respect wrigleyJust as my … suspicious detector went off when Dave Kaplan reported that Rosemont was suddenly offering the Ricketts Family a tract of land to move the Cubs out of Chicago, my … suspicious detector is going off today, now that the Mayor’s Office is spouting off about the Cubs very nearly blowing a deal.

According to the Sun-Times, the Mayor’s Office hasn’t been too pleased by what they perceive to be the Cubs playing hardball suddenly this week with Alderman Tom Tunney, and an anonymous source even goes so far as to suggest that the Cubs have imperiled the very deal that was going to get them what they want.

“They just accused the alderman of desecrating Wrigley Field [by suggesting removal of the Old Scoreboard], and [David] Axelrod is out there saying Tunney is in the rooftops’ pocket,” an anonymous “mayoral confidante” told the Sun-Times. “Every time we make progress, the Cubs do something stupid to set us back.

“There has been progress. There have been concessions made. But the constant one-upsmanship in the media only undermines the trust that’s been built over the period of months. Now, we have to try to rebuild that trust. We have to reclaim territory we’ve already covered.”

Constant one-upsmanship in the media? You mean like having an anonymous “confidante” talking tough to the Sun-Times? To me, this looks to be the very thing that the Mayor’s court is accusing the Cubs of: using the media for leverage. (Note that, whenever you read about anonymous Mayoral confidantes, it’s in the Sun-Times. Whenever you read about anonymous Cubs sources, it’s in the Tribune.)

The confidante told the Sun-Times that the Mayor’s Office is willing to sign off on a deal that would permit “some signage” in Wrigley Field which would yield “some blockage” of rooftop views, and that would increase night games from 30 to around 45. Or, at least, he was willing to sign off until the Cubs totally ruined it with their evil and nefarious smear campaign against Tunney. (Please read the previous sentence as dripping with sarcasm.)

Forgive me if that is hard to believe – after months of wrangling and fighting privately, the Cubs are suddenly going to ruin all of that by going on a public campaign against Tunney, even as a deal is close? I can’t accept that. It defies logic. It’s missing the nuance and context required to really understand what’s going on behind closed doors.

Which, unfortunately, is where we, the public, remain – standing outside those doors, subject only to the “constant one-upsmanship in the media.”

Just get the freaking thing done.

  • hansman1982

    Wow, ya, this smells like:

    “There is a really low chance we are giving in on this deal so we are going to blame the Cubs so they look like the bad guys when they start talking to the suburbs about moving”.

    Fairly certain the Cubs haven’t done jack, the media (and normal people) are the ones “smearing” Tunney for his asinine suggestion about the scoreboard.

  • http://www.justinjabs.com/blog/ justinjabs


    / this is probably not going to post correctly oh well /

    • http://www.justinjabs.com/blog/ justinjabs

      Hey it worked!

      • Connie

        Perfect and classic!

  • Leo L

    to me this another sign that things are not going well. if things were going well then why would the city say the cubs are doing stupid things. April first is going to be interesting.

  • Jason

    this is starting to be like children arguing back and forth. The Mayor’s office and the Rooftop owners are sure making it easier for fans to back a move to Rosemont. I don’t think it would happen, but each day they drag on a deal more fans jump on the idea of moving the team somewhere they can better their establishment.

  • fromthemitten

    this is beyond the pale I am so pissed off like wtf I hope none of these shits get reelected if they try to mess with my Cubs

  • fromthemitten


  • Kevin

    I thought the circus only stopped at the United Center, I guess they also stop at City Hall.

  • JR

    I say all of Bleachernation climb up on the rooftops, take a dump, and then light it on fire. Yeah, that’s how we roll. ha..

  • Indy57

    In a stunning move, today the Chicago Tribune Dining Editor, Mellow Carmello Carrillo learned in an exclusive interview with the Mayor of Evanston that the City of Evanston has offered the owner of Ann Sather the opportunity to move its Belmont restaurant to a new location in Evanston. This offer was made after a series of events have caused Sather’s owners to consider all options.

