Sign in to follow this  
BBTV

Chicago Baseball Discussion: Cubs & White Sox

Recommended Posts

"Because BAD teams shouldn't have fans.  Dat's just stupid.  If you like BAD teams, you're a BAD fan, and dem LOSERS shuden't have all dem fans show up.  Just because dey have da pritty little beer gahrd'n en aw the ivy, dat's so cute, ya know?  it's all just bullcrap for dem loser fans, drunk loser fans, do is drink and party and not even watch da game."

 

"If dey wanna know what a real fans is made of, look no furder than the Chicago White Sox.  They show up to every game and they watch the game!  Sox fans are among baseball's smartest and are so completely different from dem lousy Cubs bandwagoners dat it's no contest.  White Sox are BETTER than the stinkin's Cubs, JACK."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my favorite cases of '80s White Sox weirdness, which ends up being oddly relevant in this weird part of 2016, was how they had a dude named Andy the Clown who would show up to Sox games in full clown regalia and act as sort of a de facto roving mascot, kind of like Ronnie Woo Woo or that dude who dressed up as a bear, I forget the character's name now. Cubby the Bear? I dunno, who cares. Point is, this little bit of organic fan weirdness was benignly allowed to go on under Bill Veeck, who was all about weirdness and was too worried about simply making payroll to patrol weird-ass Sox fans too much, but when Reinsdorf and Eddie Einhorn came to town, they utterly freaked out at the notion of a man taking it upon himself to entertain fellow spectators. They tried to squeeze him out by restricting where he could be a clown, or by instating "official" mascots, which were just Pansexual Non-Threatening Spokethings in the vein of the Philly Phanatic, which no one liked. Finally, they gave up and let him do his clown thing until New Comiskey was built, at which point he would be officially banned from clowning. Then I think the guy died soon after.

 

Of course, the Cubs banned their roving non-sanctioned bear a few years ago, so once again, as with pay television, the White Sox predicted the course of baseball, but they were just such alienating dicks about everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CS85 said:

"Because BAD teams shouldn't have fans.  Dat's just stupid.  If you like BAD teams, you're a BAD fan, and dem LOSERS shuden't have all dem fans show up.  Just because dey have da pritty little beer gahrd'n en aw the ivy, dat's so cute, ya know?  it's all just bullcrap for dem loser fans, drunk loser fans, do is drink and party and not even watch da game."

 

"If dey wanna know what a real fans is made of, look no furder than the Chicago White Sox.  They show up to every game and they watch the game!  Sox fans are among baseball's smartest and are so completely different from dem lousy Cubs bandwagoners dat it's no contest.  White Sox are BETTER than the stinkin's Cubs, JACK."

+ they got way cooler uniform and logo 

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CS85 said:

It's one of those things where because Wrigley has never really had attendance problems most years, even when the team is at the bottom, the fans clearly must be drunk and casual idiots.  Or something.  I dunno.  It all comes out of a place of bitterness & contempt.

 

From the 80's forward, but before that, neither team was exactly packing their respective parks on a regular basis. The Cubs being a consistent draw is a fairly recent (in baseball time, anyway) development. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goddamn, I had a lengthy, well written reply to several posts on page two and because I was interrupted so often here at work, it saved nothing.

 

Let this be a lesson to you guys, save often, save frequently.

 

Really, attendance figures? This whole thing again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thomas said:

Why would other baseball fans care about the Cubs, they have their own team to support.

People like good stories. A team overcoming over a century of futility is a nice story.

Besides, I'm a Leafs fan. If the Cubbies can end their drought? There's hope MLSE might accidentally fall backwards into a Cup.

 

Quote

Besides, why would a long drought make them lovable,  for all we know they could have some real :censored:s + drug users on their teams through all those 100 years, who knows.

So no one can like the Cubs or feel good about them ending their drought because they may have had some drug users on their team over their 100+ year history?

Ok. I guess everyone everywhere is done rooting for sports teams.

 

You seem strangely opposed to people enjoying sports, considering your long history of complaining about "uptight" mods and posters here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, infrared41 said:

 

From the 80's forward, but before that, neither team was exactly packing their respective parks on a regular basis. The Cubs being a consistent draw is a fairly recent (in baseball time, anyway) development. 

 

Big attendance for virtually everyone is a fairly recent development. Teams were happy to hit 1.5 million a year in the '80s. Now if you're below 2 million everyone freaks out and starts acting like Montreal is lusting for their team. Probably has a lot to do with supply/demand for big stadiums that didn't function as amusement parks and even more to do with teams lying through their teeth about attendance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, the admiral said:

 

Big attendance for virtually everyone is a fairly recent development. Teams were happy to hit 1.5 million a year in the '80s. Now if you're below 2 million everyone freaks out and starts acting like Montreal is lusting for their team. Probably has a lot to do with supply/demand for big stadiums that didn't function as amusement parks and even more to do with teams lying through their teeth about attendance.

