Tomorrow

Today is a very strange day for me.  As I sit here and write this post, I don't really know what tone to take.

Tomorrow is the first day of Obstructed View.  If you don't follow me, Adam, Jeff or David on Twitter or like us on Facebook (why the heck don't you?), you have missed a great deal of hype for the new site that has been a great deal of fun to put together and I couldn't resist one last one:

It started (I think) with a comment from our friend, Melissa about how the four of us coming together was like the Traveling Wilburys.  That led to Adam putting this together:

He also did a few more and I decided I should put a few together like this one:

Or this one:

Soon there were something like twenty images floating around (check out the album on our Facebook page to see the rest) hyping up Obstructed View and I realized that putting those together was the most fun I had had in a long time with this whole blogging thing.

I remember when I first started this blog, one of my friends who had quite a bit of experience blogging told me that the main thing was to have fun with whatever I did with it.  Otherwise, it's just another form of work.  That turned out to be one of the most true statements ever made.

While I loved building up this site, I realized the main fun I've had while musing about the foibles of the Cubs is getting to know the people who have managed to find their way to this site and those who I interact with on Facebook and Twitter.  So, even though I'm not sure what is in store for this site in the future, I'm very excited to enter into this venture with Adam, Jeff and David.  I'm very thankful and honored that they asked me to be a part of Obstructed View and I'm sure our collaboration will result in something far greater than I could ever have achieved by myself on this site.

But I'm also thankful for everyone who stopped by and read the ramblings and rants that spilled out of me as the Cubs somehow managed to underwhelm me despite ever-lowered expectations.  It is a tremendous help to know that so many people out there feel the same pain I feel when watching such repeated failure.  I hope if you liked this site that you will follow me over to the new place because it won't be the same otherwise.

Thanks again, and don't forget to check back here from time to time since I do watch an awful lot of sports that don't involve the Cubs, and I'm pretty opinionated.

Until then, how about one more tip of the hat to one of my favorite shows:

Get Ready For Some Heavy Hitters

We are two days away from the debut of the greatest lineup in Cubs history.  No, not the lineup that will have Koyie Hill in it.

This Sunday, Obstructed View breaks camp and the posts count.

Cubs Hellbent on Keeping Silva for Some Reason

The Cubs have to be pretty pissed at Randy Wells, Andrew Cashner, and Carlos Silva for messing up their well-laid plans.  Wells and Cashner are supposed to be the ones fighting over a rotation spot, while Silva claimed that fourth spot.  That is how it was supposed to happen, but it didn't happen.

What's that you say?  The Cubs said that this was a three-man race for the last two spots?  They also said you wouldn't be able to buy tickets for the Yankees games when single-game tickets went on sale.  The Cubs lie.  There is no getting around it.  When the Cubs state that the sun rises in the east, it would be wise to look out your window to make sure it is true.

Of course, most businesses lie at least a bit, so the Cubs aren't necessarily the MLB version of Wolfram & Hart or anything, but they also shouldn't be trusted as much as a lot of fans want to trust them.

So why do I think the Cubs were lying when they said the last two rotation spots were open to competition?  Because Carlos Silva is still alive in the rotation competition, and I think he's going to get it.

Despite Silva's six inning, one run outing today, his Spring ERA stands at 10.90.  While Andrew Cashner's 3.97 this spring isn't something that would win him a Cy Young award if he did that all year in the rotation, it certainly is a hell of a lot better than an ERA that requires 4 digits.

Anybody who has watched the Cubs at all this Spring can clearly see that the two best performers to take the #4 and #5 spots would be Randy Wells and Andrew Cashner.  Wells and Cashner are also the younger candidates and have the highest potential to possibly outperform their projections if you completely disregard the Spring numbers.  They are also the more marketable candidates since they are products of the Cubs farm system and still basically make league minimum salaries.

Yet, it is looking more and more like Carlos Silva will be in the Cubs rotation and Andrew Cashner will not.  This says to me that there was almost nothing Carlos Silva could have done short of injury that would have kept him out of the rotation.

Let's go to the map.

Carlos Silva is a big fat-ass with heart issues, so if there was any debate about whether he should be in the rotation or not, he probably should have shown up to camp in better shape than a Macy's Thanksgiving Day balloon.  He did not.

When one is fighting for a spot on a major league roster, it is best to not get into a fight with the team's best offensive weapon.  But if one does get into a fight with the team's best offensive weapon, maybe one should wait and not get into it during the fourth game of Spring Training.  He did not.

Then there was his inability to get anybody out with any regularity until today's outing.  When one is fighting for a spot and you are a big, fat, old, expensive pitcher that was never all that good to begin with and pretty much a malcontent wherever you've been, you should probably keep your ERA in the three-digit range.  He did not.

So how will Silva get a spot in the Cubs' rotation?  Because he never was going to lose the spot.  Unfortunately he, Wells, and Cashner didn't follow the script.

Wells or Cashner were supposed to battle it out for the fifth spot so that one of them could get sent down to work on another pitch (Cashner) or work on his confidence (Wells).  Meanwhile, Silva wouldn't necessarily be fantastic, but he would be a veteran presence on the back end of a rotation for a team that was trying to win now.

The problem is that Randy Wells pitched so well he absolutely HAD to be included in the rotation.  Between his results from 2009, his peripherals from 2010 (which the Cubs don't care about, but they should), and his Spring performance, there was no way on God's green earth that Wells was going to go down. So it supposedly became a two man race between Cashner and Silva.  Silva screwed that up by pitching as poorly as if he was lobbing the pitches in underhanded and Cashner actually stepped up and pitched like he wanted that rotation spot.

The problem is that Cashner never really stood a realistic chance.  He went out in his last outing and gave up a few runs in the slop that inflated his ERA a bit and Silva went out and had his best outing, but Cashner still has Silva beat by a wide margin.  Cashner is presumably the best option if the Cubs are trying to win now OR if they are trying to focus on development, but Silva is still lingering.

Why?  I'm guessing it is his salary.  The Cubs would have to eat his salary.  He can't go to the bullpen because he doesn't want to be there and he won't go as quietly as Carlos Zambrano did when he had even less reason than Silva to do so.  They can't send him to the minors since he's a veteran.  He has almost no trade value (and today's outing didn't suddenly change him into a viable trade chip).  The Cubs seem extremely reluctant to just consider the 8-0 start from last year as the best return they could have hoped for in return for Milton Bradley and just walk away from the casino with a small profit.  They seem intent on going back to the roulette table to really try to cash in their longshot.


We can't believe it either, Carlos.

If Silva makes the rotation, I can not think of a single scenario where Silva actually had his starting job in jeopardy where he retained the spot based on his performance or value to the team.
I have an easier time rationalizing Braden Looper making the rotation as the fifth starter than I do coming up with an argument for Silva that doesn't involve the crossing of fingers and outright overstatement of his capabilities.  The only thing I can come up with is that there was never two rotation spots open.  It was one spot between Cashner and Wells (with the other dark horses thrown in for good measure) and Wells won that battle.

If anyone can think of a rational reason why Silva would be a part of the rotation, feel free to let me know.  I've got nothing.

I can't wait to see how the Cubs rationalize Cashner getting sent down.

Retro Post(s): The Letter from Tom Ricketts Series

After the 2010 season mercifully ended, season ticket holders were treated to a literary epic from Tom Ricketts where he did his best to gloss over the bad parts (of which there were many), hype up the good parts (not quite so many), prepare us for an offseason where the Cubs wouldn't really do much, and the ticket price structure would become exponentially more difficult to determine.