    In 2015 Sather was granted landmark status due to its long-time residence in the north side hamlet of Lakeview. Sather has from time to time inquired about expansion by adjoining its current space with a vacant space next store or adding a patio out in back. However, neighbors complained about breaking with tradition and the issues that would be created by a larger storefront and outside dining area.

    In exchange for potentially granting Sather’s wish, neighbors have requested 20 gallons of free coffee and 400 free cinnamon buns 81 days of the year. Neighbors explain that with Sather in their midst, there is an opportunity for them to hold brunches in their front porches for over flow customers. It is estimated that neighbors will be able to take in nearly $200 for a group of 4 in what they call “Wild Brunch on the Front Porch.” These “Front Porch” owners have organized and have the support of their Alderman Thomas “Eddie” Money. It is believed that the “Front Porch” owners contribute heavily to the Alderman Money’s campaign “fund.” We could see his bulging pockets and heard the sound of loose change as we talked with him yesterday outside of Sather.

    Sather’s owners complained that this situation would have a detrimental impact to their revenues and they feel that they should be entitled to enjoy the proceeds of their product. Front Porch owners countered that they’d be happy to compromise and provide 17% of their revenue to Sather. Further, Front Porch owners have come up with a creative way to provide additional revenue to Sather suggesting that the owners can place wide-screen monitors on their porches and will provide Sather with 100% of the advertising revenue they can generate. “Nuts on Clark” suggested this might be a good solution and that they would be willing to advertise through this medium from time to time.

    Front Porch owners made this offer with the additional compromise that Sather install parking meters on their streets at no charge to Front Porch owners, but would allow the Front Porch owners to re-coup 100% of parking proceeds. Front Porch owners estimate that they will be able to charge $50 and hour during peak brunch times on Saturdays and Sundays thereby allowing themselves to provide upkeep on their front porches.

    However, Front Porch owners were adamant that Sather not be allowed to erect a fence around their new proposed patio. “This would block the view of patrons who might want to come and enjoy brunch on our front porches”, stated Ms. Kelly, owner of Kelley’s Veranda. “We insist on unobstructed views. We are prepared to put time and money into our front porches and we don’t want Sather to impede our business. After all, we are taking on a lot of risk here.”

    Local residents have also taken a hard look at Sather’s operating hours and have asked the restaurant to open later in the morning on Saturdays and Sundays (9:00am) and to close earlier (3:00pm) as well. This is due to the constant traffic and parking issues created as patrons drop off/pickup friends and family.

    Neighbors also complain of high volume coffee drinkers using their yards and alleys as urinals since Sather does not have enough bathroom space to accommodate its patrons without serious overflow. They are also requesting that Sather pay for more police protection and patrols in order to ensure a reduction in traffic congestion and to keep Sather’s patrons out of their yards and alleys.

    Last week, Sather’s owners suggested they might be able to comply with these creative requests, but inquired about adding dinner service on weekdays from 5:00pm until 10:30pm. Front Porch owners were dubious as to the additional income this might bring to Sather and suggested that the alcohol consumption at dinnertime would only add to the degradation of their lawns and alleys. Front Porch owners are reviewing this proposal and have hinted that may allow Sather to remain open for dinner 33 nights a year as a compromise. However, the Front Porch owners have adamantly ruled out Friday and Saturday nights.

    Sather’s has suggested that it is nearly impossible for them to stay in the Belmont location under these conditions. Along with meeting all of these requests from local residents, Sather’s owners point out the Chicago City Council, as part of the Landmark status designation, introduced a new 12% tax on Sather’s restaurant and called it a “bemusement” tax, taxing all of Sather’s revenues at 12%. The City Council believes that these dollars can be saved and potentially used to help other area restaurants that are not able to attract the high volume of customers that Sather has enjoyed for so many years. The “Front Porch” owners have requested that these dollars be reinvested in their neighborhood for lawn repair, garbage collection and compensation for fuel costs local residence incur while “driving around trying to find parking” on weekends during brunch hours.

