wrigley empty seatsDon’t forget to sign up for the $1,000 free fantasy football contest, which runs this weekend. It’s a lot of fun, and you can win some scratch. Sign up here. Full details here.

  • It’s no secret that attendance was down this year for the Chicago Cubs. In fact, attendance was way down. The Cubs drew just 2,642,682 in paid attendance (not necessarily actual attendance), down almost 10% from last year (2,882,756), which was itself down almost 5% from the year before. Indeed, 2013 was the 5th consecutive season of attendance declines (from a peak of more than 3.3 million in 2008), and it marked the Cubs’ lowest paid attendance since 1998. Will the steep declines in attendance – and, thus, revenue – push the Ricketts Family into opening up the vault to sign some “big names” this offesason? I’m not so sure it will. If they truly believe that the best chance for sustained winning (which, if you track attendance, is the only sure way to get asses in the seats consistently) is the current rebuilding approach, then that will remain the focus, even from a financial perspective. That said, if there’s a “big name” that also fits with the rebuilding plan? All the more reason to shell out the dough and make the signing happen.
  • Darnell McDonald was the hero yesterday, with three hits, including the decisive three-run homer. It’s probably been a disappointing season for him, on the whole, but I’m sure it’s nice to go out with a bang.
  • When the Cubs get good, will the Cardinals, Pirates, and Reds still be standing in their way?
  • Writing at Sports on Earth, John Perrotto kinda sums up the seasons of Starlin Castro and Anthony Rizzo (though without mention of Castro’s aborted approach change or Rizzo’s suggestive peripherals). Some interesting quotes, if nothing else.
  • Among the instructional league catching converts? Second baseman Gioskar Amaya. Physically, it seems like Amaya would have a good shot at making the change, assuming his arm can swing it. His bat, which picked it up in the second half of 2013 at Kane County, would certainly play even better at catcher than second base. Amaya figures to rank as a top 20-30 prospect in the Cubs’ system this offseason. The Cubs’ system-wide catching depth is almost non-existent, so Amaya, together with Ben Carhart, Giuseppe Pappacio, and Jordan Hankins, would be a nice addition.
  • Zbo

    Speaking of attendance, did anyone else see the bench clearing in Atlanta after the home run by Gomez? The main thing I noticed was the empty seats at Turner Field.
    Braves fans = pathetic.

    • DocPeterWimsey

      “Braves fans = pathetic.”

      I think that there is a missing “a” in there!

      • Zbo

        Good one. Yeah…that too. Entitled, perhaps?

        • Cedlandrum

          Here is my question: Bigger tool, Carlos Gomez or Brandon Phillips?

          • Cubbie Blues

            Phillips is the hands down winner.

          • MichiganGoat


          • MichiganGoat

            Okay retry a different image

            • Zbo

              That picture screams tool.

              • C. Steadman

                i would have to say Braun is at the top of my list of disliked players…i hate the man

                • Funn Dave

                  That’s tough. I think I’d still go Pujols. If we’re counting other sports, though Colin Kaepernick takes the cake.

                  • C. Steadman

                    how is Pujols worse than Braun?

                  • C. Steadman

                    or Kaepernick worse than Aaron Rodgers or Ndonkeykong Suh?

  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

    Not so sure about moving Amaya to catcher. It doesn’t hurt to try him there, but right now I think he fits better at second both offensive and defensively (with the potential to be quite good in both areas).

    He’s got a patient, line drive approach at the plate, but there isn’t a lot of power projection there. 10-15 HR a year (to go with plenty of doubles and triples) is about all I’d expect. I’m not sure his SLG will make more than a backup behind the plate whereas he still has starter potential at second.

    • King Jeff

      He also has a lot of company at second moving forward.

    • Andrew

      Why does the 2B have to have little power\ whereas the catcher have big power? The aim should be to get as much offense total as possible. The cubs have a good amount of power coming up (especially at 2B if Baez ends up there). Just because typically catchers are big guys with some pop, and 2b are typically scrappy little guys, doesnt mean this won’t work.

      • Nate

        I’m not really sure and I agree with you but I think traditionally it has been because catchers are more likely to lose speed. Not necessarily base stealing but if doubles become singles and you can no longer run out infield hits your not as productive. I guess guys with bad knees can still hit HR’s?