I originally broke up the letter into five separate posts since the letter itself was so long that I figured nobody would sit through a point-by-point rehashing of the whole thing.  Well, in this retrospective you get to do just that.  Consider it like sitting through all three Lord of the Rings movies at once - your ass might fall asleep, but it is totally worth the time.

(Though, to be honest, it might be more like sitting through all three of the Big Mama's House movies.)

Part 1 - We're Not Worthy!

As you may have already heard through the Twitterverse, I received a nice letter from Tom Ricketts today in my e-mail that addressed the 2010 season, the managerial search, plans for 2011 and beyond, further improvements to Wrigley Field, and ticket pricing.  The letter is shorter than Moby Dick, but only a little bit so I'll address the components in separate posts to keep you all from dying of exhaustion from reading both the actual text and my accompanying commentary.

Dear Mr. McGinnis,

OMG! OMG! OMG! He knows my name!

It has been an incredible year for my family in our first season as stewards of the Chicago Cubs. Of all the new experiences, none was more enjoyable than the opportunity to meet and spend time with you---our season ticket holders.

We met many of you during our game day walks through Wrigley Field. Over the course of those games, you welcomed me and my family, you shared your thoughts and suggestions on improving the team and the ballpark, we celebrated some wins and, unfortunately, suffered too many losses.

Tom brought the shovel out pretty quickly because I can't imagine hearing opinions on middle relief from guys wearing Ryan Theriot jerseys was actually the most enjoyable part of owning the Cubs.

One of the highlights of the year was our first ever season ticket holder "open house" on July 8th. On that day alone I met more than 2100 of you, as we spent a day together in the greatest ballpark on earth. (For all who have inquired---yes, we are going to host that event again and in fact we will double up with a night session as well).

I wonder if he is counting his speaking to a large group at the beginning of each session as "meeting" the fans.  I think there were six sessions that day that all lasted an hour, so if he is counting the people he individually met, he would have spent about 10 seconds with every fan (which I know isn't possible because he was actually engaged in conversations whenever I looked over there). So, he's definitely playing fast and loose with the definition of the word "met."  It reminds me of the time I "met" the Rolling Stones at Soldier Field.

As our most highly valued customers, your opinions are invaluable as we move our organization forward. In fact, you will soon be contacted to participate in a quality assurance survey as we consider amenity upgrades and look to identify ways to improve your experience at Wrigley Field.

As long as they are only taking opinions from fans regarding the amenities in Wrigley Field, that is fine with me, but I do not want the fate of the managerial position or any roster moves based even a little bit on what the fanbase thinks.  Jim Hendry and the rest of the baseball operations team get paid a nice sum to evaluate baseball talent and our stupid opinions shouldn't matter for shit to them.  The ONLY time I want a fan's opinion taken into account in a baseball decision is when there is a decision between two players that basically are the same level player, but one is a dick and one is a scrappy fan-favorite.  Then sure, go ahead and let the fans be the tie-breaker in that all-too-rare circumstance.

On behalf of my entire family, thank you for your warm welcome and your incredible support of the Cubs organization. You are truly our partners and we respect your contribution and insights.

We're not worthy! We're not worthy! We suck!

OK, Tom, we get it.  We're valuable, we're part of the team, you respect us, we shouldn't stop spendinng our money on your crappy product, you love us, you'd name your children after us if you could somehow have 3,000,000 children.  Groveling is not becoming of a major league owner.

Part 2 - 2010: It Wasn't All Shitty

Tom Ricketts opened telling us how important Cubs fans are to the team, so now that we are still basking in the warm embrace of our new fan-friendly owners, it's as good a time as any to slap us in the face with the cold, hard reality of the:

2010 Review

The 2010 season was a disappointment for all at the major league level-for my family, for the organization, for the players and for the fans. The team showed signs of its potential the last quarter of the season, but the 75-87 record fell well short of our goals. My family is committed to winning a World Series and though it may not be entirely evident from this year's performance, there are encouraging signs.

Well that sure doesn't sound like the season was as big of a cluster-fuck death march as I thought it was.  Maybe I'm all turned around about the Cubs. Maybe I'll get a DVD to commemorate such a successful season:

Oh... right...

(h/t The Heckler)


If the potential of this team was shown by lots of playing time for Koyie Hill, Darwin Barney, Bobby Scales, and Micah Hoffpauir, I'm not sure what the encouraging signs are.  However, Tom nails it on the head when he says that his family's committment to winning a World Series is not "evident from this year's performance."

The 2010 highlights revolved around our home grown talent. Starlin Castro, Tyler Colvin and Andrew Cashner developed into budding stars, with Castro and Colvin in the NL Rookie of the Year discussion. That young group was enhanced by the August promotion of Casey Coleman, who went 3-1 with a 2.08 ERA in his last four starts. All need to take the next step in 2011, but we are very encouraged to have a group of young, home grown players emerge as regulars in 2010.

There is the silver lining.  Castro, Colvin, and for some reason, Cashner, get prominent billing.  Youth shall save us! The Cubs seem hellbent on turning Cashner into a middle reliever so even if you followed him through the minors and are excited about his power arm, no team should hype a middle relief prospect in its top three "encouraging" signs.  Throwing Casey Coleman and his small sample size is just grasping for straws.

We also have to recognize the superb job done by another one of our own-Mike Quade. During the final 37 games, the team played at a .649 clip (24-13), the second best record in the majors over that timeframe. Making this even more significant, we played largely against teams fighting for playoff berths.

This last part is particularly interesting since Tom seems to be selling Quade to the fans.  He could have mentioned the strong finish and left it at that to build the hope train going for next season, but he practically equates Quade to a prospect that is coming into his own at the major league level that we can enjoy in future seasons. Huh...

Plus, he gets a little liberal with his definitions again when he states the Cubs finished "largely" against teams fighting for playoff berths.  Even if I include the last three games against the Cardinals as a team "fighting for playoff berths," only 16 of Quade's 37 games came against such playoff contenders.  In those 16 games, the Cubs were 9-7.  That is nice, but it isn't like they kicked good teams' asses and took names.  But yes, Quade did a nice job overall.

It is my strong belief that, in the end, it is organizations with strong farm systems that win championships and I am convinced that our organization is making progress.

Our success in producing talent from within our system can be attributed to a number of factors, including a commitment of financial resources. We believe we have one of the best scouting directors in baseball in Tim Wilken (now 4 years in place) and with a strong farm director in Oneri Fleita and a very productive international effort, we are making progress in what had been a weak spot in the organization.

He's talking about good young talent more than a popped-collar guy at Casey Moran's.  It's like he's wearing beer goggles when looking at the state of the team...

Well, that explains the optimism.

Our farm clubs performed very well in 2010, playing to a collective 374-316 record, with first place finishes at both the Triple-A level in Iowa (tied) and Double-A level in Tennessee. The overall .542 winning percentage was second among all major league organizations and our 374 wins were the most for the Cubs organization in 15 years. As I said at our opening press conference about a year ago, we are committed to winning the right way---with our farm system. We believe we are on the right track.

Notice he didn't mention what a great job Ryne Sandberg did to lead Iowa to that first place tie.  Maybe because they blew a post-season berth in their last game.  Maybe because Ryne suddenly finds himself on the outside looking in?  At least there is a head-fake towards Ryne with his mention of "winning the right way."