    A spokesperson for the Mayor’s office only smirked when the suggestion was made that Sather might leave its Belmont location for the Suburbs. “What, you think they can make money in Evanston? It’s nothin’ but a bunch of rich college kids up there. They don’t even get out of bed in time for brunch. Besides, they drink Red Bull and eat granola bars. No way Sather makes it in Evanston. Nobody’s gonna go there from anywhere else in Chicago either. You ever try to get to any place in Evanston? Minimum 45 minutes wherever you go in that City. No, no one is going to Evanston. It’s a ridiculous thought. Sather and the Front Porch Association need to work this out…..and quick. We need a deal.”

    Many local residents have also complained bitterly about the seeming fall-off in food quality and service. “The product that they put on the table ain’t what it used to be. Why I remember the omelets back in “84, now that was a great meal. They don’t even put green peppers in there anymore and you have to pay extra for the hash browns. You can’t call it the Sandberg Platter any more; it’s more like a Barney Meal now. Jeeesh.” Said one Front Porch owner who wished to remain anonymous.

    When contacted by the media, Sather’s owners said they have no comment, as they will not negotiate through the press. Many local patrons and neighbors believe that Sather could not maintain its base of long time patrons if they were to move out of the area. Area neighbors believe there is a special “symbiotic” relationship that exists between the neighborhood and Sather that makes the restaurant a “must” destination for tourists, local residents and residents from surrounding areas and suburbs. Sather’s owners claim they must be allowed to make necessary changes to their business to stay viable long-term. Stay tuned.

    • MichiganGoat

      Okay I enjoyed that…

  • MichiganGoat

    Sigh smh rabble rabble rabble suburbs rabble rabble rabble ANGRY FIST WAVING rabble rabble rabble sigh FIRE FIRE FIRE rabble rabble rabble BLEACHER rabble rabble rabble politics.

    There I think I covered all future comments.

    • http://www.justinjabs.com/blog/ justinjabs

      Yup, Goat’s got it. We’re done here. See y’all tomorrow

      • MichiganGoat

        Head in sand until opening day

        • DarthHater

          rabble rabble rabble ANGRY FIST WAVING rabble rabble rabble ROAST THE GOAT rabble rabble rabble trolling.


          • hansman1982


  • cubfanincardinalland

    I have been saying this for six months, and it is more true today than ever. This is not going to end well.
    What makes no sense, I thought Axelrod was Rahms buddy. Now he is doing evil for the Cubs. What a freaking circus.

    • WGNstatic

      I don’t buy the Axelrod angle. Political connectedness is way too important to him for him to cross Rahm Emanuel on behalf of the Ricketts family.

      • DarthHater

        Perhaps Axelrod just said something because it’s what he thinks? Occam, meet razor.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          I’m not sure that’s the Occam explanation, though. Folks who make a living playing politics tend not to do political things without thinking through the implications.

          • Cubbie Blues

            My guess is that the Mayor’s office wants to stay as perceived neutral as possible, but also sees Tunney is dragging this out. He calls up his buddy to release a statement in favor of the Cubs position to try and get the ball rolling. The Mayor’s office still wanting to appear neutral then needs to release a statement of their own disavowing negotiations being batted around in the press and at the same time telling both sides to get this done.

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

              I’m not sure how neutral the Mayor’s Office looks right now – they just took a shit on the Cubs. It’s not like this “anonymous confidante” is speaking out of turn. I’m certain it’s all a calculated strategy, starting at the highest levels (i.e., the Mayor). They’re all too calculating and smart (I know, I know) to not plan out every little thing that makes it way out into the public.

              • Cubbie Blues

                Oh, I agree. I do however think that they feel they are being neutral by telling both parties to get the deal done. Sometimes you have to take rational thinking out of the picture when looking at politics. When a political figure feels one way but is trying to stand impartial they will inevitably say or do something that shows their true colors. They will then do/say something more down the middle and think that nobody will notice how political they are being.

                If that makes any sense.

          • hansman1982

            Ya, Occam’s razor works in reverse with politics.

            • DarthHater

              Okay, now that makes some sense, in a perverse way appropriate to politics. If that’s what you meant, Brett, then I agree.