    • ssckelley

      I agree, I think it would be a mistake to move Amaya to catcher. He has been progressing nicely as a hitter, he struggled a little at Kane County but still not bad numbers overall for a 2nd baseman and he is still only 20 years old (soon to be 21).

    • jt

      could they project Amaya to be a 5th infielder who has potential to increase value as a 3rd catcher?

  • 1060Ivy

    The attendance decline costs the Cubs about $17 MM in revenue – according to SunTimes – which is fairly close to the the $25 MM increase in television revenues from the MLB which kick in for 2014.

    My guess would be that the season ticket waiting list may be a thing of the past shortly.

    Wouldn’t be surprised if the Cubs bring back the Weekends and Night Game packages that they used to offer.

    • Kramden

      What no one is picking up on is that while the decline in attendance translates to a $17 million revenue decrease, it is more than offset by the decline in payroll…. Which means that the Cubs may actually have done better financially than last year when all the numbers are crunched.

      • Scotti

        That’s like your boss giving you a pay cut because you sold your car and expecting you to be good with it. Hey, you made a couple extra grand selling that car so why complain about the boss docking your pay? In actuality, the Cubs have LOSSES galore from monies not realized (from losing).

        What the $17 million also fails to grasp is the enormity of the overall losses (it is just this year). Nor does it take into account losses from ad buys (stadium/media) or losses from NOT raising prices.

  • cooter

    I’ve never been to wrigley, so I was wondering if anyone knew the average ticket price. I just just trying to figure out (roughly) the total sales for the season.

    • Scotti

      $45 ish. The average person spends about 50% of that on food/drink.

      • cooter

        thank you

  • jon

    In theory if the Cubs moved Kris Bryant to catcher, they would then have the best catching prospect in all of baseball.

    • On The Farm

      Well kind of. You could say that about any hitting prospect with huge power potential. If Baez would be behind the plate his potential would have been huge too. But it probably would have taken them so long to master the defensive aspect it would never be worth it.

    • JulioZuleta

      That’s like saying if the Cubs made Baez a pitcher they’d have the best hitting pitcher in the minor leagues…

      • ssckelley

        Maybe Baez can catch?

        • Scotti

          He can. When he was making the showcase rounds he donned the face mask, chest and shin protectors (and presumably a cup) and fared pretty well:

          ” Another position that has intrigued scouts is catcher, and Baez tried his hand at there briefly at the East Coast Professional Showcase last August. He got passing reviews, considering his extreme lack of experience there. ”

          Moving him there would be monumentally stupid at this point. He has a chance to play more games per year and have a longer career at any other position.

  • V23

    Some steps this offseason are a must. The cubs can’t contend in the future by hoping every top prospect turns into a star, because it’s not going to happen.

    First off- get a closer and another 8th inning guy to go with Strop. Maybe Vizcaino will be ready for 8th this year? Strop has been good, but the talk of him closing is ridiculous at this point.
    2nd- Shin Soo Choo has a career onb. of .389 (this year .398)…that’s what you need at top of lineup. Castro’s .283 onb. is disgusting. He is a 7th hitter. In 650 PA’s, Shoo would get on 65 more times than Castro.
    3rd- Need right handed power and find a way to move Rizzo down to 4th or 5th. Nelson Cruz?
    4th- No idea how you find a high-end starter but Shark and Travis Wood are number 3’s.

    Sorry believers (which I am one) it’s time to spend some dough and make a step forward. Last year they fricken wasted 52 Mil on Edwin Jackson who everyone knew what he was….which isn’t good.
    This season was disgusting. We watch 2 guys take huge step back. We saw ownership throw guys like Darnell McDonald, Donnie Murphy and all the rest of the scrap heap pick-ups at us for us to enjoy. I’ll watch a team of guy who are developing and enjoy it. Watching 31-year old waiver pick-ups who will be gone next year on an awful team is debilitating.

    • On The Farm

      1.) Blake Parker, James Russell will be coming back and Parker was useful this season and Russell was pretty useful in previous years. Not sure why Strop being a closer next season is ridiculous, but okay.
      2.) I don’t think anyone doesn’t want Choo, but if he is going to cost an arm and a leg at some point spending on him just isn’t worth it (also Castro has been batting leadoff because the FO wants him to get the most PA possible to try and hope he reverts back to his old self).
      4.) Nice of you to point out a problem that half of the MLB clubs are facing. There just aren’t a ton of aces in baseball.