Besides the absence of Sandberg being discussed, some other noticeable omissions were: Every veteran player on the roster.  No mention of Zambrano's strong finish, no mention of Byrd's All-Star appearance, no mention of Soto's rebound season.  It makes you wonder if a full fire sale may at least be on the table as an option.

So, in short, the season was disappointing, but check out all those rookies!  That makes a nice segue into the next segment:

Part 3 - 2011 Preview - Things Are Looking Up

So far, Tom has told us how valued we, the fans, are and how the 2010 season had a whole bunch of silver linings if you looked hard enough.  But enough about all of the lovey-dovey crap and going over things in the past nobody can change.  Let's talk about the future!  What about 2011?  Tom?:

We are early in the process of building the club for 2011. The first order of business is hiring our manager. Jim Hendry has identified a strong group of candidates and we are currently completing our interviews. This is a critical decision and I am confident we will find the right person to lead the club.

When the list of candidates involves Bob Melvin it can't really be that strong.  Ryne Sandberg has name recognition, Mike Quade has a month of major league experience with an expanded roster, and Joe Girardi isn't even officially interested in the job.  Bob Brenly said thanks, but no thanks.  The only way the list gets less impressive is if Dave Martinez is added to it (and he's interested!).

I do like his confidence and wish I had that sort of optimism regarding the choice Hendry is about to make.  I wonder where that comes from...

Oh yeah.

The strength of our team in 2010 was our starting pitching, as we led the National League with 96 quality starts. We expect that to continue. We are excited to see the continued development of our young players and the strong bullpen work anchored by Carlos Marmol (38 saves and a reliever-franchise record 138 strikeouts) and Sean Marshall (2.65 ERA, 22 holds).

I really like this paragraph because he starts out talking about the quality of the starting pitching and finishes by talking about the youth again (particularly Marmol and Marshall - who aren't starters).  This would lead many people to believe that the starting pitching that was so successful this past year is young and that we can expect that kind of success in the future.  It's a great marketing message.

Unfortunately, it is also wishful thinking at best and flat out not true at worst.  The leader in quality starts this season was Ryan Dempster, age 34 next year.  Next comes Randy Wells (age 29), Carlos Silva (age 32), and Carlos Zambrano (age 30).  That isn't exactly a kindergarten class out there.  What's more, Dempster and Silva will be in their last years of expensive contracts, and the Cubs would really like to get rid of Zambrano's big contract.  This does not bode well when the two regular starters with the lowest percentage of quality starts (Wells and Gorzelanny) are the only ones under 30 years old.

The only other starters besides the aforementioned Casey Coleman that pitched for the Cubs this year under the age of 30 were Jeff Samardzija and Thomas Diamond. This does not make me feel optimistic.

Going forward, we recognize the need to recommit to fundamentals. We need to stabilize our defense and cut down on errors. We need to improve our offense and become more efficient in both moving runners and hitting with players in scoring position. It is too early to determine whether this will be addressed with internal moves, trades or through free agent acquisitions. But we know we must improve in these areas.

This paragraph sounds like he is running for something and he is addressing a room full of Cubs fans all waving "It's Gonna Happen" signs.  He talks about changing what needs to be changed and offers absolutely no solutions.  Here is how I imagine it would be written on a teleprompter:

"Going forward, we recognize the need to recommit to fundamentals. (wait for applause)
We need to stabilize our defense and cut down on errors. (wait for applause)
We need to improve our offense (pause)
and become more efficient in both moving runners (pause)
and hitting with players in scoring position. (wait for applause)
It is too early to determine whether this will be addressed with internal moves,
trades or through free agent acquisitions.
(pounds fist on podium) But we know we must (pounds fist)
improve in these areas. (wait for standing ovation)"

Add a "God Bless the Cubs" and maybe a "Think of the children" and you've got a really good start to a stump speech.

Given that we had the highest payroll in the NL in 2010, I get a lot of questions about our payroll commitment for 2011. As I said earlier, we are still working on our 2011 baseball plan, so it is hard to be too specific at this time. What I can tell you is that our overall baseball budget (scouting, player development and payroll) will be about the same in 2011 as it was in 2010. Continued long term success will come through superior scouting and player development, and we are committed to improving that facet of the organization. As a result, this likely means a shift of some of our resources from the major league payroll toward scouting and player development, but we are still very much in the evaluation phase.

This is what Tom has been working towards with all the youth talk.  Young talent in baseball is cheap talent, thus the major league payroll is most likely going down.  This means there will be veterans traded away if Hendry can find takers who are willing to pay a decent portion of the contract.  This means that the team is most likely going to be crappy.  Tom is trying to sell the notion of a rebuild, but he's framing it so that we think that the youth can carry the team as soon as next year.

The thing is, most of the superior talent down in the farm system probably won't be making significant contributions until the rosters expand again in September.  If there was talent that close to being significant on the major league level, we surely would have seen it down the stretch in 2010.  Instead we got Thomas Diamond and Jeff Samardzija.

Trades probably won't boost that major-league ready talent unless they are willing to part with pieces like Marmol and Marshall.  Otherwise, all the Cubs get back is salary relief in any trades that occur of players like Fukudome or Zambrano (not that he would waive the no-trade clause anyway).

So Tom is doing his darndest to put the best face on 2011, but when it all comes down to it, it really has no more substance than this:

Part 4 - Ticket Pricing: Good Luck Figuring it Out

If you remember from last week, Tom Ricketts sent a very lengthy letter and I've been breaking it down as best I can so it can be viewed safely by normal human beings without going insane.  By now we've seen that Tom has given a group hug to the fans, talked up the rookies to Corey Patterson levels, glossed over the disaster of the 2010 season, and made some leaps from small sample sizes to build up the hope for 2011.  At this point, he is counting on our eyes glazing over and nobody reading this far.  As one of my heroes,  Dave Barry, has pointed out, it is an age-old tactic dating back to Thomas Jefferson when he wrote the Declaration of Independence:

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind require that they should get some sleep.  Because I have been up for two nights now, declaring independence, and I may be a lanky Virginian but I am not a machine, for heaven's sake, and it just doesn't make sense to sit here scrawling away these complex-compound sentences when I just know nobody's going to read them, because nobody ever does read all the way through these legal documents. Take leases. You take the average tenants, and you could put a lease in front of them with a clause halfway through stating that they have to eat toasted moose doots for breakfast, and I'll guarantee you they never read it."

He's betting no one is reading at this point so that it will be an optimal time to slip in some information that won't necessarily be popular along with some confusing plans that are being spun as good news for season ticket holders. Tom is crafty.  It is time to start talking about:

2011 Ticket Pricing

The other question I get regularly concerns our ticket pricing for 2011 and beyond. Overall, our average ticket price will be flat in 2011 compared to 2010. Before going into greater detail on that topic, let me provide some background.

Translation: The amount of revenue we generate from ticket sales on an average per ticket basis will remain the same, but it will change for you. I won't say how yet because I'm going to try to confuse you with more words here in a second.  (Hint: it probably isn't going to go down for you, but I'll try to make you think that it is.)

My family is committed to providing ticket pricing that allows families to enjoy Cubs baseball. In so many ways, our children represent the next generation in the Cubs family. We want to invest in providing families with opportunities to experience Wrigley Field, including such things as running the bases, which will be continued in 2011.