          • DarthHater

            I still think your hypothesis makes more assumptions than mine, so you will have to pry the cold, dead corpse of William of Occam from my cold dead fingers. 😉

  • another JP

    This spokesman is full of it. It was reported just a week ago that the city had cut off all negotiations, so all he’s doing is trying to get the upper hand in a bargaining position that suddenly is weaker because of the Rosemont offer and some surprising fan support for a Cub move. Just more evidence that you can’t trust the mayor or these politicians as far as you can throw them.

  • Kirby

    Today’s government leaders only think about one thing … How to line their pockets and their cronies pockets based on the product of someone else’s work. While Wrigley file is my heaven on earth, it’s time for the Cubs to open negotiations with with other suburban locations in public. The landmark can stay where it is and the neighborhood food and bar businesses can close loosing all of those tax dollars for the city of Chicago.
    It’s just like the governor not wanting to expand gambling at Illinois race tracks or granting more gambling casino licenses. We have the largest deficit of any state, they are afraid of reform and change. He claims they couldn’t control it … WTF? It means more jobs and more revenue for the city and state.
    Wake up politicians before you have nothing less to govern in the city or state!

    • DocPeterWimsey

      Either you are a deep time geologist who uses “today” as a short-hand for the Quaternary, or you have never read a history book…… (Those don’t need to be exclusive, but I’ve never known a geologist who was not also interested in history.)

      • hansman1982

        What if just the Holocene is “today”?

        • DocPeterWimsey

          I consider everything after the Permian to be today, myself….

          • hansman1982

            I’m more of a Cambrian kinda guy.

  • Kevin

    I love the Cubs………..I just don’t like Chicago anymore!

  • WGNstatic

    The one piece of this that is confusing to me is David Axelrod. He is one politically smart dude, he isn’t taking to twitter after downing a few beers and reading Brett’s rant against the current state of Wrigley negotiations.

    Furthermore, if he had to list his friends in order… I am thinking that Rahm pops a bit sooner than the ol’ Ricketts clan (yeah, I know that the Ricketts family is not monolithic in their political leanings, but still), so I have a hard time seeing him being the Ricketts family’s shill when he takes to twitter.

    So… just who is this “mayor’s office insider”? Sounds to me like perhaps someone in the mayor’s inner circle who may lean a bit more towards Tummey than others in the same office.

  • preacherman86

    I don’t understand the cities or wrigleyville’s position on this. The Cubs have offered to pay for everything and the only reason it wouldn’t be agreed to is because the damn rooftop idiots are STEALING MONEY, if this were a movie it would be considered piracy! it is damn near criminal. And they know the Cubs won’t seriously entertain leaving wrigleyville because of the fan reaction to that. More so, these restaurants and bars are greedy as hell. The only reason they make the money they do is the Cubs in the first place. Give em more night games, improve the quality on the field with updates to stadium, more income, and better overall product. Heck if there are more night games there will be more dinner reservations and more drinking if you ask me! Everyone around the stadium is fully taking advantage of the team and it is criminal. You can’t scalp tickets on the property but you damn well can create and sell them for seats across the seat to the same show! It’s a luxury they have made the money they have, its not a business, it’s residence, restaurants and shops making bank on the cubs bill. ITS BS!!! come on chicago, the press you would get with a rennovated stadium and the allstar games, etc. etc etc. just back off and let the Ricketts run the organization and do what needs to be done to maximize the organization in every facet. Cubs win, we all win!

  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

    Does anyone still think this will definitely get done? The Mayor is spending a ton of political capital stalling and trying to make the Cubs look bad. If he backs down at all now, it will look like the Cubs won.

  • http://thecubcontrarian.blogspot.com Kyle

    Yesterday: “The Cubs are so brilliant with how they are playing this through the media. What a brilliant leak!”

    Today: “How dare they accuse the Cubs of leaking this! They had nothing to do with it!”

    Seriously, though, in negotiations like this, when both sides start spazzing out about how the other is derailing the deal, it either means the deal is incredibly close to getting done or it’s incredibly close to falling apart. And given that it makes no sense for anyone to let it fall apart, I’ll assume the former.

