March 05--For opening night at Wrigley Field next month, the Cubs should hand out free hard hats and safety goggles to the first 20,000 fans.
They can call the giveaway a promotion. It also could double as a precaution around the construction site at Clark and Addison.
Danger: Falling Confidence.
The Cubs' rebuilding efforts on the field responsible for so much excitement strikes quite a contrast to the one underway in the bleachers, which remain incomplete, unpredictable and behind schedule. The most Cub-like development came when, in the midst of pushing back deadlines to June for construction of the right-field bleachers, officials couldn't rule out the possibility of work being done around the ballpark during games. Everybody respects a baseball organization committed to a blue-collar approach, but only the Cubs have gone to these great lengths. Dusty conditions aren't always conducive to winning, as any Cubs fan knows.
The most recent problems caused the Cubs to officially request to work around-the-clock, seven days a week, but Mayor Rahm Emanuel, to nobody's surprise, made the right call by rejecting it. Those who live in Wrigleyville must accept what comes with having the Cubs as neighbors, but one of those realities shouldn't be worrying about construction noise at 3 a.m. The city ordinance makes no exceptions for front-office officials who flunked meteorology. The Cubs never considered calling Tom Skilling for advice?
"We were hoping for a more normal winter ... whatever that means in Chicago," Crane Kenney, Cubs president of business operations, said Wednesday on WSCR-AM 670.
It means that even without one of the coldest Februarys on record, wintry conditions rarely can be considered ideal for construction projects. Any homeowner understands that. Yet the Cubs ambitiously proceeded, expecting to sacrifice April -- the team's most lightly attended month -- but finish the bleachers in May. Now Kenney estimates the left- and center-field bleachers will be completed May 11 with the right-field bleachers done three weeks later because work on a water main under Sheffield Avenue took two months longer than planned.
At this rate, anybody else thinking it will be the All-Star break before all the bleachers are full?
In terms of the bottom line, it only figures to cost the Cubs about $1 million in losses -- money they easily can recoup by scheduling another concert. In fairness, the Cubs warned everyone at the onset of construction to expect delays because of bureaucracy, bad weather and the age of the 101-year-old building. It took only months to see how right they were, a clumsy start to a project still likely to make North Siders proud by its completion.
When the Cubs finally unveil the newly renovated ballpark with two video scoreboards and modern signage complementing the historical elements of a diamond full of mystique, it will be something to behold. It will look like one of baseball's most sparkling treasures, worth all the waiting and whining and legal wrangling. This week's setback represents the equivalent of booting a ground ball in the first inning. If the finished product looks anything like the artist's renderings, nobody will remember The Great Bleacher Bummer of 2015.
The attention paid the timetable prompted a valid question over whether the Cubs considered the wrong venue as a viable alternative to Wrigley during renovation. With a major league stadium eight miles south within city limits, Kenney revealed the Cubs discussed the possibility of playing at Milwaukee's Miller Park -- with its retractable roof -- to escape Wrigley Field construction before deciding against it.
"We just thought it was too much displacement for our fans," Kenney said.
That makes sense given 90 miles separate Wrigley Field and Miller Park. U.S. Cellular Field sits much closer but research convinced the Cubs their fans preferred playing in the home of the Brewers rather than their city rivals. Armed with that information, Kenney confirmed he never explored the possibility of the Cubs playing at 35th and Shields despite how feasible the option might appear to outsiders -- even if Chicago's teams have no overlapping home dates through June.
Why not the Cell? From here, the Cubs asking players to sleep anywhere else but in their home cities during homestands would have put them at a competitive disadvantage. Considering Milwaukee and temporarily leaving a city whose mayor helped facilitate the renovation would have been bad form and worse politics. They're the Chicago Cubs, regardless of how hard it can be for their North Shore season ticket holders to get to the South Side. The Cubs' primary concern throughout this prolonged process should be keeping the renovation from affecting the baseball team, which will encounter its own unforeseen delays.
Was staying at Wrigley Field through the work in progress in the best interests of building a perennial winner?
"Talk to me in four years," Kenney said.
That's assuming he and Cubs fans are still on speaking terms.
dhaugh@tribpub.com