This is nice.  Families can come and watch the Cubs and enjoy the same experiences as the Ricketts FAMILY that now owns the team.  They understand the importance of families and they understand that giving children the opportunity to come to games at an early age is important so that they can get addicted and continue buying tickets for the rest of their lives.

To this end, we will continue the policy of keeping many of our tickets in the sub $10 range-in fact, we will offer a substantial increase in sub-$10 tickets next year compared to 2010.

As long as the families are content sitting in the 500 sections of the upper deck in the outfield (and like to see the Pirates a lot), they can get into the park for less than $10 per person.  I'm sure it is only a coincidence that these sections probably have the fewest season ticket holders since season ticket holders generally want a halfway decent seat if they are going to sit and watch a team lose 81 times per year.

In addition, we are increasing the number of bronze games (our lowest ticket pricing tier) from 6 games in 2010 to 15 games in the bleachers and 11 games in the grandstand in 2011. As a result, there will be 77% more tickets priced at $20 or less in 2011 than there were in 2010. Stated differently, a total of more than 550,000 tickets will be available for $20 or less next year.

This is great news to the single-game ticket buyers because there are now cheaper options available to the games that the Cubs had trouble selling at the end of the year last year (and therefore would probably be a tough sell in 2011).  It could also end up lowering a season ticket holder's cost overall as long as they don't jack up prices to the games they know they are going to sell out anyway.  Let's cross our fingers.

Again, our average ticket price next year will be essentially flat compared to 2010 (actually it is fractionally down vs. 2010). This does not mean all ticket prices will be the same as last year however, as pricing was adjusted based on location and our schedule. A little background might be helpful.

See what I mean about a bunch of words? He already said this, but he really wants to hammer home the message that the average ticket price won't be going up so he'll repeat it again here and then go into some more background (translation: more words to distract us).

To set our pricing in 2011, we examined approximately 5 million transactions from our primary and secondary ticket markets from 2005 through 2010. Our goal was to keep our average ticket price flat overall but improve the alignment of pricing for games and seating sections with actual demand. The result is a market-based ticket model that reflects our fans' buying patterns.

They are segmenting their fanbase based on past ticket buying patterns and splitting the stadium and games into appropriate categories to maximize their profit from every segment. There is nothing sinister about this and they are actually being very smart in not lumping all Cubs fans into one massive group. The duplicitous thing they are doing is talking about a few segments being helped by their price adjustments as if it was benefiting a large percentage of the season ticket holders, which is just not true.

The highlights include: (1) reducing the average ticket price for all gold, silver and bronze games, (2) separating the bleachers and grandstands in the pricing tiers, as the buying patterns vary significantly for each area, and (3) adding a new fifth tier of pricing (Marquee Tier) for our highest demand games.

1) Yay!
2) That's a highlight?
3) Uh. Oh.

Cutting through it all, the net result for our season ticket holders is that some will see a slight (in all cases, less than 3%) increase, others will see a reduction as much as 6% and some will see virtually no change at all.

Oh ho!  There's the increase snuck in there amongst all the good news and tier talk.  You have to get up pretty early in the morning to sneak that by us in Aisle 424, Tom.

So let's take Tom's approach and cut through it all.  I would be shocked if the percentage of season ticket holders that actually see a drop in their overall price from 2010 is over 20%.  I'd actually be surprised if it was higher than 15%, but I'm being conservative.

Folks holding tickets in the infield portion of the stadium are mostly full plan holders, so they will benefit slightly from an increase in the number of cheaper Crappy Level games, but that will get negated by the boost of including the new Mega-Maxi-Super-Duper-Snazzy-Marquee-alicious Tier in the package.  They also will not benefit from those 550,000 tickets that are under $20 that Tom mentioned before.

Anyone grandfathered into the Combo Plan (nights and weekends) isn't benefiting from all of their restructuring since the price drops will all be in games not included in their package.  I would gather this group will almost assuredly be in the group whose prices actually go up since they now have the Premiere-Ultra-Awesome-Happy-Fun-Luxury Tier games to pay for without anything to offset that cost.

The folks who will benefit are the Bleacher season ticket holders (Yellon and his three friends), and the folks who sit way down the lines and/or far under the upper deck in the Terrace Reserved sections.  Like I said before, the percentage of season ticket holders in these sections is small.  This new pricing structure is actually much more beneficial to the single game buyers like the families Tom talked about a million words ago.

It's all very simple.  Oh, there's a separate pricing structure for bleachers now too?

But Tom, always crafty, has packaged this into his announcement to season ticket holders, and tried to bury it as best he could.  Now he's going to talk about a bunch of stuff that has little to do with the baseball team being good as a way to continue to sell us on what a good deal season tickets are.

Other changes in 2011 include new season ticket holder benefits. Over the years, we have added significant benefits to being a Cubs season ticket holder, such as a dedicated area within our website, early access to Spring Training tickets and other special events (such as the very popular Dave Matthews concerts and Allstate Wrigleyville Classic football game coming in November), and last year's open house.

Dude, we just want the team to fucking win.  Seriously.  Do that and I'll volunteer to let any member of the Cubs organization punch me in the ding and take a dollar from me.  You can form a line.  It will be totally worth it.

For 2011, there are a number of new benefits that I think you will find interesting. Among them is exclusive access to our players, coaches, manager, front office and ownership through Cubs Insider Webcasts that will occur throughout the year. In addition to updates on everything happening inside the ballclub, these webcasts will provide you the opportunity to ask questions on topics of your choice. A Season Ticket Holder Benefit page follows this letter and you should ask your Cubs representative about any of the items listed there.

Finally!  A chance to have my question answered about what brand of chewing gum Justin Berg prefers! 

Actually, as a Cubs blogger, the Webcasts would probably be pure gold as they shove more contrived crap into our consciousness than the people at Vineline could possibly dream.  Get ready to learn way more about Starlin Castro than any normal human being should ever want.

The long and short of it is: the Cubs have lowered prices on games you either don't want to see or can't see because you have a job, and on the seats that you don't want to sit in unless you have to because all of the other good seats are sold.  They have raised ticket prices on all the really good games because they know they can and they will still sell them out.  I'm actually shocked at their restraint in how much they've bumped them.

They can talk about families all they want and how much they care about us, but when it comes down to it, this was about adjusting the single game pricing structure to maximize those revenues while still collecting the full amount of revenue from season ticket holders that they count on each and every year.

Part 5 - The Final Chapter

So, if you have been following along, Tom Ricketts' letter to the season ticket holders has now reached epic proportions.  He has used many, many, many, many words to explain things that really shouldn't be that hard to succinctly discuss:

• Cubs fans are important to the Ricketts family
• Families are important to the Ricketts family
• The Cubs were disappointing in 2010, except for the end part when they were awesome
• 2011 will be a continuation of the awesome part
• Some ticket prices will go up for some games and seats, but not others, when they may go down, or not
• The new ticket prices make it easier for families to go to Cubs games
• Twelve drummers drumming, eleven pipers piping, ten lords a-leaping, nine ladies dancing, eight maids a-milking, seven swans a-swimming, six geese a-laying, five golden rings!, four calling birds, three French hens, two turtle doves, and a partridge in a pear tree

After all of this, you may be asking yourself if you can expect to see any more major changes in Wrigley Field itself in 2011.  You will be happy to know that the answer to that question is... maybe.