    • scorecardpaul

      Seriously, though, in negotiations like this, when both sides start spazzing out about how the other is derailing the deal, it either means the deal is incredibly close to getting done or it’s incredibly close to falling apart. And given that it makes no sense for anyone to let it fall apart, I’ll assume the former.

      This statement makes no sense. Go ahead and believe anything you want, but this doesn’t even resemble an argument , fact, or truth. that comment is just nonsense.

      • http://thecubcontrarian.blogspot.com Kyle

        Thanks for stopping by.

        • JR

          Kyle, you seem like you have a lot of sarcastic humor potential. If you used those talents in a positive way I think it would be great for you and all on this board. Either way I find your clever/snarky/atypical comments funny at times…

  • Tim

    The rosemont cubs? Doesn’t catch for me

    • DarthHater

      No, no. The Chicago Cubs of Rosemont. Much catchier, don’t you think?

    • hansman1982

      We’d probably be the Chicago Cubs of Rosemont, in that scenario.

    • noisesquared

      The Chicago Wolves do play in Rosemont, so the precedent exists for a ‘Chicago’ team to exist in Rosemont…

      • scorecardpaul

        if they were in the world series we would all be lining up to buy tickets even if they were called the Rosemont Dogs.

  • Derrek

    I still hope the city and Wrigley find a way to work this out.

    However, that Rosemont deal looks juicy as hell right now. The amusement tax is nothing compared to what it is now. Space and freedom for the Cubs to develop… pretty much everything they cannot do now. Plus, the mayor invited the team! At least one of the big-wigs in the area knows what’s going on.

    I still love Wrigley though. The Cubs should use Rosemont to their advantage. Show interest in the move and if that does not scare the city, then out they go and onto a new era of Cubs baseball.

  • DONNIE621

    When the White Sox and the Bulls were moving into “public housing” did they get this much grief. No they got rent concessions and a facility (Sox park) that looks like it was designed in Moscow pre 1960.

    Cubfanincardinaland is right… this is not going to end well no matter what the public perception is. These guys are going to stick the Cubs as much as possible now and into the future… as far as the eye can see. I think the Cubs will rue the day they chose to stay in Wrigleyville.

    • Tim Mo

      I might be mistaken but the UC was mostly private funding between Wirtz and Reinsdorf

      • noisesquared

        The UC was privately funded, but special tax breaks were granted in order for Wirtz and Reinsdorf to proceed, basically locking them into only paying about 25% of their property tax obligation. The below article notes how over a 6 year span in 2002-2007, they saved anywhere from $30-$65 mil in property taxes. Estimate those types of savings over the life of the UC, and the tax breaks have to be well over $100 mil, possibly over $150 mil (and approaching the $174 million UC construction cost).


        • Pat

          Your numbers are way off. Nowhere is it suggested they saved “between 30-65 million”. The quoted text below shows an estimated savings of 27.6 million. Where are you getting the up to 65 million part?

          “He dug through tax records from the Cook County Board of Review, the county Assessor’s office and the county treasurer to find the annual net income reported by the arena between 2002 and 2007, when its owners appealed their property taxes, making them public record.

          What he found was that Messrs. Reinsdorf and Wirtz paid $8.5 million in property taxes during that time.

          Without the benefits from the 1989 legislation granting them relief — things like a locked-in assessment rate and deductions of income taxes, maintenance costs and mortgage interest — he calculated that they would have had to pay $35.9 million or more in property taxes”

          Also, please keep in mind that the report was comissioned by a bunch of socialist goobers who are hugely anti any sort of private business (in fact they can’t keep it out of what is supposed to an economic study), and, judging the their total inability to teach the subject to anyone else, not very good with math.

          That report is hillarious though. Thanks for the laugh.