 

No, not really. Not at all, in fact. Back in the 80's, most MLB teams were hitting 1.5 million regularly. Teams like the Dodgers and Angels were almost always in the 2.5 to 3 million range. Hell, the freaking Astros only had two seasons below 1.3 million between '80-'89. From '84 thru '89, your Cubs never went below 1.8 million for a season. Speaking of Montreal, in the 80's, it's lowest attendance was in 1.1 million in 1986. The Expos went over 2 million three times in the 80's and I'm sure the average for those years was well above 1.5 million. From '83 thru '89, Toronto's lowest attendance for a season was 1.9 million. The Jays hit 2 million or better five times in that stretch. The Cardinals were well over 2 million every year from '82 thru '89 and hit 3 million a couple times. The Phillies hit 2 million five times in the 80's and averaged around 1.8 million a season. I could go on, but I think you get the point. Sure, there were teams that had real attendance issues - Cleveland, San Francisco, Seattle, Minnesota*, Pittsburgh, to name a few...actually, they're about it, but overall, drawing only 1.5 million in the 80's was seen as a bit of a disappointment and it certainly wasn't cause for celebration. 

 

*Even the lowly Twins managed to draw 3 million people to the Hefty Bag Dome in 1988. The Twins also hit 2 million in 1987. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

No, not really. Not at all, in fact. Back in the 80's, most MLB teams were hitting 1.5 million regularly. Teams like the Dodgers and Angels were almost always in the 2.5 to 3 million range. Hell, the freaking Astros only had two seasons below 1.3 million between '80-'89. From '84 thru '89, your Cubs never went below 1.8 million for a season. Speaking of Montreal, in the 80's, it's lowest attendance was in 1.1 million in 1986. The Expos went over 2 million three times in the 80's and I'm sure the average for those years was well above 1.5 million. From '83 thru '89, Toronto's lowest attendance for a season was 1.9 million. The Jays hit 2 million or better five times in that stretch. The Cardinals were well over 2 million every year from '82 thru '89 and hit 3 million a couple times. The Phillies hit 2 million five times in the 80's and averaged around 1.8 million a season. I could go on, but I think you get the point. Sure, there were teams that had real attendance issues - Cleveland, San Francisco, Seattle, Minnesota*, Pittsburgh, to name a few...actually, they're about it, but overall, drawing only 1.5 million in the 80's was seen as a bit of a disappointment and it certainly wasn't cause for celebration. 

 

*Even the lowly Twins managed to draw 3 million people to the Hefty Bag Dome in 1988. The Twins also hit 2 million in 1987. 

 

Hey now we weren't that lowly in 87.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alex Houston said:

 

Really, attendance figures? This whole thing again?

 

 

It's the big stink because it cuts deep.  The old exchange used to be maybe 10-odd years ago when the Sox just won their title:

 

White Sox Fan:  Cubs haven't won in 108 years, call me when you win something, chokers.

Cubs Fan:  Nobody goes to your crappy park, jerk.  

WSF:  But, eh, well, er-.... :censored: yourself, casual beer garden douche!  2005 World Series Champs, bitch!

CF: :censored: you too, buddy!

 

Now it's more of probably:

 

WSF:  My team cuts holes in fauxback uniforms & still has attendance problems, yet we did win a title recently and have great pitching.  Because our fanbase is more intimate, we don't get featured in the public eye much and we prefer it that way.

CF:  My team is willing to acquire woman-beaters to secure a championship, also our fan base is currently flooded with loud mouth newbs.  The clock is ticking on how much more we are in the good graces of the larger baseball fandom, and we will be overexposed on primetime broadcasts for the next 5-7 years.  

WSF:  Our fanbase does not care about the BP Cup.

CF:  Nor does ours.

WSF:  I begrudgingly respect you, for the most part, and I believe we can maintain a docile and distant relationship with one another.

CF:  I agree with those sentiments.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we both know that Cubs and Sox fans never have this civil of a discourse. How can I formulate words like that when I'm too busy dragging my knuckles on the ground and using a big wooden mallet to club my dinner to death?