Like you, we love Wrigley Field and are committed to winning a championship at the Friendly Confines. We all need to recognize, however, that our wonderful Wrigley Field is fast approaching 100 years of age and is in need of substantial improvements. We committed over $10 million to that effort last year, largely to improve restrooms, add new food options, recast concrete, upgrade steel and other general maintenance. We will continue this effort in 2011 but again the focus will be more tactical than strategic.

Yes, the urinals and the bison dogs, how can we forget?  Sounds like more of the same little tweaks that they will herald later as grand sweeping changes are in store for us in 2011.  Seriously, did anybody notice an appreciable difference in the bathrooms?  The one change I noticed was that the sign above the sink that said "sink" to differentiate itself from the troughs was not there when the season began and then re-appeared at some point in the middle of the season.

I honestly have no idea if this is a Before or After picture.

The bison dogs were tasty from what I remember.  I didn't have one after the month of May because I had stopped buying anything in the ballpark as a personal protest.  But whatever, they didn't suck, which was nice compared to what we were offered on the baseball field while we ate the damn things.

So who knows what will come next.  Ketchup and mustard packets instead of the dispensers that always cause a log jam at the condiment/napkin stations because everyone is trying to unwrap their food to be able to apply some mustard?  Miller Park and a few other ballparks have little kiosks that serve freshly roasted nuts with cinnamon and sugar.  Those are awesome.  Maybe something like that?  I might even buy some of those even if the team sucks next year.

Whatever it is they have planned, it doesn't sound like it will be of much consequence in the grand scheme of things, so you have to wonder why Tom bothered to bring it up at all, but he was on a roll.

We spent much of the 2010 season assembling a team of renowned architects, engineers, designers and project managers to develop a master plan for a more significant Wrigley Field overhaul and Triangle Building development. Our planning will continue in 2011 and your involvement through the quality assurance surveys mentioned earlier is very important. We look forward to completing the analysis phase and getting underway with the construction and occupation phase.

The Triangle Building!  Bet you had forgotten all about that with all the noodles and Toyota signs and the team sucking and all, but there it is still getting planned.  Look at them plan.  Plan, plan, plan.  They should charge money to have fans be able to watch them plan.

They are looking forward to turning the plans into reality though, as should you because there will be all kinds of different ways to separate us from our money in the Triangle Building.  They just have to finish planning how. Hopefully their plans for the Triangle Building are more solid than their plans for building a World Series contender.

I guess as long as it isn't the same people that designed the Soldier Field spaceship thing, I don't care that much, but it sure was nice of Tom to keep us informed that nothing specific can be divulged at this time.

Conclusion

We were in Year One when this started, what year is it now?

Thank you again for your incredible support of Cubs baseball and the Ricketts family. We have spent our adult lives sitting next to you cheering for our team. We now have the responsibility to improve not only the play on the field but also to protect and save our summer home, Wrigley Field. With your help we will accomplish both.

It is pretty incredible that so many people love this team so much when they never, ever fulfill that love and devotion by ending a season with a playoff win. 

Think about it, Tom openly admitted that payroll is going to go down (and therefore the realistic expectations of being a contender also go down), and at the same time they've said they'll pretty much be charging us the same rates as last year (which was supposed to be a contending team). I haven't seen much backlash about that.  We, as a fanbase, seem pretty much OK with it since they aren't actually raising the rates (except when they are for some people).

That is incredible.  It really is.

I did notice a slight clerical error at the end though.

"With your help money we will (hope, pray and ultimately fail to) accomplish both."

Fixed. You're welcome.

Sincerely,
Tom

Thanks, Tom.  Do you take personal checks?

Retro Post: Coming Soon: The Magical Cubdom

The Heckler published a great cartoon today that captures Tom Ricketts' vision for Wrigley as well as anything I've ever seen:

It reminded me of my post from about a year ago that pretty much saw this sort of thing coming.  I still haven't gotten my royalty check from the Cubs.

Coming Soon: The Magical Cubdom

The Cubs announced today that they would be unveiling a new statue outside of Wrigley for Billy Williams this coming September.  That is nice and I want to say up front that I don't necessarily believe that Billy doesn't deserve it, but it begs the question: What is next?  

For those of you keeping score at home, the Cubs have six players numbers retired represented by the five flags hanging on the fair poles.  Those same fair poles have the Hey Hey memorials to Jack Brickhouse.  Harry Caray gets the pressbox caricature and the statue outside the Captain Morgan's Club.  Ernie Banks has his statue by the ticket windows.  There are flags waiving on the rooftop that commemorate every Cubs playoff appearance and important players, events, and even a former owner.

Now Billy gets his own statue.  That's nice.

I guess I didn't think that another statue was really necessary to properly commemorate any more players on a team that hasn't won anything since before the Titanic was built.

I think the problem is that they went a little too overboard on the commemoration of broadcasters to the point where it became obvious that they were lacking in solid memorials to great players.  Since the Harry Statue went up in 1999, the Cubs have retired the numbers of Santo, Sandberg, Jenkins, and Maddux and they added the Banks statue.  I guess I thought that was enough to balance it out.  Especially since there really hasn't been a whole lot of winning on the North Side about which we should get all nostalgic.

What it boils down to is that the Cubs are going full bore ahead with their plans to make Wrigley a baseball version of Disney World.  If they have to build a few statues to support a revisionist view of their past history of failure, that is exactly what they are going to do.

If you go to Adventureland in the Magic Kingdom, you don't get an actual jungle experience.  There are no warring tribes, bugs the size of a Volkswagen (though with it being in Florida, this part is actually pretty close), and people dying of malaria, dysentary, or ebola.  You get happy natives and friendly British explorers who have no intentions of enslaving the darker skinned people.  You get friendly animals banding together to defeat the more harshly designed, mean looking animals that are only violent because they are bad eggs, not because they are naturally carnivores looking to survive in a harsh environment.  It is good clean fun and no one cares that it isn't close to reality.  In fact, they prefer it isn't and they pay big bucks to escape reality for a while.

Wrigley Field has real potential to become a place where reality is suspended and we as fans can pay a lot of money to walk down memory lane to the great teams of Cubs past.  I've been giving it some thought, and I think I've come up with some good attractions that could enhance the experience:

• Audioanimatronic Harry (voice provided by Ryan Dempster) - An interactive computer program will allow a virtual Harry to mispronounce visitors' names as he would if he were calling a game.
• The College of Coaches Jamboree - Audioanimatronic versions of El Tappe, Goldie Holt, Bobby Adams, Harry Craft, Verlon Walker, Ripper Collins, Vedie Himsl and Charlie Grimm will sing a medley of classics like "Go Cubs Go" and "It's a Beautiful Day For a Ballgame"
• The Carousel of Diminutive Middle Infielders - this could be audioanimatronic or it could help keep guys like Manny Alexander, Neifi Perez, and Aaron Miles out of the unemployment line.
• Journey to the Bottom of Yosh Kawano's Laundry Bag - kids can attempt to find the lucky soiled jock strap to win a prize.
• Michael Barrett's Punching Gallery - visitors can choose to be Michael Barret and punch A.J. Pierzynski, or they can choose to be Carlos Zambrano and punch Michael Barrett.  It's win/win.
• It's a Small Strike Zone Afterall - where visitors attempt to throw a virtual pitch on 3 and 2 to complete a perfect game that Bruce Froemming doesn't call a ball.
• Honey, I Shrunk My Testicles - where visitors try to hit virtual homeruns as Sammy Sosa or Rafael Palmeiro for prize tickets and they can use virtual cream, clear, or needles to enhance their power.  But watch out! If you get caught you have to go sit and explain yourself in the Hall of Congressional Committees, but you get to keep the prize tickets.
• Cindy Sandberg's Wild Ride (Adults only)
• Wait 'Til Next Year! - this is just a long line that never ends.

