Selling your Soul: Zell plans to sell naming rights of Wrigley Field

You know those old tales of good and evil where the devil tries to tempt a man on earth with great treasures and power in return for his soul? 

Remnants of that tale immediately came to mind once I heard that Sam Zell, the new owner of the Chicago Cubs and CEO of the Chicago Tribune, publicly stated that he will sell the naming rights of Wrigley Field.  I immediately thought of the outrage that this would stir among Cub fans and baseball purists.  Now, I am a die hard Cub fan and as tough as it has been not to show any real bias towards this controversy, hearing about this news really ticked me off. Selling the naming rights of Wrigley Field is just disrespectful to the loyal fans, the game itself, and the Chicago Cubs organization.  Sam Zell is a man that is already filthy rich and I understand that business is business and he wants to turn the Chicago Tribune back around, but this is not the way to do it. 

Let me start off by saying that you can try-but if there’s one thing I’ve learned as a sports fan: you can’t buy tradition.

Needless to say, I am sad to see that this day has finally come.  I'm dissapointed as a loyal Cub fan and sad because this is the world we live in ruled by corporate mega giants.  There is no doubt that selling the naming rights of Wrigley Field would be extremely profitable. The naming rights to the Mets' new Citi Field in New York generated a deal of $20 million per year for 20 years. But is it worth it?  Maybe I would feel differently if Zell was selling the naming rights and donating it to a charity or a good cause. However, the fact of the matter is that Zell is a greedy SOB looking to make as much money as he can in a short period of time. (maybe not the best choice of words, but it's a passionate subject)  With an estimated net worth of 6 billion (US), Zell was ranked as the 52nd richest American by Forbes at the end of 2007.  Obviously this man doesn’t care about the tradition that is the Chicago Cubs and I’ve certainly lost all respect for him as have many Cub fans.  You don’t become a new owner of one of the most popular franchises in the world and decide you’re going to mandate major changes overnight.  That’s just disrespectful. 

So what’s in a name? Over 100 years of tradition lies behind the name Wrigley Field and it’s one of the few ballparks that has endured the test of time in a league mired by change.  Advertising in ballparks has become extremely popular.  Still, compared to other ballparks, Wrigley Field doesn’t have as many advertisements.  For the most part, the stadium has kept its pure beauty. The Chicago City Council even granted the stadium local landmark status. The designation protects Wrigley's exterior and unique features, such as the ivy-covered walls and manually operated scoreboard as well as the marquee on Clark and Addison Streets.   For those of you who say it’s just a name and that Wrigley Field is named after a corporation need to learn the facts.

In 1926, the stadium was changed from Cubs Park to Wrigley Field in honor of owner William Wrigley, Jr.  He never really sold the rights. If the Wrigley's owned the field and named it after themselves, it wouldn't be corporate sponsorship because it's not a company paying the ballclub to put their company name on the marquee.  Wrigley has never paid to name the field. Besides, this is a vastly different world that we live in today where naming rights are extremely profitable. Everything is being so commercially driven these days, it’s just ridiculous. Are baseball parks going to look like Time Square or Tokyo one day?

C'mon people,who really buys Wrigley Gum because of the Wrigley Field name anyway?
To me, when you think of Wrigley Field, thoughts of baseball in its purest form come to mind. (along with 1:20 game times & drinking awful Old Style)  Fans have stuck with the Cubs through thick and thin.  They have endured terrible losing seasons and heartbreak.  Yet, they come back every year even though prices of tickets have risen substantially.  The majority of Cub fans wouldn’t want the name to be changed and I think the Cubs Organization owes it to the fans not to change it.  Business is business, but whatever happened to the idea that businesses are supposed to have a community goal in mind?  Businesses are supposed to provide services that the community wants or needs.  This is something Cub fans or baseball fans obviously don't want.

Somewhere the great Harry Caray is shedding a tear.  By changing the name of Wrigley Field, you’re basically saying that the only thing owner’s care about the fans is their money. (surprised anyone?) We are also assuming money rules over everything including tradition.  It’s a shame, especially when you’re Zell and you don’t really need more money. Zell also wants to sell the team and stadium separately and possibly put a PSL license on season ticketholders.  I’m sorry, but Zell is a greedy bastard.

He even told a journalist “f*** you” after responding to a question. I’m serious, it’s on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtuRJYJ0Nao

Changing the name of Wrigley Field would be like changing the name of Madison Square Garden.  It would be sure to spark incredible controversy.  But naming right changes to stadiums are not occurring everywhere.  Even in NY where most consider to be the sports capital of money and greed, the New York Yankees are not selling the naming rights to their new stadium.  At least one group of baseball hierarchy got the memo about tradition. 

“The dollars we passed were incomparable”, Lonn Trost, the Yankees' chief operating officer, told the New York Times in October. "Having said that, you wouldn't rename the White House, you wouldn't rename Grant's Tomb, and you wouldn't rename the Grand Canyon. This is Yankee Stadium, and this will always be Yankee Stadium."

Are owners and fans alike paying for turning their noses at the thought of Mark Cuban owning the Cubs? Owners wouldn’t even give him a chance.  However, I don’t think Cuban would have even pondered the idea of changing the naming rights of Wrigley Field.  He might have added seats or something along those lines, but I don’t think he would have wanted to anger Cub fans the way Zell is now.

And what can we do as Cub or Baseball fans to make sure this change doesn’t occur? Unfortunately, not much.  Cub fans or those against the change can voice their displeasure with petitions and activist groups, like www.keepitwrigley.net but the decision lies in the hand of Darth Zell. The fact is Wrigley Field should be protected as a historic landmark.  Its landmark status should have included the name “Wrigley Field”, but it might be too late.

It’s certainly a sad time for loyal Cub fans and baseball purists everywhere.

**Also visit Gene Wojciechowski's article about Zell's plan on ESPN.com, real interesting

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechow