PDA

View Full Version : naperville vs soldier field... a new angle?


Pages : 1 [2]

Godot22
05 Aug 2002, 04:43 PM
In my specific case, I made certain sacrifices when I decided to return to being a full-time student, and among those sacrifices was being able to go to the vast majority of Fire games. Some may question whether I'm a true fan for having done so, but the day I ask myself "what will they think on BigSoccer?" before making a major life decision is the day I finally get that lobotomy I've had my eye on for a while now.

I don't think the move to Naperville has had a huge effect on the number of "hardcore" fans, but it seems to me that there's been a precipitous drop in the proportion of--uh--"mediumcore" fans--that is to say, people who followed the game and the team, people who went to some games every year, people who were gradually trained over the course of four years at Soldier Field how to behave at a soccer match.

It's quite possible that I'm looking at the Old Soldier Field years through rose-tinted glasses, and it's equally possible that I'm just bitter about the present circumstances because they're more difficult for me personally, but there is, at the very least, a significant qualitative difference between the experience in Naperville and what the experience of a Soldier Field crowd in a Cardinal-sized stadium would be, and, yeah, I find that a bit frustrating.

Glenwood Lane United
05 Aug 2002, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by CUS

3301 S. Laramie. Just No. of 55 and So. of Ogden--about a mile away from each. I don't know what kind of public trans. is available. Midway Airport is about 2 miles due south.

I know the Douglas Blue Line has a CIcero stop...I think it's like 12-15 blocks north of Sportsman's, and then you can hop a bus from there.

NOt sure where the nearest Orange line stop is.

benine
05 Aug 2002, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by kenntomasch



And as for those folks who won't come out to the suburbs---well, a couple of weeks ago, I drove, walked, took a train, walked, took the el, and walked to get to Wrigley from the suburbs to pay a ridiculous amount of money to watch an incredibly bad baseball team blow another game. And there were a bunch of people who did the same thing on a Thursday afternoon from out my way. What does it say about people who won't go the other way to pay less money to watch a team that historically has been very, very good? ;)

But thanks for disagreeing the way you did. It makes all the difference.

A: "Historically very very good" in 5 years. That's an atypical example of american's concept of time. the cubs last WS is "historical".
B: Wrigley Field is to Cardinal Stadium what, oh, damn i cant even think of anything remotley that night and day. I know, Finway to New Comisky?
C: If you are "walking" from metra to El and from El to Wrigley, you have a low threashold for what constitues "a walk". A walk is Cardinal stadium to the Metra in downtown Naperville.
D: Hold on, your first step of your journey is "i drove"? Why didnt you drive to the parking off of Irving and Western and take the shuttle? Much easier and kills your argument dead because i'm talking about us hardcore 100% CTA/PACE reliant mofos.

also, new evidence for the anti-naperville debate: one damn metra train. ONE per game.

kenntomasch
05 Aug 2002, 05:56 PM
(a) Pick another word then that meets your concept of "historically". "Over the last five years has been very, very good." There, does that work for you?

(b) Yes, you're right, and that's part of the attraction.

(c) Yes, it was about 7 blocks from Union Station to where I caught the el. I put one foot in front of the other, I call that a "walk". What do you call it? Did I call it a "hike"? No. I walked. It was nice. And the walk from the Metra to Cardinal Stadium is, they tell me, shorter than the walk from the back parking lot to the front door at Soldier Field. If that's your idea of a hardship, then perhaps it's you with the low threshold.

(d) I live in Lisle, jerkweed, and there's never any parking at either the Lisle or Naperville stations (where I was meeting someone). And, since, unlike you, I don't live under a bridge by the train station, yes, I had to frigging drive to get there.

Chris M.
05 Aug 2002, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by kenntomasch



And as for those folks who won't come out to the suburbs---well, a couple of weeks ago, I drove, walked, took a train, walked, took the el, and walked to get to Wrigley from the suburbs to pay a ridiculous amount of money to watch an incredibly bad baseball team blow another game. And there were a bunch of people who did the same thing on a Thursday afternoon from out my way. What does it say about people who won't go the other way to pay less money to watch a team that historically has been very, very good? ;)



Sad but true, the Cubs have earned the right to suck and still draw huge crowds :) But, how many times are you willing to do this each summer?

I definitely see your point, however, in some respects, it goes against the natural order of things. People make a choice -- city v. suburbs -- for a thousand different reasons. I am still city, and fighting the inevitable move to the suburbs for space, parking schools etc.

When I finally make the move, I know that it comes with the consequence of making the trek into the city when you want to go to a Cubs game, a Bears game, the symphony, the art institute, blues fest etc.

I am not averse to coming to Naperville, but since my life is ordered around the city, it becomes more difficult to make a Fire game work logistically. I have always done the 7-pack of tickets, and this year is no different, but I will only make it to 4 and possibly ony 3 games.

It's not a question of wanting to go, and honestly, when I do make that gigantic leap into suburbia, I STILL want my Fire downtown.

ne plus ultra
05 Aug 2002, 07:04 PM
When we drew 20,000 or more, I didn't feel like SF was too big. People crowded down and it felt reasonably full, because there were people around you and a mass of people across from you. Even if there were many seats available in the sections that were populated and the upper seats were absolutely vacant, it didn't seem too bad to me.

Below 14,000 and it did seem pretty empty. But I think we're pretty close to the day when we'll regularly draw 20,000 to Soldier Field (at least on weekends.) We seemed to have found critical mass last year, though we'll have to start over.

voros
05 Aug 2002, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by CUS

3301 S. Laramie. Just No. of 55 and So. of Ogden--about a mile away from each. I don't know what kind of public trans. is available. Midway Airport is about 2 miles due south.

That's the closest "el" line (Orange). But a 2-mile shuttle from that line would not be to big a deal.

It's also about 3-miles south of one of the branches of the blue-line.

As a fan, I really liked Soldier Field (am furious that they destroyed the place) for all sorts of things including Fire games.

benine
06 Aug 2002, 11:05 AM
a) much better.
c) see, thats your fault for choosing a bad way to get from Union to Wrigley; 157 to wash/state (5 minute bus ride), red line, BAM! Not that many options for city dwellers to go out to your ant colony and a walk around Soldier is 3000x more pleasent than a walk in Naperville.
d) nownownow, no reason to call someone a jerkweed (2nd grade much?). you missed my point, for all the bitchen that you set up your original post on, about how its just as hard to take public transport into the city, its all b.s. if you have a car. us city folk, who "live underbridges", and dont have a car dont have the luxury of choosing to drive out to wonderful Naperville to see the CHICAGO Fire.
It's all moot anyway since they'll be coming home in a year.