Mr. Kenney, please feel free to e-mail me to find out where to send the royalty checks.  Thanks.

Illinois Thinks Helping Delayed Children is a Part-Time Job

I'm trying to figure out Illinois State Representative Raymond Poe. It says on the Illinois General Assembly website that Mr. Poe has three children and eight grandchildren.  So I'm sure he is familiar with the feelings that parents and grandparents have when they are hoping and praying the additions to their families are born without complications and have the capacity to develop and grow normally.

But I wonder if he knows what it's like when a child is born with syndromes that prevent normal development or physical problems that require therapy. I guess none of his kids or grandkids needed any special attention or assistance as babies.

I assume that is the case because I don't know how else someone could introduce a bill regulating the state's support of early intervention therapy with the following clause:

State-approved public or private early intervention providers shall not exceed 30 billable hours per 7-day week.

There is already a shortage of qualified service providers in early intervention (probably due to the fact that the state routinely falls six months behind in payment for the services), but now they don't want to let anyone who is capable of helping these children do it as their full-time job?  So I'm trying to think of a rationale that explains the proposal of such a bill.

Maybe Mr. Poe is a big Jenny McCarthy fan and saw on the Oprah show that she had cured autism and figures these services aren't as necessary anymore. 

Maybe.

No. Probably not.

Maybe he is a big believer in the study by Andrew Wakefield that concluded that giving children vaccinations contributed to autism.  Maybe he didn't see that the study was debunked because it was determined Wakefield falsified data. 

Maybe Mr. Poe just doesn't give a damn about children.

But then if you go to his website you can see that he recently passed a bill that allows Newborn Metabolic Screenings without administrative charges or charge-backs:

“In the past, the Newborn Metabolic Screening funds have been subject to administrative charge-backs in Illinois,” said Poe. “As a result, the healths of thousands of babies have been put at unnecessary risk. To ensure that this does not happen again, I worked with the March of Dimes on this important piece of legislation to help ensure that any disorders are detected and treated early.”

Se he obviously knows how important early detection of disorders are to the health of children, but now he wants to restrict those who are qualified to help once the problems are detected?  It just doesn't make sense.

I'm sure this is being proposed as a means to close the gap in our state budget that has been left to implode on itself while Blagojevich bided his time and padded his resume for his eventual... ... bid for President... ... of the United States... HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA... excuse me.

But who is going to regulate which providers are staying within the new guidelines?  Some assistant therapists don't have their own billing numbers so they have to bill through a therapist that hires them.  Does that mean the assistant is out of luck since the main therapist isn't going to waste the 30 billable hours on an employee when they need to put food on their own table?  If not, who is going to sift through all the invoices to determine who gets what money?  Will assistants get their own billing codes?  Who will administer the rollout and management of that system?  It sounds like they'll have to add a few positions in the state government and the people who fill those positions are probably going to want a salary and I'll bet they're full-time positions. 

It seems like a whole lot of wasted effort and money on a regulation that won't end up saving the state much to begin with AND will drive even more qualified therapists into different lines of work because they can't afford to be part-timers.

I just don't get it.

Retro Post: Best. Birthday. Ever

Of course, no retrospective of Tales from Aisle 424 would be complete without a post about my best birthday ever, which also happened to be The Sandberg Game. There is very little video left of this game online anywhere, so we have to make do with the MLB version that features Bob Costas from the NBC Game of the Week broadcast.  Harry's call is better, of course, but I can't find that anywhere at the moment.

I did this post on the 25th anniversary of The Sandberg Game, otherwise known as my 37th birthday.  It's not as good a post as the game was, but I still like it as a window into how I'm still a Cubs fan after all of these years of failure.  Something in me still has the twelve-year-old's belief that miracles can happen.

Best. Birthday. Ever.

Today is the 25th anniversary of one of the best days of my life up to this point. Of course, every Cub fan knows that June 23, 1984 was The Sandberg Game, but it also happened to be my twelfth birthday. My present that year was to go to the game on my birthday with my Dad.

I had moved to Western New York the previous summer, so I was down to seeing maybe one Cubs game per year, and June 23rd was my one game of the 1984 season.

When you are twelve years old, the innocence and naivety in which you a view a game is not something that can be duplicated later in life. Age and experience will cause you to learn that most things are not too good to be true, heroes are flawed, and cheering for the Cubs will inevitably bring pain and suffering. But at twelve, you believe in things. You are beyond optimism in your sureness that your heroes will reward your love.

I don't know how I would have viewed the events that transpired on that sunny day in June if I had been older. I may have been more pissed about Steve Trout getting hammered for seven runs in less than 2 innings. It may have struck home more with me that Willie McGee was absolutely tearing the Cubs apart all day. The entrance of Bruce Sutter, former Cub and dominant reliever might have filled me with more dread. I may have hated Lee Smith for giving up those two runs in the 10th after Sandberg had heroically brought the Cubs all the way back to tie it in the 9th.

I just don't know how I would have viewed those events if they happened today.

At that point, I don't think I realized that the Cubs were down 7-1 in the second inning. I knew they were behind, and I may have even known the exact score, but when you are twelve, a six-run lead doesn't matter as much to your psyche. You believe that the Cubs could come back, and they sure did. Sandberg was 3 for 4 with four RBIs as they fought back to make it 9-8 after the sixth inning, but that is the way the game stayed until the ninth inning.

I was old enough to have remembered when the Cubs traded Bruce Sutter for Leon Durham and Ken Reitz, so I knew how good Sutter was when he entered the game. I also knew that Ryne Sandberg was leading off the ninth inning. I believed that Ryne Sandberg could tie the game, even when the rest of the world may have only been wishing and hoping.

My dad and I were sitting down the third base line in the Upper Deck Box seats, probably right above the bullpen, so we had an excellent view of the trajectory of the ball hit by Sandberg in the ninth. We knew it was gone before it cleared the infield.

I watch the videos of that day and see the footage of the people in the stands going crazy, and I don't think it comes close to capturing the joy and bedlam in the stands as that ball hit the back rows of the bleachers.

This was a team that had SUCKED for the entirety of my baseball viewing life at that point. 1969 was but a mere fairy tale to me of days long past and glories all but forgotten. The 1984 team was the first team that had really exhibited any real signs of life and potential to me.

I believed in that team because I knew that Ron Cey, Larry Bowa, and Gary Matthews had played for World Series teams. These were guys whose baseball cards you actually wanted. Plus we had picked up another player whose name I knew only by baseball card collecting, but knew he was an excellent pitcher, Rick Sutcliffe. Harry Caray told me how great Jody Davis was, and the impending greatness of our new Daily Double, Dernier and Sandberg.

Cubs fans were seeing their hopes that the relatively new ownership of the Tribune would be restoring the Cubs to prominence in the National League. The weight of the blown 1969 season and one crap team after another since were starting to fall away as the city fell in love with the Cubs. The Sandberg homerun was supposed to be the moment when the Cubs would stand up to Whitey Herzog's Cardinals and shove them around for awhile.