 

***

As soon as someone gets on about the attendance, I roll my eyes like a perturbed parent and go "uh huh, what else you got?" It's the never ending story and the reason you think it "cuts deep" with so many of us is because we've heard the narrative only every baseball season since we started cheering for the team. My theory isn't that for many of the reasons previously stated, Sox fans do a crap job of filling their stadium consistently. I went to a game back in August against Seattle and during the 3rd inning, it was probably around 75-80% full. Sure, it was on Saturday and the weather was peachy but it can be done. The issue is those Monday-Thursday games when they basically play at a Triple A stadium. Like Admiral said, the Cubs have a huge advantage here and there's more to it besides lazy fans.

 

Suffice to say, it's dark times for the south side. Bad ownership, stupid logos, torn up shirts, players bringing in children to the clubhouse (cue Airplane!) and being forgotten by the The Worldwide Leader. It's an annoying time for sure.

 

Edit: It's times like these I miss having The Old Roman around to help discuss this kind of issue. The only other Sox guy I've seen on here is BayouJim, so it gets lonely defending the pale hose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guaranteed Rate Field <insert Sideshow-Bob-stepping-on-a-rake-shudder> has a pretty fun tailgate environment. But that's kind of all it has going for it. The surrounding area isn't as bad as some like to say it is, but it's certainly not like going to Wrigley. When I go to a Sox game (and when most people I know do as well), you get there 90 minutes early, drink beer and play baegs (©the admiral), go into the park after first pitch, drink beer and watch the game, and then we get our asses back to Oak Lawn/Orland Park/Palos Heights/Tinley Park/etc. and go out to a bar there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rj0498 said:

Hey now we weren't that lowly in 87.....

 

Or in '91. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents, Canadian so my money is worth less...

My own perception is that Chicagoland seems to prefer to embrace the 'loveable' {throws up in mouth} Cubs, National League baseball, their healthy rivalry with the Cards, & of course Wrigley Field + Wrigleyville.  I guess through many losing seasons my perception is also that Wrigley seemed to be frequented by out of towners just happy to participate- of those I'm sure were some of the 5+ mil who showed Trump & Clinton how to rally.

As for the Sox, my perception there is they are in fact the least lesser of 2 clubs in 1 town, including the Mets who while a healthy following are obviously dwarfed by the NY Yankees BC FC United City.  That's not to say I think the White Sox are on par with most other AL clubs in their own towns, I just think they've got the highest floor of credibility & lack of scorn of any city's 2nd team in the big 4.  The NY Jets perhaps, yet the Giants aren't exactly the NY Yankees of the NFL.  

The White Sox are they the oldest established 2nd team of a city?  Not sure who else - not the Mets, Clippers, Jets, Nets, Ducks/Angels if we go there... etc.  So even if Chicagoland wishes to quarantine the White Sox from humanity, at least there's genuine heritage involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem with real fans celebrating, not there are too many bandwagon fans this time, and the media is filled with BS sob stories  like "85-year-old Cubs fan holds on to hear final World Series out before dying" and "Cubs fan drove all day to listen to Game 7 at his father's grave" 

 This one is no better.  Cubs pitcher stares creepy dead goat in the face

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/cubs-pitcher-stares-creepy-dead-goat-in-the-face-before-eating-it-110616

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thomas said:

No problem with real fans celebrating, not there are too many bandwagon fans this time, and the media is filled with BS sob stories  like "85-year-old Cubs fan holds on to hear final World Series out before dying" and "Cubs fan drove all day to listen to Game 7 at his father's grave" 

 This one is no better.  Cubs pitcher stares creepy dead goat in the face

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/cubs-pitcher-stares-creepy-dead-goat-in-the-face-before-eating-it-110616

 

 

Every championship run by any team ever has produced bandwagon fans and drawn back casual fans.  That's just sports and the symptom of success.  This one is tenfold that because of generations of people who never lived to see it. 

 

There's a lot of family and heritage enveloped around this win, so of course people are going to graveyards or coming out on social media to celebrate on behalf of relatives or friends who are big fans - it's historic.  It's huge. 

 

Also for some advice,don't be one of these people who tries to make up rules about who can celebrate and who can't.  It's no way to enjoy life.  Sports is a frustrating messy mix of people on all ends of the dedication spectrum, and if a team wins a title all fans celebrate equally, new and old, casual and committed. 

 

Naturally the media is going to go bananas with stupid coverage but that's the industry.  

 

If you'd like to get mad over sports casuals, target the gross nature of fantasy football and it's relationship to the NFL. Otherwise just let people do their thing and don't let it bother you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complaining about "bandwagon" fans is one of the most tired things that happens not only on here, but in life in general.

 

I'm using the royal 'you' below, not a specific 'you'.

 

What is the point of pro sports?  Entertainment / fun?  An "escape"? Both of the above?  Guess what - it's more fun when a team is winning and everyone's partying, having fun, filling the park, getting together with friends to cheer on a win, etc.  

