move to other locations within the city. Some people on here have mentioned the idea of re-building Wrigley on the lake front which I think would be amazing. Move out of the neighborhood! Ricketts could build his own Wrigleyville including rooftops (condos) which he owns, restaurants, bars, hotels and parking all owned by the Cubs. As a season ticket holder I would move to one of those condos in a heartbeat!

    • Derrek

      This idea makes more sense than many of the “move to the suburbs” ideas. A move out of the 44th ward is enough to make Tunney nervous.

  • Leo L

    Im starting to think maybe the cubs need to find a new alderman to back for the next election. start a propaganda compaign like pappa ricktes was doign with obama then gain political power in the neighborhoods. probably cheaper than greasing emmanuel.

    • Lets get real

      That would be one way- buy an alderman. LOL.

  • itzscott

    The rooftop buildings I’d assume are zoned as residential property. Does anyone know if the units in those buildings are occupied 24/7 by people who actually live in the units or if the sole reason for the being of those buildings are the rooftops themselves, which would require they be zoned as commercial property? Mixed use?

    • Coal

      They are not occupied (other than, in some cases the bottom floors). Several years ago (5? 6? 7?) the rooftops wanted to expand dramatically. The Cubs were a hot ticket, so Tunney brokered a deal where the rooftops were sharing revenue with the Cubs. Since Wrigley was at capacity, it was just gravy and they went along with it. In exchange for giving up some revenue to the Cubs, the rooftops then got (from Tunney) relaxed zoning to build, essentially, high-school stadiums on top of their buildings. It is purely business. And, like the housing bubble, as long as things continue to go up, everybody wins (Tunney, Rooftops, Cubs). Problem is, when the team starts losing, and the rooftops are overbuilt, they can give away free tickets, free beer, etc – and option the Cubs don’t really have. It was all built over massive greed (over the hot property that was the Cubs in the mid-90s through mid 2000s). Somehow, the Cubs are the only ones holding the bag in the “downturn.” They are the ones with the product!

    • Meredith

      Wrigleyville rooftops have their own special place in the building code although they are roughly considered assembly and residential uses. Since assembly and the specfic “rooftop special club license” has stricter life safety rules, those parts of zoning and code win out over their residential uses.

  • Mark

    Move to Rosemont and take advantage of the CTA, airport, expressways and hotels. We don’t need no Wrigley field. They are building a winner. We can start a whole new tradition. Get the heck out of Dodge!!

  • P hertz

    Tunney’s a shakedown artist. I also expect he’ll have stiff competition come re-election time.

  • bruce

    Time for the Rickett family to drop the “We must begin to explore all options if we expect to stay competitive” line to the city. Then (not so) secretly hire a firm to begin plans on building a replica of Wrigley in the suburbs. That will get the ball rolling.

  • http://www.obstructedview.net Aisle 424


    Yes, the aesthetics of Wrigleyville have always been high on Tunney’s priority list.

    • Cub Fan Dan

      I think Ricketts has a winner for the RF opposite the Toyota sign.

  • bpaoni

    anyone know how/where to start a petition? Maybe if we can get enough fan support behind a Cubs move to the burbs Ricketts can use it as ammunition in talks with the City and Cunntey….errr I mean Tunney.

  • Eric S

    If I was Ricketts I would set a HARD DEADLINE on the deal. If it’s not done by May 1st, the deal that includes the organization paying 100% of the bill comes off the table, and if it means they have to wait longer for the deal to go through, the thought of public money gets put back on the table. I think Emmanuel knows this and wants the deal finalized before the Cubs come back and request public funds before too long.

    Better yet, similar to what the Tribune did put the screens back up on the fences so the rooftops can’t see in with the words, “Not on our backs” across the fences. That would be a nice statement to ALD Tunney saying agree to our demands or we’ll screw over your community ANYWAY. The problem there though it would be harder for the Cubs to get what they wanted if they tried to strong arm Chicago politicians.