But, the Cardinals would not go away easily and there was Wille McGee in the middle of a two run inning that seemed to sap away all of the joy within moments. The Cubs were reverting back to form.

The Cubs came to bat in the tenth and I realized that Sandberg was due up fourth in the inning. I began to believe that all the Cubs needed to do was get a runner on base so Sandberg could come to the plate again. I remember asking my dad if he thought that Sandberg could come through again. I don't remember his exact words, but it was something to the effect of, "Let's hope he gets a chance."

It didn't look good when Sutter retired the first two batters in rather easy fashion. But then, Bobby Dernier managed a walk to keep the game alive and bring Ryno to the plate.

There are so many times in any baseball fans life where you try to will a homerun from your hero. Baseball being a game of failure, you walk away from the vast majority of those times sorely disappointed. That day, I didn't know if I was being a fool for believing Sandberg could hit another game-tying homerun off of one of the pre-eminent closers in the National League, but I also didn't care. I was SURE he could do it.

I was not alone in my beliefs that day, as the crowd seemed to sense that something special was about to happen.

When I said before that Wrigley erupted into bedlam after the first homerun, the second homerun caused the stadium to almost convulse and be torn apart by the sheer volume of the sound that erupted as soon as the ball launched off of Ryno's bat.



We knew it was gone at this moment.

Sutter knew it too.

I may eventually witness a Cubs World Series moment that will eclipse Sandberg's heroics that day, but nothing I have seen since comes close. I saw the Cubs beat the Brewers last year after being down 6-2 with two outs in the ninth. I saw Eric Karros launch a pinch homerun to take away Roger Clemen's 300th win. I was at the 1998 tie-breaker game. I saw the Cubs clinch the division last year. I've seen numerous epic battles with the White Sox, Brewers, and Cardinals.

I still get chills when I see replays of the Sandberg Game. I still can't believe I was there. Thanks, Dad.

Retro Post: Interview with the Baseball Gods

The following is another fun post where I get to put on my fake journalism hat and have a pretend interview in my head.  In most cases, multiple personalities having conversations in your head is not considered healthy, but it worked out for this post.  I don't know where I got the idea that the baseball gods were women, but once I had that idea, it all fell into place.  Again, there weren't a ton of people reading at that time, so it's probably new to you.  Enjoy.

Interview with the Baseball Gods

Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time, while probably getting driven irreparably insane, will also know that I can not be considered a journalist by any stretch of the imagination.

So, you can imagine how thrilled I am to have landed the biggest Cubs interview since Kellie Pickler visited the broadcast booth and enthralled us all with her two... um... I.Q. points.

Shortly after the latest Cubs loss to a pitcher only fantasy baseball geeks have ever heard of, I had an opportunity to sit down with the Baseball Gods to talk about baseball, the Cubs, and The Curse.

Aisle 424: First, I want to thank you all for being here and taking time out of your busy schedules. It is quite an honor. But before we get into the heavy stuff, can you introduce yourselves to my six readers?

Diane: Certainly. First, we are happy to be here and we look forward to clearing up some of the misconceptions that float around about us, particularly in the Cubs fan community. I'm Diane, God of Health, on my right is Cleo, God of Talent...

Cleo: Hello, it's great to be here.

Diane: ... and on my left is Felicity, God of Luck.

Felicity: Hello.

Aisle 424: I think when most people think of the Baseball Gods, they envision bearded Zeus-like men with bolts of lightning and such. Sitting here with you all now, I can't help but notice that you are all female. Where did such an erroneous stereotype begin?

Diane: Well, baseball has long been a male dominated game among the players, but women have a long tradition of appreciating baseball in all of its intricate beauty. If oversight of the game had been left in the hands of men, it would be far more needlessly violent and thuggish. You see what has happened with basketball.

Cleo: That is so true. It used to be such a beautiful game, but now its all razzle-dazzle followed by a giant man bullying his way to the basket and jamming it through while other giant men shove and smack him along the way. I don't know what those guys who run basketball have been thinking.

Felicity: I'll tell you what it is, they hang out with the Football Gods too much. Those guys are bad news if you ask me, but they know how to build revenues. I'll give them that.

Aisle 424: So being a Sports God involves building revenues for the sport?

Cleo: We'd be lying if we didn't say that was part of it. Let's face it, this is the world as it is and sports are only going to survive by playing by the same rules as everyone else, and that includes making some money, sure, but that isn't everything.

Felicity: At least it shouldn't be. You have to think of the game itself. You have to keep the essence of what makes the game great. When they brought in some new female leadership to the Hockey Gods, things started turning around for that sport.

Diane: That is a GREAT example. They kept some of the fighting, which again, let's face it, that is part of the game of Hockey, but they aren't so fixated on it anymore. They started getting back to the skating and the passing and the scoring. Plus, they stopped letting every damn team into the playoffs.

Aisle 424: I see, so you three have been charged with overseeing the overall wellness of the game of baseball in all of its aspects?

Felicity: That pretty much covers it.

Aisle 424: So do you work with Bud Selig?

(laughter)

Cleo: Oh my, I was told you were funny, but that caught me off guard...

Felicity: Damn it, I'm crying that was so damn funny. Do you have a tissue?

Aisle 424: So, you don't work with him.

Diane: No, no, no, no, no. He works FOR us. He might not realize it fully. Frankly, I think that he thinks that he runs the show, but that's just his own ignorance. He wouldn't be able to wipe his own ass if we didn't allow him to.

Aisle 424: OK, well it's clear who's in charge, so let's get right into the guts of what Cubs fans want to know: Why do you hate the Chicago Cubs so much?

(laughter)

Diane: Yes, that certainly is direct. I do appreciate your candor so we are going to tell you a little secret: We don't hate the Cubs.

Aisle 424: Really?

Cleo: You seem surprised by that.

Aisle 424: Well, forgive me, but I have been operating under the assumption that there was a massive supernatural conspiracy against the Cubs.

Felicity: Oh, well sure, there is. But you asked why we hate the Cubs. We don't at all. We hate the Yankees.

Aisle 424: What?!! How can you say that?! They have 26 World Championships!

Cleo: This is why there is so much confusion. You and most Cub fans have misunderstood these things for years. You equate a drought of championships to mean that we hold a grudge against your team and its fans. You equate World Series victories with some kind of approval from us. That isn't it at all.

Aisle 424: I am so confused.

Diane: We know. It's cute. But think about it, how many happy Yankee fans do you know?

Aisle 424: I know they are always pretty happy after they win a World Series.

Diane: Yes, for about a minute. Then they go back to their sad lives of obsessing over how they can possibly win ANOTHER championship the next year. They win three in a row, four out of five and do you know they can't get past Luis Gonzalez keeping them from four in a row? Or why they didn't have five in a row to begin with? What the hell kind of life is that?

Cleo: They HATE the Red Sox for infringing on their "property" a couple of times. They can't deal with any other team having even a small amount of success because it means they have FAILED in their minds. It doesn't matter how often they beat the Red Sox down in the past or how often they will in the future, they will hate Boston to the core until they die.

Felicity: They have an addiction and it consumes them. They derive no joy from win after win. Pardon my French, but they want to boo the shit out of Joe Torre for crying out loud. The man resurrected them from a huge (in their eyes) slump of championships and they would punch him in the head if they had a chance.

