Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: New Reports Suggest the Deal is in Trouble (But Are We Actually Worried?)

respect wrigleyIt wouldn’t be a deal involving the Chicago Cubs if we hadn’t long passed the point where everyone had confirmed that a deal was done … only to hit unforeseen snags at the 11th hour.

It’s tough to say whether this is a “problem that might hold up getting an actual deal done” kind of problem, or a “problem that we already knew was a problem” kind of problem. But the Sun-Times, which originally reported that a deal between the Cubs, the City, and Alderman Tunney had essentially been reached, says there’s suddenly a “snag.”

The “snag,” of course, is that menacing rooftop press release we discussed on Friday. In short, the rooftops have been cut out of the negotiations, and are threatening to sue if any of their views are blocked by the outfield signage that results from the Cubs’ deal with the City and the Alderman. While that may very well be a legitimate position based on the contract the Cubs have with the rooftops, I don’t quite see how it could scuttle a deal being completed unless the deal was always preconditioned on rooftop approval – and whomever was representing the rooftop interests in the negotiations (Tunney) miscalculated the rooftops’ willingness to accept “some” blockage.

The rooftops, per the Sun-Times, are reportedly insisting upon an extension of the current agreement with the Cubs, which provides a 17% revenue share to the Cubs in exchange for the right to sell tickets and (according to the rooftops) to not have their views into Wrigley Field blocked through 2024. The Cubs, on the other hand, are apparently balking not only at the idea of an extension, but also at locking down a deal with the City and the Alderman until they know that the rooftops aren’t going to sue. As I discussed in greater detail on Friday, lawsuits bring with them uncertainty, and there is no guarantee that a lawsuit could not seriously impede the renovation process, regardless of what deal the Cubs have struck with the City and the Alderman.

A Tribune report also says that the rooftop problem arose yesterday with respect to the outfield signage, and is still being hashed out. We’ve known that the precise size and location of the JumboTron and other outfield signs had to be settled, but we didn’t know that those fine details could still blow things up. The tenor of all reports last week were that: a deal was done, the details are being hashed out, but the details can wait.

(If the rooftops have always had the capacity to derail a deal, and if the rooftops/outfield signage piece was always the stickiest aspect of any deal (it was), then why in the world would anyone believe and report that a deal was essentially done and would be announced on Monday until they knew the rooftops were on board? Or until they knew that the rooftops *didn’t* have the capacity to derail a deal? And if they don’t, then what are these new “snag” reports all about, Tribune and Sun-Times?)

So, I’m back to the question I posed at the outset. Is this a problem that’s going to sink the deal for now, or is it a problem that the Cubs will have to deal with over time, but a deal is still coming?

Only the parties involved know the answer, and I suppose we’ll find out tomorrow at the Cubs’ home opener. Given the reports of late last week, everyone is expecting a champaign-laden announcement tomorrow. Hopefully this “snag” business proves to be nothing more than spilled ink.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

90 responses to “Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: New Reports Suggest the Deal is in Trouble (But Are We Actually Worried?)”

  1. Jon

    With all the hot and humid carbon dioxide being expelled by Beth Murphy the ball should really start to carry in Wrigley Field before we even get to the summer months.

  2. gutshot5820

    How can this not be a deal breaker? The Ricketts need to have full confidence before they invest one dollar into the renovation that they are not going to run into problems. Once, they actually started spending money on materials, etc the RTO would have all the leverage in the world to squeeze the Cubs.

  3. Die hard

    Putting a smaller Jumbotron on top of grandstands behind each dugout would allow rooftops to view from each OF

  4. hansman1982

    Geez, why can’t we ever have nice things.

  5. Tom A.

    New questions. If the announcement is that the agreement was reached and all is good, will it be a real fun and festive environment tomorrow ? If the agreement does hit a snag, do you think that there could be issues requiring additional security ? It is sort of strange and who can be certain which environment we will face. I truly hope it is fun and festive !

    1. Kevin

      “If the agreement does hit a snag, do you think that there could be issues requiring additional security ?”

      I have worried about issues requiring additional security too. At what point do the Rucketts siblings say enough is enough?

      1. Kevin


    2. aCubsFan

      If there is no deal tomorrow, you know darn well the RTOs are going to need protection because it is going to be a very ugly day in Cubdom.

      I believe this issue with the rooftop owners is why the brothers and sister Ricketts wanted to engage other cities about moving. Maybe now Tom will finally give up his love affair with Wrigley and move.

