The Philly Phanatics

Is nothing in the world of sports sacred? The Steroids Era of baseball has attempted to reduce the sport's record books to a complete sham. Now, greed is attempting to reduce the game's sacred grounds to corporate advertising. The naming rights to one of the sport's great venues, Wrigley Field in Chicago, are supposedly for sale to the highest bidder.

Sam Zell, the billionaire investor who is the chief executive officer of the Tribune Company (which owns a variety of media and business entities, including the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Cubs, and Wrigley Field), stated today on business-television network CNBC that he would not hesitate to sell the naming rights of the baseball landmark. Zell also hopes to sell off the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field separately in the future.

There are rumors that the naming rights would be worth around $5-6 million per year, which is less than the naming rights of more modern parks. In comparison, Lincoln Financial paid $7 million/year for the naming rights to the Philadelphia Eagles stadium, making that one of the largest deals for the naming rights to a stadium. The New York Mets have reached a blockbuster deal that blows all the rest away for the naming rights to their new stadium being constructed: $20 million per to call it Citi Field for financial giant Citigroup. The lower that comparable revenues from the naming rights is an expected result of the fact that there will likely be a lot of backlash against the change in the name of the Cubs' home park.

Damn right there will be backlash! And it'll start right here and right now!

Being a business major, I understand that marketing is important, but there is a limit to where and how companies should be able to advertise, and this limit should be enforced by the people, the customers, and the backlash against such a marketing campaign.

Selling the naming rights to Wrigley Field would be comparable to the Boston Red Sox selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees in 1920 for $125,000, the proceeds of which Harry Franzee used to finance the production of No, No, Nanette on Broadway. It would be a huge mistake. Wrigley Field is one of those places where everyone wants to play. It is a link to a past era in baseball history. There are very few places where fans can connect with their sports legends and their sports history. Wrigley Field. Fenway Park. Yankee Stadium. Lambeau Field. Everyone can tell you who plays in these stadiums. They are obvious to any normal sports fan. It is the goal of major sports fans to make a pilgrimmage to these holy places of sports. In fact, the first three of these venues are on my "bucket list" of places to see a game before I die.

From the financial side of this deal, the expected revenues of $5-6 million per year from selling the naming rights of Wrigley Field to the highest bidder would do nothing to impact the bottom line of the Tribune Company, which had revenues of $5.5 billion in fiscal 2006 and net income of $594 million. Sure, a few million dollars per year would finance the signing of perhaps another free agent player, but over the long term, what difference is that going to make in the financial situation of the Chicago Cubs...especially considering that Zell and the Tribune Company are planning to sell the franchise and the ballpark.

Answering any critics, yes, the ballpark, which was built in 1914, was renamed for William Wrigley Jr., the founder of the famed chewing gum company in 1920. However, I would not consider this a corporate naming right because the name has not changed since before the Great Depression and there are no monetary payments to maintain that name. In addition, Wrigley was an owner of the franchise in the early 1900s, therefore, the stadium is named for an influential person in the history of the franchise.

Wrigley Field is a baseball landmark, as well as a local landmark in Chicago (the famed sign on the outside of the stadium has been declared a historical item by the city of Chicago), and should be preserved under the same name for the rest of its existence. Cubs former GM Ed Lynch compared Wrigley to a cathedral, declaring it "the baseball version of St. Patrick's Cathedral. It's something people have seen and been to and have been associated with for not only their lifetime, but their parents' lifetimes, too. You just cannot replace this type of ballpark."



Wrigley Field is not just any field. It is a field, a landmark, a history lesson, and a touch of all that is pure in a game that is being clouded by questions of steroid use, government intervention and enforcement of its rules, and its ability to continue to call itself "America's Pasttime" in the face of a declining fan base. Keep Wrigley Field's name.



Note: The Chicago-Sun Times is starting a petition about changing the name of Wrigley Field. You can see the article about this by clicking here.