Cubs fans. Would you rather build a new stadium or keep Wrigley?

Question

Even though it is a terrible stadium to watch a game at, and falls apart more each year.

I say you keep everything in the outfield since that's where all the historic stuff is, like the brick wall with ivy, and the scoreboard and bleachers, but then demolish everything else foul poll to foul poll.

Thanks fka h.

Answer 1

I wouldnt mind making a couple changes, but Wrigley is just too sentimental. I mean it's where I saw my very first baseball game. It's by god the best ballpark to watch at a game at, and is a huge part of baseball history. I would rather watch a game in Wrigley than in any other ball park. I dont mind if they improve it by adding things on to it, but it would be a sad day for me to see it get torn down.

Answer 2

No. At least not in the near future(meaning 20 years). Wrigley Field will remain standing even as a landmark stadium. Potentially what might happen is that the owners of the Cubs may get in a situation where they feel that they are losing potential revenue for playing in a small ballpark. In that case, they will just build some kind of super stadium of the future for the current team. They probably would have to build it in the Chicago burbs though. That would totally change the atmosphere of Wrigleyville and I'm sure alot of the residents would protest it but money is money. Again, this is a NON issue for the Cubs at this point and it may not even happen in our lifetimes!!

Answer 3

Without question, I'd keep Wrigley. To me, nothing says "Baseball" like Wrigley Field. Even though I'm from New England, it was the first baseball stadium I feel in love with, and you never forget your first.

Answer 4

I'm from Brooklyn and once the Dodgers left and they tore down Ebbets Field Brooklyn was cursed. Some times a Ball Park is the soul of a city, or in this case a borough of New York, (Yankees suk so does the Bronx). From what I can see on TV the soul of your city's baseball is Wrigley. DON"T let them tear it down. Renovate it, fix it up, modernize it but don't condemn it to death.

Answer 5

There is no way you can get rid of Wrigley. It's a part of the Cubs. It'd be like the Red Sox without Fenway. There's no reason why you can't renovate it though. Especially the bathrooms.

Answer 6

I've been to Wrigley,its gonna be a sad day in Baseball when they replace it,but it will be replaced.There should be a new stadium built that is the mirror image of Wrigley,with 21 century accommodations,but it won't happen

Answer 7

i would keep Wrigley and not build a new stadium. if i did build a new stadium there's still the problem of what to do with Wrigley because of the fact that it has landmark status and can't be torn down

Answer 8

I am all for keeping Wrigley, although I admit they could do a better job restoring certain parts of the park.

Answer 9

Move them to Silver Cross Field in Joliet since they usually play like a minor league team anyway.
Honestly, who in their right mind would say it is a great place to watch a game? How would the FACT that over 30% of the seats have obstructed views be a great place to watch a game? Do you like poles in your way? Do you like not being able to see a high fly ball because the upper deck is right over your head? Really - Wrigley is a dump. It is. The bathrooms are worse than any bar you could ever go to. Tear the place down.

Answer 10

Here's a parallel. Fenway Park.

I've had good seats, just some obstruction , where I had a great view and I loved it.

went to a game where we had seats deep down the RF line. A steel post blocked our view of the plate, a steel beam blocked our view of the pitchers; mound, ,the roof flocked part of the CF area,and the sound from th PA system was hard to understand. myreaction, NUKE THE F(%(^ PLACE!!!!!!!!

I was a Wriglety once, had good seats, down the1b line. Great seats, andI loved it.