Aisle 424: So, let's say I buy into this, "We hate the Yankees and will curse them with seemingly unbounded success." Why do you hate them?

Cleo: Because they are so damn full of themselves. You'd think that they were the ones who orchestrated the trade for Babe Ruth themselves. They think they did something to DESERVE Babe Ruth. We made Babe Ruth. We bestowed him on the Yankees and they go and act like their shit doesn't stink because of it.

Diane: So we gave them Gehrig, DiMaggio, Mantle, and Yogi too. These poor bastards on the team now have no chance of ever replacing the Golden Gods of Yankees Past. A-Rod? Seriously? That guy could hit 2,000 homeruns a season and have drug tests as pure as the driven snow, and if he pops up once with a runner at third with less than two outs, he'll hear for two weeks that he'll never be a "real Yankee." They love Teixiera now, but wait until he strikes out with runners on in the playoffs. They're getting on Jeter now for being over-rated. Derek Jeter. This guy was the heart and soul of those teams and he takes crap for losing a step and not having the greatest range in the world at short. These people would boo the second coming of Babe Ruth. That is why we hate them. The sense of entitlement.

Aisle 424: So the Cubs drought of 100 years isn't because you hate the Cubs? Then why?

Felicity: Because it makes us laugh.

Cleo: Absolutely, there is no ill-will. We just find it funny. Don't you?

Aisle 424: How is it funny? There are fans that have been born, lived to a ripe old age and then died without ever seeing a Cubs championship. That's funny?

Diane: Maybe funny is too strong a word. Perhaps it would be better to say it amuses us. It is a great story of longing and yearning and unfulfilled love. It's great. Women love that sort of stuff. Why do you think that the Twilight crap is so popular? Cubs baseball is the same sort of thing only with more substance and real drama.

Aisle 424: So the Bartman ball, the ball between Durham's legs, the injuries to Prior and Wood, the collapse of 1969 and all the rest was orchestrated for your amusement?

Felicity: You are thinking far too simplistically. We didn't make Steve Bartman do anything. Durham simply took his eye off the ball, and 1969 is the greatest piece of marketing and over-hype we have pulled off yet.

Cleo: On September 2, 1969 the Cubs had 84 wins and the Mets had 77. The Mets went on a 23-7 run to end up with 100 wins. The Cubs only won 8 more games, but they would have had to go 17-9 down the stretch to end up the season ahead of the Mets. The Cubs weren't winning in 1969. The Mets would have run them down anyway. The collapse makes for a better story though. It led to all sorts of excuses from a mangy cat at Shea Stadium to playing too many day games. It is all part of the grand plan.

Diane: We don't involve ourselves in the minutia of individual games very often. We are more into the big picture. We simply orchestrate situations that come together to maintain the order and balance that a championshipless Cubs team provides.

Aisle 424: So how is destroying Mark Prior's career not involving yourself in minutia?

Diane: Mark Prior was doomed from the start.
Aisle 424: So you weren't involved at all?

Felicity: You just aren't getting it at all. This is the problem with men. We orchestrated the whole situation to provide the Cubs with the opportunity to even have Mark Prior in the first place. We made sure that the Cubs were crappy enough the year before to get a great draft pick. We made sure that the pre-draft hype was so high that the Twins wouldn't even think about trying to sign him. We held his body together with our sheer will power so he could excel on the mound for just long enough to get everyone to start pre-enshrining him in the Hall of Fame. Then we just let the natural order take its course.

Cleo: See? We just add a few elements of drama to keep things interesting. We didn't force Bartman into interfering. We guided that ball to a spot that was almost out of reach for Alou, but not quite. You've seen the video and the pictures. Everyone in that area was reaching for the ball. Bartman was the one who happened to touch it.

Diane: We actually felt bad about that because we didn't mean for anyone to get killed over it, so we did make Gonzalez drop that ground ball shortly after to take some of the heat off that poor kid. It didn't work completely, but I think he's alive today because it couldn't be spun as COMPLETELY his fault.

Aisle 424: But why? Why the Cubs?

Felicity: We honestly didn't think you minded that much. You pack that ballpark even though ticket prices go up almost every year. You put bleachers on top of buildings across the street so you can catch a glimpse. You dance around like you've won the World Series after winning a regular season game against the damn Brewers. You seem pretty happy.

Diane: Plus, you seem to have so much fun with the whole goat thing. For awhile I thought you guys were playing along with us.

Cleo: We messed with the Red Sox and they just got PISSED! White Sox fans just ended up going insane and a little psychotic. Cubs fans just kept rolling with it. They blamed a goat, made some t-shirts, and kept singing "Go Cubs Go." Why would we end that party?

Aisle 424: But what about the fans that hate all that crap? What about the ones who would demolish Wrigley Field after it was re-named Wal-Mart Field at Cisco Systems Park if it meant seeing a Cubs World Series victory before we die?

Diane: We're not saying that everyone should be happy about it and we do feel for the people who suffer and die a little with every Cubs failure, but we're really quite proud of how long we have kept this going. There are going to be a few casualties, which is regrettable, but the long-term benefits are too great.

Cleo: Think about it, every time the Cubs manage to get close, it starts a whole new resurgence in the "Cubs Mystique" and the undying loyalty of the fans when faced with unending adversity. It's good for the game. Remember, we need to make sure the game itself remains healthy. It needs a tragic hero as much as it needs a villain like the Yankees.

Aisle 424: So there will be no World Series this year?

Felicity: We're not going to comment on that except to say you all can probably safely make plans to go out of town in October.

Aisle 424: Is there anything that can end the conspiracy?

Diane: It might play itself out at some point. People might get bored with this storyline. You can't milk the "will they/won't they" angle forever. But for now, we have some really nice sub-plots that are in process. We're particularly proud of orchestrating a global financial collapse that prevented one of the biggest cash cows of the last quarter century to sit on the market for over two years and ending up preventing them from making any serious mid-season adjustments to a roster that is already overpaid. That took some doing.

Felicity: We put in a lot of overtime on that one. But we love what we do, so it really is a blessing to work with these ladies. Remember when we got the United States involved in World War II so that Wrigley would donate the metal for the lights to the war effort? That got another 40 years worth of excuses. Cleo, that was your baby, wasn't it?

Cleo: Oh stop. I might have kicked off the idea, but we all pulled together to make it work. Felicity arranged to put the team on WGN and planted the idea of marketing the "romanticism" of day baseball. I remember, Diane came in one day and said, "What if we put ivy on the walls, wouldn't that be pretty?" We just wove that into the mythology. It really is a work of art, and to ask us to stop now is almost like asking Michaelangelo to just put a coat of stucco on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel instead of a painting.

Aisle 424: Well, this certainly has been enlightening despite being wholly depressing.

Diane: We are sorry about that. You seem like a good guy and you are obviously taking it all very hard. Maybe we can help out a little.

Aisle 424: Can't you allow the Cubs to win it this year before I either die or can't afford the tickets anymore when PSL's arrive with the new owner?

Felicity: I'm afraid I can't promise anything like that. You'll have to stay tuned. What if we gave Milton Bradley his power-stroke back?

Aisle 424: Won't you just injure him after a couple of good games?

Cleo: You're starting to get it. There may be hope for you yet.

Aisle 424: Thanks, I guess. Again, I appreciate you sitting down and talking with me. Perhaps we can do it again some time?

Diane: You bet. We're not going anywhere anytime soon.