      • Kyle

        Russell’s usefulness in the past was predicated on an unusually low HR rate that, in retrospect, should have always been a little suspect.

        That said, I think there’s more than enough potential in the bullpen for next year that you should probably focus the money elsewhere this offseason. You have to take some risks on the cheap in some parts of the roster, and the bullpen is one of the best places to do that both in general and in the Cubs’ specific situation.

        Strop, Parker, Rusin, Russell, Rosscup, Rondon, Cabrera, Grimm, Arrieta, Vizcaino, Rivero, Lim, the eventual return of Fujikawa. That’s more than enough to try to build a bullpen around (a few will get shots at the rotation, but not more than one will make it, I’d imagine).

    • josh ruiter

      V23…I have three very plausible solutions…though opening the pocket book remains a prerequisite.
      1. Our bullpen doesn’t need any additions. With Strop, Parker, Fujikawa, Russell, Rosscup, Villanueva we have a very solid 6 in the pen…if we go with 12 you can look in house from the AAA closer, or one of the guys who miss out in the rotation competition. like Grimm. That is a good pen top to bottom. a small question in the 9th – but that is a luxury bad teams are not afforded.
      2. Choo – in my mind – is a must have. a good defensive outfielder who flat out gets on base! His approach, hustle, and baseball abilities would be all to the positive for the Cubbies. Even if he goes at 15 mil a year I say its worth it on a 4 year 75mil type deal.
      3. power hitting righty – i would shy away from Cruz…. 2 reasons – he is gonna want a fat contract with lots of years, and his numbers are juiced – you don’t know what you will be paying for…plus his age scares me…if you can go two years tops then maybe, BUT!!! I really prefer the idea of Cory Hart on a prove it deal coming off of major injury on the the wrong side of 30. Plus I like Hart better in the field and his plate approach has always pissed me off as an opposing fan, so I think I would enjoy it on our club.
      4. Starting pitcher? TANAKA TANAKA TANAKA – sign the kid and see what he’s got. We are too far away to mortgage the farm for a top arm. Anytime you can get a potential 1-2 type guy without giving up players you do it. Unless it takes a 51 million dollar bid Yu know? Other option could be (and I pleaded for this, on BN, this season)…unload Shark for a Bradley, Bundy, Walker. We had a chance, supposedly to get a discussion around Bradley for Shark and we asked for Skaggs as well. But I think you get the max potential for Shark this offseason or during next season, don’t extend him. That is one great way IMO. So sign Tanaka, trade Shark for young ace ceiling starter, and you have possible 1-2 punch at top with two years away from Pierce Johnsen, CJ Edwards, Neil Ramirez (possible BP guy), Blackburn, Paniagua. Could be a real solid 5 if two of those 3 possibilities plays out.

      • V23

        Agreed with everything you said besides #1. I’d like them to spend on the bullpen. I think Strop has been great for the Cubs, I just don’t see him having it as a closer. He was a throw-in for a reason in the trade.
        From what I saw of Fujikawa, I thought his stuff was bad. Slow…wild…not good.
        They have to open up the pocketbook.

        Also, someone above says that Epstein says he will never “overspend”. Don’t let him sell you on himself. Edwin Jackson was a complete overspend and that was his only big signing so far (until we see Soler).

        • cms0101

          They’re not going to add to the bullpen and they’re not going to sign a big free agent. They’ll consider any positional player that is an improvement to the club and doesn’t come with draft compensation. Ellsbury, Choo, and Cano won’t fit that profile. I’ve said this a few times, but they’re not concerned about losing a draft pick, they’re concerned about the pool dollars lost with a lost pick. They’re not in that phase of the rebuild. They won’t sacrifice it. I want to see a better team too, but they’ve already begun this plan of attack. Panicking because fans didn’t visit as often would be foolish and shortsighted. There will be plenty of players to improve the team with that won’t require them to drop draft pool dollars. Given that approach though, I do feel like they can go after Tanaka and sign him for whatever it will take to get him. Hell, if he’s agreeable, I wouldn’t even mind seeing them resign Garza. He won’t cost anything but money. Traded guys like him are probably the likely targets, given the lack of draft compensation tied to traded players.

          • V23

            It’s not shortsighted to want improvement. You can’t be “all-in” on rebuilding like a Minnesota market. No reason you can’t have a $130 Mil payroll like before. There wasn’t a new stadium 3 years ago either.

            I have a bigger problem with Cub fans who will believe anything Theo says. Signing a free agent doesn’t take away the ability to build your farm. In fact, Cubs have another protected pick…so sign away!

  • Kyle

    I’m assuming it won’t push them into opening up the checkbook because the family trust agreement prevents them from doing so. This may or may not have been precisely what they planned to do all along, but they are stuck with it either way.

    • MichiganGoat

      The renovation hold up has really stalled the plan and the checkbook, Ricketts and Theo both believed they would have the Jumbotron (and its revenue) ready for 2014 and that extra advertising would help get more money out of the WGN TV deal. Now everything is is a bad holding pattern and nothing looks like it will ready until 2015 and even that is hard to count on right now. They money everyone was expecting is not available and that is bad news. If this becomes a court battle it might be even worse news. Basically until the renovation can begin… everything kinda sucks when it comes to FA signings.

      • Brains

        The problem is that they want sky high ticket and concession prices but are offering a substandard product. I’m not paying Goose Island Matilda prices for a Blue Moon. I’ll be happy to stop buying rock bottom tickets at stubhub once they’ve actually invested in the CUBS again, jumbotron and all.

        • MichiganGoat

          Problem is they CAN’T invest in the ballpark until they are certain that they are going to be allowed to do what they need to do. I don’t blame them for not wanting to invest money in renovation without the increased revenue streams from signage and right now I think they are quite certain the rooftops will files an injunction/suit (or whatever you call it) to prevent a jumbotron to go up and of course they would wait until after Ricketts had paid for the construction to begin. Its a giant clusterfoock and until its resolved nothing can really be planned besides hoping that prospects succeed.

          • Eternal Pessimist

            “I’m assuming it won’t push them into opening up the checkbook because the family trust agreement prevents them from doing so.”

            This is the question I want asked during the next Theo interview. There has been some deliberate silence on this topic from the FO. Are the Cubs hands tied for 2 more years? five years? infinity?

            • willis

              A long time. That’s your best answer. At this point there is no idea when the significant renovations will begin and you won’t see Ricketts spend until they begin. It’s a shitty cycle right now that will continue to put a bad product on the field for a couple more years at least, and that’s if the prospects make it.

  • arta


  • willis

    Decline in attendance since the Ricketts purchase is no surprise. Prices across the board have gone up, and the product on the field has turned to crap. People’s wallets do not care about the minor leagues. They care about where to unload a few hundred bucks (if taking your family) that is actually worth it.

    • Brains

      Prices up, traditions removed, the actual team in shambles, constant threats of trade, firings, lawsuits from all sides. It’s been a rocky road for the Cubs the past two years with no end in sight. Another two years of this and we’ll officially be the biggest joke in sports. Right now it’s still a wait and see and some growing pains, I hope.

    • http://epicfunhub.com Frank

      Here’s a novel idea. Ignore the waver wire, spend a couple of dollars and put a good team on the field, all the while improving the minor league system. Nah, that’s a stupid idea. Lets continue to concentrate on only building the minor league system and fuck the fans. Their called the “lovable losers” anyway, right?
      Hey Theo, what does your subscription to Tommy John weekly cost you?

      • ssckelley

        Good point, I cannot find anyone that the Cubs acquired via the waiver wire that amounted to much of anything. Ransom had some good moments when the Cubs first acquired him but he turned back into a pumpkin after the All Star break.

        • cms0101

          Valbuena has been a good addition. He was one of the first waiver wire acquisitions. Jury’s still out on a few others. These guys made their bones on waiver acquisitions. (See David Ortiz). They’re not going to abandon the practice. Spending money is still something they will need to do. I don’t see signs that they won’t. But overspending just for the sake of is what Hendry and the Tribune Co. did, and it didn’t work.

          • http://epicfunhub.com Frank

            Nobody said to overspend just for the sake of it. I said spend a couple of dollars and put a good team on the field. Oakland spent 7 mil a year on Coco Crisp and he helped them a lot. I don’t know what Oakland’s payroll is, but I bet it’s less than the Cubs and take a look at the standings. Who do you think is doing a better job?

            • Eternal Pessimist

              Then you understand that the Cubs “have” spent a dollar or two…after all, they spent more than the Oakland team that are using of an example of the Cubs needing to spend more. That is contradictory.