      1. caryatid62

        90% of Cubs fans have no idea that any of this has anything to do with the rooftops. If a deal doesn’t get done, nothing will happen tomorrow.

        1. aCubsFan

          It’s difficult for not anyone in Cubdom not to know what is happening and what’s causing the ‘snag’ unless they have buried their heads in the sand because it has been written about in numerous media outlets and blogs.

          1. caryatid62

            You realize that most people who go to games don’t follow the Cubs nearly as closely as the people on this blog, right? “Hardcore” fans make up about no more than 20% of the total number of fans.

            If you actually think that people are going to resort to violence because the rooftop owners are preventing a deal with the Cubs then…well…I just don’t know what you tell you.

            The idea that people would act violently over a contract dispute involving a baseball team is nothing short of absurd. And if they did, it would be a sad commentary on society.

            1. fanof19

              Rooftop owners aren’t preventing it. The snag was caused by the Ricketts themselves.

              1. caryatid62

                You haven’t provided any proof of this assertion.

                1. fanof19

                  Where is your proof that the rooftops are the actual snag? They aren’t even at the meetings. All I hear is you all repeating something you think is truth, without showing any facts, and you’re mad at me for not jumping on your anti rooftop bandwagon? Repeating speculation doesn’t make it the truth no matter how many times you repeat it. so, to quote Darth, put up the proof that the rooftops are the cause of the snag or shut up. Interesting your first reaction is to call me a liar when I just may be offering you a more truthful scenario to the situation. And if you don’t think the Cubs have their 20 year old interns on here responding, you are sorely mistaken. It’s right out of McDonough’s marketing manual.

              2. DarthHater

                Great. The leeches are now sending their minions out to post on Cubs blogs… :-P

                1. fanof19

                  yes….because the only opinion which is valid is your right?

                  1. caryatid62

                    Provide some proof–that’s all that’s being asked of you.

                    1. fanof19

                      Brett will have it. In the meantime, you can keep on thinking the rooftops are the problem here until he does. Personally, I like to look at the whole picture. Easy to view the rooftops as a scapegoat. Until you start investigating what’s going on. Which is what I have been doing.

                    2. DarthHater

                      Blah blah, don’t post a bunch of vague crap about how you’ve been “investigating” and how you’re going to share your important knowledge with some other person at some other time. Put up or shut up. Preferably the latter.

                    3. caryatid62

                      So in other words, you have no proof of anything you assert.

                      If you’re going to lie, at least have some information to make it look a bit more credible.

                    4. Hansman1982

                      I’m sorry that you were to cheap to buy a proper attorney last time so you got a contract that was worth a damn.

                      I’m sorry that you stole a product from someone and then raised a fuss when they were going to shut you out.

                      I’m sorry that you the clock is ticking on your businesses existence. That soon you will have a bunch of buildings that, once you are out of business, will be virtually worthless.

                      No, wait, I’m not sorry. I have no pity for those who provide so little and demand so much. Your group is the prodigal son. Just there is no chance of returning to earn your keep.

                  2. Tom A.

                    Try a search for recent press releases of Cubs (there are none) and the rooftop owners (they are all negative and full of threats). Who is the blame for negativity ? Looks like those greedy rooftop owners.

  6. Timmy

    We’ll be better off with a few more years of memories without digital everything everywhere all the time. I love the tradition of our scoreboard.

    1. Jim L

      I love the tradition of buying your ticket and walking through the turnstiles to your seat. Instead of sitting on a rooftop 500+ feet away after paying money to a group of leeches.

      1. Timmy

        I’ve never actually sat on a rooftop but I like what it adds to the culture of seeing a game. What won’t add to a game is a giant screen showing advertisements for minutes on end in between innings. I know everyone thinks baseball is better served as a component of consumerism instead of its tradition as a competitive sport, but I lament a lot of the recent decisions by Rickets and Epstein.

        For one there are other teams doing a better job investing in the future while winning right now with lower payrolls. Second, Rickets is a businessman first and a competitor second. In what way will our Cubs resemble the Cubs of the past when this is finished?

        1. Internet Random

          It added to the culture when it was guys in lawn chairs drinking canned beer from Igloo coolers.

        2. DarthHater

          “In what way will our Cubs resemble the Cubs of the past when this is finished?”

          Perhaps they will differ from the Cubs of the past in having won a world series or two.