  • BluBlud

    This doesn’t makes sense, unless, my sispicions that I have are true. Ricketts doesn’t want Wrigley. So when he seen a deal was close, he did what he had to do to kill it. Ricketts wants a new stadium,plain and simple. It’s starting to become more apparent. I’m not saying this story is true or false, but I don’t think Ricketts really want to keep that hell trash heap known as Wrigley. I fine with overhauling the place, including replacing scoreboard with a Jumbotron, and changing the bricks on the outfield wall so our outfielders don’t have to be scared. Putting signs to block out the rooftops, a new club house, and whatever new facilities. I’m also cool with a brand new stadium. It really doesn’t matter to me.


    After seeing how bad the city and neighborhood is really giving it to the Cubs…..I think for the first time I’d actually be okay with them leaving Wrigley. It would still be hard to see them move but I’ve been to enough games to let it go. They never won a world series on the North side. Maybe it’s time to go back to the west side where they originated and start winning again.
    Take the Cubs out of the neighborhood and it’ll be a ghost town in two years. Kind of messed up to treat your bread and butter like an after thought.

  • Kev

    So, is “mayoral confidante” a euphemism for “White Sox fan”?

  • JoeyCollins

    It pains me to say it but i just don’t care anymore. Or probably i just can’t care anymore. The fans have zero say in this process and continuing to get our hopes up for one plan or another, no matter how logical the plan seems, is just setting ourselves up for frustration. The deal will get done by April 1st, or it wont. The cubs will move to a suburb, or they wont. From now until a final decision is made im just going to sit back and wait, then probably shrug when it happens, no matter the outcome. I’m a Cubs fan first and foremost, and for the first time in my life i feel we have owners who are Cubs fans as well. I believe the Ricketts care about this team, more than as a business venture, and I trust they will attempt to do what’s best for the Cubs, on and off the feild. If they don’t it’s not like we have any say. Good luck Tom. Good luck Cubs. Rahm and Tunney… blow me.

    • JR

      The only reason I care is I want RIcketts to get PAID. Which obviously effects/helps the Cubs in all kinds of good ways, and makes them a bit closer to that title we all want. But yeah, I get what you’re saying it’s getting old.

  • cubzforlife

    Brett you are right on. I’m now convinced a deal will be done by opening day. After reading the SunTimes story I pictured Rahm laughing on the slopes in Utah. There is no way next week at this time we’re not reading about a deal.

  • DONNIE621

    Does anyone remember the story of the “Golden Goose”? The Cubs are the Goose and Tunney and Rahm are the farmers.

  • Pingback: Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: Alderman Tunney Doesn’t Like Playing the Villain (Also: Meeting Details) | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

  • Die hard

    All of the hogs fighting over who is going to get fatter ….. At the end of the day hogs get slaughtered …. Would be interesting if big money from Latin America start own league offering big contracts to their native born sons ….. Will see if there’s anything left to slobber over

  • Tim

    I have a feeling we are going to see a lot of “Save Wrigley” and “Stop Killing Wrigley” and “I Hate Tunney” signs this season at Wrigley Field. And I am all for it. The fans need to show the city who they are backing in this situation.

    And when is the next election for alderman of the 44th ward? Because I can tell you who the Cubs will not be endorsing for another term

    • sillyrabbit

      I doubt it. The Cubs endorsement means next to nothing to the people that actually vote in the ward. The Cubs should worry about putting a good product on the field.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

        Pet peeve: when people post using lots of different names to make it seem as though there is a chorus of people in agreement on an issue. #WebmasterProblems

        • sillyrabbit

          Kinda like the crap you spew at times

          • TWC

            Be honest with me. You are a rather sad, pathetic person, aren’t you?

            • MichiganGoat

              Living in a windowless basement awaiting mom to warm up a hit pocket will do that to a person.

              • Silly rabbit

                I see the slugs that lick RIckets toilet dispenser are getting restless.

                • TWC

                  I’ll take that as a yes.

                  • Silly rabbit

                    you are a yes man by nature. so your thought process is to be forgiven.

                • DarthHater


                  • Silly rabbit

                    yeah it always the same robots

                    • DarthHater

                      Some sentiments bear repeating.

                  • DarthHater

                    Awww, maybe a smaller version will fit better:


Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Need more baseball goodness? Check out BN Baseball - Videos, Plays, and Other Baseball Fun.