In a bizarre story that's not getting much run, THE STATE OF ILLINOIS [Guest Editor's Note: what the fuck?] is expected to make a bid to buy Wrigley Field sometime next week. The Sports Economist is pretty much in heat over this, with sexy talk like "landmark status" and "sales tax growth" being thrown around.
Perhaps the "landmark" of value to Illinois is not just the building itself, but the name of the stadium, something that may be up for sale. Wrigley Field is synonymous with Chicago and Illinois and calling it Sears Stadium or whatnot will obscure that to some extent.
Why shouldn't they call it Sears Stadium? Nearly every other arena in this country has some corporate name du jour attached to it. Why should those assholes get it any better? They need to call the next building built with public money Taxpayer Stadium, because that's who's actually paying for the damn thing.
Basically the state wants Wrigley's landmark restrictions to be lifted, because having certain elements of the stadium declared "off limits" any fundamental improvements is certain to make any renovation more cumbersome and more expensive. We can't have all the drunks getting lost on the concourse while the Cubbies are in the midst of a pennant race. But then what about the last three months of the season?
– Monday Morning Punter
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/226/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.wl.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/09/Wrigley-Field-2-180x180.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.wl.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/07/cubs-wedding-proposal-fail-180x180.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.wl.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/06/bill-murray-hall-of-fame-speech-180x180.png)
![[image]](http://cdn.wl.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/06/allerton-castle-180x180.jpg)
After seeing that pic, I'm naming it Kleenex Field.
Meh. Wrigley is a corporate name. They make shitty gum.
I bet she has a better arm then Kerry Wood.
ans she can twist my testicle any day
The posts are coming fast and furious!!! I can't keep up!!!
Also, fuck the Cubs and Wrigley.
/disgruntled Sox fan
Why would you be disgruntled?
"Once upon a time hot chicks in skimpy outfits were sexy. Now they're just a sad parody of themselves. Oh well, guess it's time to fire up the ol' butt plug and go to bed." –
- Lloyd Braun
On her, the Cubs logo doesn't look nearly as shitty…
Uhhh.. wtf is up with that girl's EAR?!
@ Hooker Slayer
A) It's an earring
B) If that's what you're focusing on, may I suggest you change your handle to "Male Hooker Slayer"
She has ears?
I say name it Freedom Field and have Al-Qaeda have at it.
Can they sell the curse too?
That is one beautiful UPA.
This has to be the only female Cubs fan without a C-section scar.
@hooker slayer: Deaf chicks are hot. And they don't mind it if you have the television on while you're having sex.
Umm, the IFSA, a state organization, already owns U.S. Cellular Field. It's not uncommon (or "bizarre") for a state-run agency to own a stadium. Chicago and its Park District own Soldier Field. And this story has received plenty of play in the media, where have you been?
@jrg: where have you been? Getting drunk and raping people is where I've been duh
It's not uncommon (or "bizarre") for a state-run agency to own a stadium.
but the taxes would suck.
And this story has received plenty of play in the media,
Not on the blogs. And the rub for me is that the state was going to buy Wrigley. All of those government-owned stadiums are usually such because they were built with significant taxpayer contributions.
Not on the blogs.
That's the funniest line i've ever read on here, since 90 pct of blogging is linking to MSM stories and riffing on them (which is great, don't get me wrong). so if it hasn't been covered on the blogs, whose fault is that? the story's been a front pager in chicago for months.
and you're right, of course, most state-owned stadiums are new ones, but this is obviously a unique case for the times. i was against zell and the trib selling wrigley and the team piecemail (it will significantly lower the price of the sale of the team), but since it's a landmark, i think it makes sense for the state (the people) to own it. especially since the cubs will be forced to play a season on the south side (which the ifsa also owns) in the next 10 years if they renovate wrigley (everything but the ivy), as they should.
wrigley's future is going to be a huge headache for whoever buys it.
That's the funniest line i've ever read on here, since 90 pct of blogging is linking to MSM stories and riffing on them (which is great, don't get me wrong). so if it hasn't been covered on the blogs, whose fault is that? the story's been a front pager in chicago for months.
and you're right, of course, most state-owned stadiums are new ones, but this is obviously a unique case for the times. i was against zell and the trib selling wrigley and the team piecemail (it will significantly lower the price of the sale of the team), but since it's a landmark, i think it makes sense for the state (the people) to own it. especially since the cubs will be forced to play a season on the south side (which the ifsa also owns) in the next 10 years if they renovate wrigley (everything but the ivy), as they should.
wrigley's future is going to be a huge headache for whoever buys it.
too long. Did not read. Fail.