          1. Hansman1982

            Hey…now…settle down. No need to attack tradition.

            Our history got us back-to-back World Series titles. And three appearances in a row!!!!!!!

  7. hawkcub

    Never knew the Old scoreboard is going away. Oh that’s right it isn’t.

    1. praying the cubs get ready to win

      Why can’t the Cubs replace the old scoreboard with a huge Jumbotron. Every so often the Jumbotron can flash and become like the old scoreboard and everyone will be happy, rooftop owners, traditionalists, the Cubs and the Jumbotron can be really big, nobody can complain because its Rita where the scoreboard was.

  8. Rcleven

    I have a hard time believing the Rickett’s group did not know from day one that the blockage would lead to a problem. Their legal team must have must have found an out.
    The problem will be how long it takes to go through the courts.

  9. arealpoy

    Honestly, whatever happens on the field in 2024 will be nothing compared to the offseason. I don’t wish any ill will on the RTOs but they’re in for a rough ride in ten years. Make what you can now and try to repair any burned bridges. Otherwise, you’re going to be starting at a privacy screen until you sell out to the Cubs at a discount.

    If I were an RTO, I’d really consider selling to the Cubs in the next 3-5 years because there is absolutely no way they’re ever getting another deal after this mess.

  10. King Jeff

    A different question, If they do sue, what are the possible outcomes? I don’t believe that they can stop construction. It seems that the rooftops would just be in line for a settlement of some sort, with some money either coming off the contract, or going back to the rooftops. If that’s the case, I don’t see why a lawsuit should make anyone sweat, the Cubs want out of this deal anyways, and this seems like a perfect excuse. Or am I missing a greater point here?

    1. Ivy Walls

      No your are not. If a breach is afforded than it comes down to the amount of the breach. This would entail large amounts of attorney fees and unless there is a white night the attorney’s would be on the clock in both sides.

      then there is the good faith element, did the cubs offer compensation to any affected roof top operation. i think emotions that the reality that parasitic businesses are seeing the end of the line. Ten years is short with any capital investment. acrimony is expensive and no matter what if i were the group I would be trying to find an exit point. bottom line is that the roof tops are not product or the cubs. they are essentially an opportunity not risk taker.

    2. aCubsFan

      It is making people sweat because of the landmark ordinance that says the outfield walls can not have any interruption of the ‘sweeping views’. A ruling would have to be made that (a.) Wrigley is not a landmarked building, and (b.) that the signage they want is not an interruption of the ‘sweeping views’. Because any money spent on fighting a lawsuit is money that will not be spent on renovating and it is also money that is not going into the team.

      I agree with the Ricketts that not one penny should be spent until this issue of landmark status and any potential lawsuit is resolved. I also agree with the Ricketts on putting the squeeze on the RTOs.

  11. MichiganGoat

    Just more posturing by rooftops and the Sun-Times need to sell a few more papers out of this story. The deal will be announced Monday and these reports will continue for quite some time.

  12. Kevin

    Move from Wrigley and leave Marmol there.

  13. Boogens

    I can’t help but feel that this is another bungled situation caused by Alderman Tunney. He is representing the RTOs and if they’re not aware of the situation or possible agreement then the blame rests directly on his shoulders. It’s his responsibility to to get them in line with the overall agreement.

    1. Kevin

      “I can’t help but feel that this is another bungled situation caused by Alderman Tunney. He is representing the RTOs and if they’re not aware of the situation or possible agreement then the blame rests directly on his shoulders. It’s his responsibility to to get them in line with the overall agreement.”

      Hasn’t Alderman Tunney represented the RT’s to a fault? From 30,000 feet, my guess Tunney was pressured into a deal my the mayor.

      1. caryatid62

        I think we’re all overestimating the amount that Tunney is “representing” the rooftop owners. If he was “representing” them, they wouldn’t be threatening to sue right now. My guess is that he was using them to get what he felt were benefits for the neighborhood as a whole (parking and security).

      2. Boogens

        “…Tunney was pressured into a deal my the mayor.”

        I don’t doubt that Tunney was pressured by the mayor but it’s still his responsibility to keep the RTOs dialed in and gain their buy-in of the eventual deal. He’s done a poor job of that. If he eventually placed a greater focus on getting concessions from the Cubs on building a parking garage and increasing police security on game days by sacrificing the demainds of the RTOs then it was his responsibility to sell them on it. Which, by all accounts, he didn’t do (or didn’t do effectively).