              I would agree that they need to spend better and NOT overpay, especially as the FO/owners has committed to a lower payroll than other teams in similar market sizes.

            • cms0101

              There’s no way to quantify what “spend a few dollars and put a good team on the field” means. They won’t spend money on anyone that will cost them a draft pick and draft pool dollars. So cross off Choo, Ellsbury, and Cano. If there are Coco Crisp type signings, I’d be thrilled with that. Schierholtz and Navarro come to mind as the best signings this past offseason. Feldman worked out well too. But those were 3 good signings last season and the team still didn’t improve much. They’ve already improved the bullpen, which was the biggest problem for the first half of the season. They need some offense from Castro, Rizzo, and anyone that can play 2nd. Where exactly do you want them to spend? Aside from Cano, you’re not going to find a significant improvement for 2nd, and you don’t want to tie that position in case Baez pushes his way up in 2014. At 3rd, you’re probably looking at a Valbuena/Murphy/Olt platoon, which could work out fine. The only logical player to spend any kind of dollars on is Tanaka. Anything else will be more like Navarro and Schierholtz. Catch lightning in a bottle if you can. If they show anything in the first half, maybe you move some prospects to add long term Major League assets. But they have to show something in-season before we can expect to see prospects moved. And I think they can do it. They’ve got the pitching. The just need a little more offense, either from the guys that are here, or maybe add one OF, like a Coco Crisp.

      • willis

        Hahahahaha Tommy John Weekly. That’s hilarious.

  • Kevin F.

    Overpaying a member or two of your roster has become a part of doing business in MLB. It wouldn’t hurt the Cubs to do so in 2014 with a player or two. No one, including ownership, will care about that sunk cost if the prospects pan out at even a 50% rate (which, I know, is above average). They will have to measure the willingness to do that vs the current system which rewards failure/continuing to try to convince Joe Fan that this is the way to go and be patient.

  • JulioZuleta

    Cano asks for 10/$305, Yankees offer 8/$138. This should be entertaining… I wonder if a player has second thoughts about firing the greatest agent that ever lived in favor of a rapper when he realizes there is a $167M gap in negotiations.

  • The Dude Abides

    I can’t see any “big names” signing with the Cubs this year unless we overpay and/or give a long term contract to get them to play for money instead of a chance to win a championship for similar money on a contending team. MAYBE in a year or two but not this upcoming season.

    Rickett$ and/or Theo are adamant they will not over pay, so if by “big names” IE Ellsbury, Choo, etc. or any other relevant or soon to be in his prime player I can’t see it. Why would they want to play for what we have become? Because they believe in the cause?

  • jon



    • The Dude Abides

      Wouldn’t it be something if a team that actually wanted to spend money wanted Theo and Rickett$ cut a deal allowing it to happen so he could lessen his debt with the savings figuring the foundation was set and he could promote Hoyer & McLeod?

  • cubfanincardinalland

    Remember reading comments on here about the magnificent drawing card that is Wrigley Field, and how the Cubs would never consider moving and give up this wonderful tradition. And they could never draw crowds in DuPage County like the great drawing crowd Wrigley is in downtown Chicago.
    Can we say this myth has been officially busted? The reality is that Wrigley Field remains the liability of this club, and the Cubs brand is the asset.

    • JulioZuleta

      It’s not that cut and dry. I have said all along though, that many of the attendees that the Cubs would lose from leaving the city would be accounted for by the wealthy suburban parents who hate driving to and parking at Wrigley. I don’t think the attendance dip would be too substantial.

      • Scotti

        Attendance would GROW because you’d be able to add seats while still keeping a cozy atmosphere (and the Cubs in the NW burbs with PARKING would sell out every game even if only modestly competitive). Beer sales would be down (more children) but kids drink LOTS of pop and (suburban dads buy kids LOTS of jerseys).

        Parking would bring in a ton of money that is not possible in Wrigley’s current location. You can also factor in a removable roof (not possible at Wrigley) which not only eliminates rainouts/delays but also allows for year round events (concerts, conventions, weddings, bar/bat mitzvahs, etc.). Four concerts? Try forty.