 

If you think you need to "suffer" as a fan in order to enjoy it when the team wins, then something is wrong.  If you've been a fan for ever and appreciate the history and know all about the struggles, then great!  It likely means something to you that is different than what it means to someone who just jumped on.  But to think that watching blowout after blowout, spending money watching a losing team in an empty stadium, wasting your life by yourself at home watching losers strike out means that you're the only one that can enjoy it when the team wins, then that's a problem.

 

"Bandwagon" fans are that way (at least partially) because their priorities are maybe different and they're focusing on enjoying life and focusing on other things that make them happy, rather than watching crappy baseball.  Now all of a sudden baseball is fun, so they're enjoying that, until it's not fun again.  Doesn't that sound like a pretty good way to go about life?  It does to me.

 

Plus, maybe by getting on the bandwagon, they'll realize that baseball is pretty great, and they'll remain fans even when the team sucks again.  Being good is how a lot of teams establish a fan base.  So I can't think of a single thing to complain about when it comes to "bandwagon" fans.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Thomas said:

No problem with real fans celebrating, not there are too many bandwagon fans this time, and the media is filled with BS sob stories  like "85-year-old Cubs fan holds on to hear final World Series out before dying" and "Cubs fan drove all day to listen to Game 7 at his father's grave" 

 This one is no better.  Cubs pitcher stares creepy dead goat in the face

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/cubs-pitcher-stares-creepy-dead-goat-in-the-face-before-eating-it-110616

 

"While we have no way of knowing if Strop actually ate any part of the goat head, it doesn't appear to be very edible and just looks downright grotesque."

 

I know that it's raw, but meat comes from animals! You can eat pretty much any part of the animal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Complaining about "bandwagon" fans is one of the most tired things that happens not only on here, but in life in general.

 

I'm using the royal 'you' below, not a specific 'you'.

 

What is the point of pro sports?  Entertainment / fun?  An "escape"? Both of the above?  Guess what - it's more fun when a team is winning and everyone's partying, having fun, filling the park, getting together with friends to cheer on a win, etc.  

 

If you think you need to "suffer" as a fan in order to enjoy it when the team wins, then something is wrong.  If you've been a fan for ever and appreciate the history and know all about the struggles, then great!  It likely means something to you that is different than what it means to someone who just jumped on.  But to think that watching blowout after blowout, spending money watching a losing team in an empty stadium, wasting your life by yourself at home watching losers strike out means that you're the only one that can enjoy it when the team wins, then that's a problem.

 

"Bandwagon" fans are that way (at least partially) because their priorities are maybe different and they're focusing on enjoying life and focusing on other things that make them happy, rather than watching crappy baseball.  Now all of a sudden baseball is fun, so they're enjoying that, until it's not fun again.  Doesn't that sound like a pretty good way to go about life?  It does to me.

 

Plus, maybe by getting on the bandwagon, they'll realize that baseball is pretty great, and they'll remain fans even when the team sucks again.  Being good is how a lot of teams establish a fan base.  So I can't think of a single thing to complain about when it comes to "bandwagon" fans.

I completely agree. Sports are ultimately a form of entertainment. They're supposed to be enjoyable, just like any other form of entertainment. And a losing team can still provide entertainment, for what it's worth. But I can't blame people for not tuning in if they're not entertained.

 

I started watching the Yankees at the beginning of their dynasty. That team is what got me into baseball, more than anything else (the McGwire/Sosa home run chase helped quite a bit as well). Am I a bandwagon fan because I happened to start watching baseball (at a young age) when my team was at its absolute peak? Of course not. That incredible Yankees team ignited my love of baseball, and I haven't stopped watching since - not just the Yankees, but the game as a whole.

 

I have no personal connection to the Cubs - I've been to Wrigley Field once and I have a couple of acquaintances who are Cubs fans. But did I celebrate when they made history and broke the most infamous drought in all of sports? Absolutely. It was a feel-good story. They were a thrilling team to watch. And I was honestly happy for all the Cubs fans out there who have dreamed of that moment, never quite knowing if it would come, and finally got to celebrate a world championship. 

 

There's nothing wrong, or abnormal, with rooting for a team even if they're not your own team. Sometimes I'll root for a good storyline, or for players or coaches who I like. Sometimes I root for sheer chaos. It's more fun that way. And after all, isn't that what sports are really about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Complaining about "bandwagon" fans is one of the most tired things that happens not only on here, but in life in general.

It was maybe funny on social media 10+ years ago, & yet I know ppl who still won't stfu about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this