  14. DPU Cubbies

    The rooftops want an extension now? Hahaha these people must have some Of the better drugs in our beloved city. regardless of what happends now, 2024 will
    Be the last time we ever hear about these people. It’s only unfortunate it’s a few years away.

    1. aCubsFan

      No, the RTOs have wanted an extension of the current agreement since the Cubs/Ricketts made it known that they wanted to renovate Wrigley.

  15. MrCub73

    Maybe I am all wet on this subject as I have not calculated the height necessary to accommodate the line sight for the roof top owners, but if the real issue with a jumbotron is blocking the rooftop owners line of sight, if not to unreasonable and the aesthetics can follow the age and design of Wrigley Field, would a slightly elevated board not make sense if it allowed the rooftop owner to essentially see under it? The picture Bret posted was great at creating a mental picture, but with all things up in the air (maybe the video board should be as well), this option should at least be looked into. Even for the rooftop owners, a better product on the field is better business as it will create more revenue there as well. If this scenario would work with ballpark design, most of the issues regarding blockage could resolve themselves. The Cubs and rooftop owners alike will benefit with a better product on the field. Why do most attend games on the roof top? It would seem, that most who attend games on the roof top are not going there because the superb view, but the atmosphere and the unique aspects involved with watching the game from the roof top. Considering this type of design at most would have few support beams that minimally restricting any line up sight and only at limited angles. Maybe even a smaller LED video board could be installed on the backside allowing left roof top owners to view a video board as well. This potentially could even generate even a few additional advertising dollars for the Cubs. Anything that helps put a competitive team on the field and gives the Cubs a chance to win it all is worth a look.

  16. fanof19

    What if the snag in the deal has nothing to do with the rooftops at all? What if the snag is actually the Mayor finding out that the Cubs have been less than truthful with what their plans are. What if the Mayor and Tunney don’t like being fed 1/2 truths. Where I come from, those are called lies, but I’m not going to call out anyone on maybe lying. Maybe the snag is really due to the Ricketts themselves. That would be a funny turn of events in their propaganda machine.

    1. Boogens

      “What if the snag is actually the Mayor finding out that the Cubs have been less than truthful with what their plans are.”

      Not trying to pick a fight but where did this perspective come from? If you have knowledge that the Ricketts have lied or been deceitful about their intentions then come out and say what it is instead of casting shadows without any substance.

    2. josh2

      So the mayor and alderman dont have their own lying propaganda machine?

    3. B Robs

      This person is either a troll or a rooftop owner/employee.

  17. rooftop

    It is very interesting in this day and age of such information availability, that there is still so much lack of understanding and knowledge by the masses of those proclaiming to be Cubs fans. Telling the desperate Cubs fans that a World Series would be in play if only they could put up advertising billboards, and promising a $500 million investment to a budget strapped City are tempting strategies. The rooftops made an agreement with the Cubs and the CIty 10 years ago. This provided for the rooftop owners to invest over $50 million dollars to create the Rooftops, preserve the ambiance and provide revenue for the Cubs. The 20 years was needed to ammortize the investments…and the City/community wanted to preserve the iconic nature of Wrigley Field and Wrigleyville, which is part of the reason the Cubs draw 3 million fans while losing 101 games. Night games with a new television contract will be many, many times more lucrative than a billboard above the bleachers. I remember Cubs fans complaing that they put up advertising inside the ballpark on the cup holders! The Cubs will get a 4000 square foot Jumbo tron on Waveland (350% larger than the current scoreboard!). When it goes up, or when the plans are revealed, there will 10 times the opportunity for Cubs fans to gripe.

    1. aCubsFan

      But the outfield signage and jumbotron make the new TV contracts more valuable then if there isn’t any signage.

    2. caryatid62

      If it means the Cubs have more money to invest in the quality of the ball club, then literally nothing written in your comment matters at all.

      It’s plainly obvious that more money doesn’t guarantee a quality team, but increased revenues will most certainly not hurt. And now that the Cubs are willing to do it without public financing, they should be allowed to make all the additions necessary.

      I don’t begrudge the rooftop owners from trying to protect their investment and fight for their own financial stake, but when your product is built entirely upon someone else’s product, you have to understand that this might happen.

    3. DarthHater


    4. arealpoy

      Here’s the thing. Nobody thinks a jumbotron or some signage puts the team within striking distance of a World Series. It does, however, put them within striking distance of signing players to put them in a position to contend.

