The power of the buck!  NO don't rename next thing you know we will be selling naming rights to landmarks.  Welcome to the Budweiser St Louis Arch!

Hey Dick- thanks for reading.....why would it matter what they called the park ???

I can't even image why so many people would care so strongly!  It's  not the name that matters but what is going on inside the stadium!

Millars- that's my point exactly.....when you're on 100 years of not winning something the darned Florida Marlins have done twice  in 15 years of existence- you oughtta be more concerned with on-field product. They don't think for one second  that those fans won't come out to the game.

If Cubs fans have THAT BIG of a problem with it.....take the beef to the Wrigley Company!!! They've had  free advertising on the building for decades--- they sell enough Orbitz and other gum that they can get something put together- I'm confident of that.

Jim, it would not bother me. I just want the Cubs to win. They all do it for the money why would Chicago be any different.

They can change the name all they want, but if they dont get things done on the field then they will see attendance decline!

Jim, I can see both points of view. However I would not go so far as to boycott a game just because they changed the name of the park. Heck look at the SF Giants there park opened in what 99 or so, and it has had 3 name changes since then. 1) Pac Bell 2) SBC Global and currently 3) AT&T. If the name were a problem with those fans how many games would they have not attended. Now if the McCourts want to change the name of "Dodger Stadium" to something like Friskies Park or Purina Field, well then we got problems. 8)

Here in Boston the famed Boston Garden was torn down and it has had 3 name changes in the past 10 years. The Fleet Center, Shawmut Center and now TD Bank North Garden.

Or traditionaly we cal it the Garden or just call it the ole Boston Garden.

I'd hate to see Wrigley renamed only because I love the tradition of the game and let's face it, Wrigley Field is full of tradition and deeply ingrained in the history of the game. But that being said, in this day and age, money talks, and although we may not like these naming deals, it really doesn't affect the game on the field. Besides, they can name the venue anything they want, the fans will probably still call it Wrigley. BTW- I hope to get there one day for a game - no matter what it's called.

I remember a couple of years ago all the controversy about putting advertising on the sides of the bases, now that was a bit much! I think that the name of the stadium can reflect the name of the major sponsor; wait, as you pointed out, it already does. I must say that the only one who may be truly upset at the renaming of the ballpark is those twins from the commercials <<<smile>>> In the age of big money sports, it would be unfair to not allow Wrigley to be changed to...what are the contenders again? I think it would be disingenuous for fans to allow a name change of the park to keep them away!

I agree Rich...Spiderman logos on bases were NOT cool in my book- good thing they pulled the plug....that is above and beyond....things like that and selling ad spaces on jerseys are a no-go in my book and hopefully we don't come to that.

I'm not a fan of selling the names of parks BUT we have to remember it's a quick and easy way for owners to make revenue. I'd never stop cheering on my team at home because of it. I go to US Cellular to cheer on the White Sox, don't have a phone of theirs, possibly never will- got over the name change quickly.

As far as my team the Los Angeles Dodgers they haven't renamed Dodger stadium yet. But inside the park their are advertisements EVERYWHERE. A couple years ago the owner decided to go without names on the back of the jerseys in order to cut costs. If Dodger Stadium and the dodgers front office decide to sell the naming rights to the stadium it wouldn't bother me a bit. Business is Business. Professionals sports is a business after all.

Eddy

Did they REALLY take off the names on jerseys t save a buck? I thought that was for nostalgia? Come on- only two or three teams in ball spend more than the Dodgers!

Jim ------ yes thats the explanation that the owners the McCourts gave. If it were for nostalgic reason they would of done it this year being the 50th anniversary that the Dodgers have been in Los Angeles.

On the field though our bats are off to a slow start hopefully we can pick it up , the NL West is a tough division.

Eddy

Cubs fans and Wrigley, both unique to the game.  It's going to be a long time before I can call The Jake Progressive Field.  

Joe- listening to opening day at the Jake shocked me a little when the White Sox announcers said Progressive Field.....there's not even a really good way to shorten that one up! "The Prog"???

Wrigley is a great place to see a ball game...like Fenway I hope it never changes...I want to take my son and grand kids to both

Wrigley Field is already named after a product - so why the need to change? Would ruin an institution. Would you still watch the Cubs if they changed to the Wolves or something? It just wouldn't be the same.

Steve, thanks for reading. Wrigley is named after the former owner that happened to be a chewing gum mogul....so they're not seeing any money from that name. NOW- they could (and to an extent have been)pressure Wrigley into purchasing the naming rights that they've had free for so many years.... My point is that it doesn't matter a lick what the stadium's called. The company is operating in the red and selling naming rights would help bring that up...

As far as changing the team name- I could care less......you generally only do that if there's a REAL reason to do so----like Tampa Bay changed from the Devil Rays to just the Rays this year. They've been horrible and in the cellar annually since their inception, they want a fancy pants new stadium and NEEDED to re-brand the operation. I'm certain Cubs paraphernalia/ product sells in the top 5 of the league and would bet that it's right behind the Yankees and very close to the Red Sox (if not beyond) in the top 3......so an identity change argument doesn't hold water.

Wrigley Fields name has been in place since 1927, I would hate to see it renamed as something stupid like a superstore, or a airline company. Could you imagine a ESPN sports caster saying "were live from Wal-Mart Supercenter Park", or "were here to see the cubs at Southwest Airlines Field". Stick with Wrigley, it's a ledgion. Go Cubs!!!

Unfortunately it is part of sports these days...it is no longer the Boston Garden, or Tigers Stadium or Comisky or Candlestick Park and I am pretty sure it won't be Yankee Stadium next year, but could be wrong.  I am sorry it has come to this.

I think if you asked Cubs fans...if the naming dollars brought in a big free agent who would bring the World Series to Chicago...would they want the name change...you would get some positive feedback.

That's the trouble though...they DON'T want it....and they already spend enough money on free agents---

Jim, you know people are saying one thing and they will do completely the opposite. Yeah I sure they are not happy with it, I know I would hate to see Dodger stadium named after a stupid phone company, or an outfit that sells pet products, or what ever. We both know that nothing will keep them from attending other than maybe not selling beer any more.

Rob- I agree. I HATED Comiskey Park being changed to US Cellular.....and i LOVED the white sox winning the world series and would have called the field Tampax Field or whatever as a trade off.

I have to say I would not be thrilled if my beloved Fenway had its name changed, however I certainly would not stop going.  I suppose if selling the naming rights would increase the teams revenue and help ownership get out of the red so they could field a better team I would be fine with that.  Good luck Cubs fans this is a no brainer.