        Whatever city you land in (and it needs to be NW burbs because that’s where the Cub fan base is) wouldn’t be anywhere near as restrictive as Chicago is to the Cubs. To me, I would have pulled out of negotiations when BOTH DePaul and the Bulls got deals during the Cub negotiations. No money for the Cubs but plenty for DePaul and the Bulls all while the City is still expecting the team to bend over so Tunney could keep his promise of being “up the butt” of the Cub’s (you couldn’t make up a better line–Thanks Tom).

        Rebuilding would cost many hundreds of millions more than the half a billion they’re planning on laying out for rehabbing but the revenue streams would be MUCH greater.

        • caryatid62

          Most of your points are, at minimum, off base, but it’s a moot point. They’re not going anywhere. Move on.

          • Scotti

            Thanks for adding zero to the collective discussion. “Gee, you said things and I’m going to dissemble instead of contributing.” For all intents and purposes, that’s little different than LOUD NOISES:


            BTW, your deciding what is a “moot point” for others to discuss is, well, moot. No one is going to bother paying attention. Anyone who feels like posting about the advantages of a new facility in a new city isn’t going to be dissuaded by Pointers Of Moot. If you have something constructive to say, great. If not, perhaps you should “move on.”

    • http://www.hookersorcake.com Hookers or Cake

      Wrigley isn’t a liability as far as attendance is concerned. Far from it. Does anyone honestly think The Cubs would have the 12th best attendance if they were in Rosemont?!

      Honey! Pack up the kids! We need to go see Donnie Murphy and the strip malls of the west Chicago suburbs.

      • http://epicfunhub.com Frank

        Hookers or Cake… Can’t you see the future? Put the strip mall in the new stadium. Now that’s forward thinking. Rosemont Cubs, the lovable “suburban” losers. Now that has a ring to it.

        • Eternal Pessimist

          I think the attendance would be/should be great in Rosemont if they moved. Chicagoland is a HUGE market and the White Sox location sucks…it is not on the side of town with most of the money.

          As long as the Cubs put a park in the Northwest corridor I would expect attendance to be strong wherever they go. I think staying at Wrigley is based on preserving something rather than a business decision from Ricketts.

    • Paul

      Put a last place team in the suburbs and the crickets will be the only ones making any noise. Attendance has dropped, but compare it to any other crappy team and Wrigley still puts the Cubs well ahead of expected attendance based on performance.

    • cavemencubbie

      I totally agree. Wrigley field is an albatross, not just from additional signage but from the standpoint of player facilities, both home and visitors. Then we have all the crapola restrictions from the city fathers and the horse hockey neighborhood. The Cubbies and Bears should get together in building a new stadium, like Atlanta is planning, in a friendlier political environment, without the graft of Chicago. Why throw good money after bad?

  • jon
    • jon

      whoops I read the headline wrong, I guess it was the Dodger fan that died.

      People really need to lighten up, this is nuts.

  • Paul

    Don’t worry. A jumbo-tron will bring those fans back.

  • Die hard

    Shorten game to 3 balls walk and foul ball on strike 3 is out

  • CeeDeeVee

    Hey Brett,
    I’m signed up for the fantasy football for the first time. I have to pick 10 players, but are only 5 eligible for points? Are the other ones benched?

    • ssckelley

      The other 5 go to the bar for drinks.

      In some leagues you can put them in and out of the lineup depending on if they are playing or not. Use Function F1 to see your league allows it.

  • Stu

    Being in Arizona and attending Diamondback games, I can tell you that gimmicks do not get you very much. We have a swimming pool, all kinds of lights going off, etc. So what.

    The Cubs will have to field a competitive team, not jumbotron explosions, if they are going to continue to charge the 3rd highest ticket prices.

    • Cubbie Blues

      Yeah, but, there is piss in the pool.

  • North Side Irish

    Apparently the Cardinals are having attendance issues too. I get an email every day reminding me that there are still tickets available to every game in the NLDS and NLCS. I think they’re getting spoiled like the Braves fans used to be.

  • Losing makes u better 62-100 > 75-87

    The prices for tickets while the cubs suck are outrageous, I’m scared for when they’ll be contenders again prices will be just too expensive.

    • Losing makes u better 62-100 > 75-87

      Prices will only go up. The ricketts no this product is trash on the field yet they still charge high prices. I can’t imagine what the prices wil be when their going to be good in a couple years.

  • Pingback: First You Get the Money, Then You Get the Wins, Then You Get the Fans, and Other Bullets | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()