      You can spin it however you like, but the simple fact is that a jumbotron and signage would earn the team more money in a season than the rooftop revenue would generate in five years. As a business, the jumbotron option has to be explored and hashed out. On top of that, the jumbotron and signage makes a new TV deal more lucrative as even more eyes are watching it.

      The Cubs prosper, the RTOs prosper and the neighborhood prospers. If the three groups could sit down and figure this out, 2024 won’t be so painful for these “small businesses”. A major league baseball franchise doesn’t get pushed around in any other city. Chicago should be no different.

    5. B Robs

      Yes, all Cubs fans believe more money equals a World Series win. That’s an entirely reasonable and supportable assertion.

    6. Hansman1982

      A 4000 square foot jumbotron would be 97% larger than the current scoreboard. But hey, I’m sure if you were to lazy to look up one fact and run a simple math equation, it was only evacuee you were too busy making sure the rest of your “facts” were right.

      1. Hansman1982

        Evacuee – because. Same difference.

  18. Clay

    You can pretty much bet the rooftops are a goner after their contract is up.. If the Ricketts wanted them to stay around they’d have no problem extending the contract (or restructuring)….

    1. aCubsFan

      Well in just reading the Suntimes article from today, it seems Ricketts wants out of the agreement with the RTOs immediately, and, the RTOs want an extension. Also, the RTOs believe the proposed right field signage will be 3x the size of the current ‘see-through’ Toyota sign.

      The Suntimes says these two issues are what is holding up the agreement.

  19. cubmig

    ………….lol……….funny to see businessmen RTO duke-it-out with businessman Ricketts. Racket vs. Racket. Settle down people. We’ll all now in due time what-is-what and who-gets-the bigger-piece of the pie.

  20. Camiata2

    This is why I will never purchase any seats from the rooftops ever again.

    1. caryatid62

      Why? Because they want to keep their business viable? Because they’d like to see their contract enforced? There aren’t good guys and bad guys here–it’s a bunch of people trying to maximize their investments. Because you and I don’t agree with the rooftop owners doesn’t make them bad people.

      I want to see the Cubs do whatever possible to increase revenue, and as long as they’re paying the full bill, I want to see them get everything they want. But I don’t have a problem with the rooftop owners trying to get everything they can with their investment. If/when they don’t get anything and get shut out of the negotiations, I won’t shed a tear, but this isn’t personal. It’s business.

    2. Coal

      Season ticket holders should hate the rooftops – because they flood the market with cheap seats for which there is almost zero marginal cost, making it harder to sell unwanted games.

      Cubs fans should hate the rooftops because they take money away from the Cubs (lost food, drink, and ticket sales are not replaced by the 17% royalty), because of the distraction they are.

      Bar/restaurant owners should hate the rooftops because if people weren’t eating/drinking there they might be drinking/eating at their establishment(s).

      The neighborhood should hate the rooftops because they bring thousands of people to the neighborhood, contribute zero parking themselves, fill them full of food and drink and then turn them loose on the neighborhood.

      The fan from out of town, the corporate types that want group outings, or the “groupon” loving cheapscate are about the only people who can legitimately like the rooftops, and the Cubs are working (through renovations) to create a better experience inside Wrigley for the out of towner and corporate groups. That is why the rooftops should be worried. Their racket is going to be up way before 2014 – officially or not.

      1. G_Racin

        Never thought of it quite that way. You make some excellent points.

        1. Coal

          The irony is that the rooftops couldn’t help themselves with the expansion. It would be entirely possible for them to generate more revenue from fewer seats. There are now essentially an unlimited number of rooftop seats out there. Guess what that does to their value. If they had done upgrades in terms of the facilities, food items, and modest seating increases they could still charge a lot of money per seat because it would be high end, unique, and somewhat scarce.

          The fact that Tunney/the City allowed the rooftops to expand so much while at the same time not allowing the Cubs to expand at all is preposterous.

          1. hawkcub

            Not going to disagree that the RTO got greedy. Because they did but attendance to Cubs games overall had as much to do with them not being able to charge a premium . I remember when things were great for them they were charging $100 for the cheapest game. Saw Sox/Cards going for $175. Even then you had to have groups of at least 15.

      2. Coal

        [2024, sorry]

        1. Tom A.

          Drat I was hoping that you knew something and 2014 was correct.

      3. Tom A.

        Well said !

        1. Coal

          I’m not going to be at the game tomorrow, but I would love to see the bleacher fans this year take up the cause of a “rooftops suck” chant – after the traditional “right field sucks” and “left field sucks” chant(s). There should be plenty of time for clever chant invention this season what with the product …. well ….. “sucking.”

      4. hawkcub

        Good points but I don’t know if I would include the fan from out of town in the pro RT crowd. If they are in Chicago for the first time and want to see Wrigley they are going inside. If they have been multiple times your probably more then a casual fan and don’t want to sit 600 feet away.

        1. hawkcub

          My comment was to what Coal said as my comment didn’t line up like I thought it would.

  21. DarthHater


  22. Die hard

    Saw the Detroit Jumbotron today …. If that’s the kind the Ricketts want the Rooftoppers have a legitimate beef…. But the stands weren’t even half full and so much for a good investment….

    1. DarthHater

      According to mlb.com, attendance at today’s game in Detroit was 39,829. That is over 96% of regular season capacity of Comerica Park. But hey, over 96% full and “weren’t even half full” are almost the same thing, right?

      Moreover, even if your assertions had some actual factual basis, the attendance at a single game on a 50-degree day in early April would prove absolutely nothing as to whether a jumbotron is a good investment.

      1. Coal

        MLB counts/reports tickets sold, not gate attendance. Thus, it is possible for the Tigers to have sold 96% of their seats AND have half the seats empty. Could it be……perhaps you’re both right!

        1. DarthHater

          No, it could not. Because diehard’s point was that the alleged poor attendance demonstrated that the jumbotron was not a good investment. But if the tickets were sold, then the team got the money for the ticket, even if grandma stayed home today. Also, I looked at the photo album of today’s game at ESPN and the stands in the background all looked well populated, except for one picture that was from a pre-game activity.

      2. CubbiesOHCubbies

        C’mon darth. Go easy on die hard. He does make a good point. I spoke with the 4% that didn’t go to the Detroit game today and thy ALL said it was entirely based on that hideously gaudy jumbo tron.

  23. notcubbiewubbie

    once again the crappy ballpark and the stinking yuppies in wrigleyville stop the cubs from becoming a world class team and operation.wrigley field it is a shrine ;so is the alamo wrigley deserves the same fate blow it up PLEASE!!!!!!

  24. Westbound Willie

    You really think that the ballpark is the reason was the cubs have been so bad almost every year?

    And you think if the ballpark gets renovated that the cubs are going to become a world class team?

    1. DarthHater

      If we get a big enough jumbotron, the players will have to see gigantic replays of how bad they are and will be embarrassed into becoming a world class team! :-P

      1. TC

        you may be joking, but this is basically what people who boo their home team think will happen. “Maybe they just don’t realize they’re playing poorly!”

        1. Westbound Willie

          I doubt anybody on this team doesn’t realize how bad they are as a collective group when they look at the other rosters of their peers.

          Guys like shire hola and Hairston and lillibridge are just this years version of Aaron miles and Joey gathright. Since Epstein has been here he has signed guys who I didn’t even know they played the game. Guys out of nowhere that of course are garbage. The only guy that has been decent has been camp and I’m waiting for him to start taking social security any day now.

          Every season is sacred was just a bunch of bs.

  25. SiLLY Rabbit

    One can argue, perhaps even cry tears, that when Ricketts bought the team – It is been the Cubs that have robbed the Rooftops by assembling the worst disasterous team in the past 40 years. Some might even claim that under Ricketts leadership the product the Cubs put on the field is not worthy of stealing ,let alone to buy a ticket within the friendly confines,

    Just a thought.

  26. Internet Random

    “[E]veryone is expecting a champaign-laden announcement tomorrow.”

    Wait. Are you saying the Cubs are moving to Champaign? Oh my God, you are, aren’t you?

  27. mysterious4th

    Would it be worth (the risk and possible expensive lawsuit) to go ahead and block the rooftops view and hash it out in court (or settle outside the courtroom down the road)?
    Would they actually make more money that way by blocking it with the signs/jumbotron and paying of the leeches? I could see the Rickett’s family doing that. Just giving a big eff you and blocking them and play courtroom/lawsuit chicken. Hell, I would do it just because the rooftops are being whiney babies. The Cubs let them sell tickets to watch the cubs with a small amount the the revenue going to the Cubs.