Why Do Sports Matter (Not a Rhetorical Question)

One of the interesting things I have learned since first getting involved in this community, is there are not a lot of sports fans in it. Which perhaps makes it a good forum for my question (or not). So, as I sit around, feeling absolutely pummeled by today's Cub's non-victory, where nearly every member of the team took their turn at various moments, to fail to perform, I wonder why does it matter.

What personally does it do to me to have my team win or lose. Whatever entertainment value one can have by watching a sports game is not contingent on having your team win (I mean it should not). We watch the Olympics, no? We are not ourselves playing. "We" did not win or lose. And if you need action, bet on the team you think will pay-off.

Jerry Seinfeld once noted, wisely, that professional sports teams have no inherent connection to their fans. It is not even our team. None of the Chicago Cubs is from Chicago and most choose not to live here outside the playing season. Moreover, in today's game, few of today's Cub's will be tomorrow's Cub's. The Sun Times noted today that of the Cub's team that went to the playoffs in 1998, a mere six seasons ago, only two players remain on this current team. We root dearly for today's players and hate the rivals, but easily switch. No where was this more apparant than one our biggest enemy, Dennis Rodman came over. As Seinfeld notes, we are cheering for the uniform, a concept.

Yet, while hounds like GWiv and Hat Hammond could care less, I do. My mood swings the height of the Sears Tower over whether the Cub's win or lose. Of course, this only happens when I feel hope, if they Cub's had no chance, like their cross-town rivals, I would not care. Yet, with hope, with teams seperated in the standings by potato chips (obligtory food reference), I hang on each result.

I can justify my passion for the Cub's with the one thought that someday, when victory does come, it will be about the most joyous day in my life. I am not sure if my bar mitzvah, wedding, or birth of my two children will compare if only for the pent up happiness that Cub's glory will bring. All of those other events were ordained by decisions made by me. Since I can never know when the Cub's will win, the release will be so satisfying.

Yet, will the release ever come. Any team with LaTroy Hawkins as their closer seems hardly destined for greatness let alone the wild card. If not this year when? The stalwarts of the Cub's greatness in recent years, Sosa and Alou, have both aged very un-gracefully. Will we keep our great rent-a-player Nomar? All Cub's fans think exactly as I do. If we keep him, he will remain as brittle as he has appeared in the last three months of this season; if we lose him, he will star for years to come.

I know it should not matter so much, but it does. Anyone have an answer?

Rob

I do not know if age makes a difference.Watching as a child in the 70s,it felt personal.I would ride my bike to pick up baseball cards and spend my allowance on the paper just to read the sports.And I ate hot dogs and pretzels so this is food and yet not food related.It also encouraged me to become more athletic.

Vital Information wrote:

I know it should not matter so much, but it does. Anyone have an answer?

Rob

I don't think there's any great truth hiding here. I believe it's as simple as some of us are sports fans, some of us aren't. It's the same as other interests in life - some of us like opera, some don't. The mistake some people make is trying to pass a value judgement on how people feel about such things, as if there is a right and a wrong position. It is what it is and we are who we are.

As to the specific matter at hand that you reference, the Cubs, I ride the same emotional roller coaster as you. Last night I was visiting my sister-in-law and her hospital room didn't get the FSN channel that the Cubs were being broadcast on. I was thinking that with the way Maddux had been pitching of late it would be a great chance for the Cubs to get some ground on their competition against a very bad Reds team. I used my cellphone's web interface to check the game's progress and was shocked to see that Maddux had hit a batter, given up a HR, and hit another batter (at the time I checked; he later gave up another HR). As a longtime fan I was trying to recall if I had ever seen GM hit 2 batters in one game, let alone in one inning.

Today I checked on the game's status late - top of the 9th to be specific - to see Hawkins had a 1 run lead with 2 out and 2 strikes. Then gave up a triple and a double to tie the game. I left the office to head across the street for a very late lunch simply to watch the game and was crestfallen to see the Cubs lose 4-3 in 12 innings.

So, why does it matter? I've always been a baseball fan. I played a variety of sports growing up and was at best a mediocre baseball player but it's always been my favorite sport. I appreciate the good play - whether it's by my home team or by the opposition. I can see Barry Bonds for being both a jerk at the personal level and at the same time probably the greatest hitter we've ever seen . . . and still revel in having had 9th row seats behind home plate when he struck out 4 times at Wrigley. There's no shortage of shrinks to tell us why we invest so much of ourselves into our teams - I really don't care what they say. I do care that I enjoy it - win or lose; obviously I enjoy it more when they win, but quite simply, I enjoy watching the game. For fear of exploding the myths about Wrigley being about people just drinking beer, I can enjoy going to the game all by myself with a pencil and a scorecard and tracking the game without ever having a drop.

And to loosely tie this back to food, why does the food at Wrigley suck so badly? Back in the day when my then wife-to-be and I lived in a rathole of an apartment in the Winthrop/Kenmore corridor we would grab sandwiches at the Thorndale Deli and head south to stand in line for the bleachers. Over 20 years later the food at Wrigley is worse than it was back then, and it wasn't good then but at least they sold Smokey Links.

I like sports, I like food (but generally not the food they serve at sporting events). I like women, too. What's the mystery?

stevez wrote:I like sports, I like food (but generally not the food they serve at sporting events). I like women, too. What's the mystery?

Gee, Steve, each has its charms, and they are different and definable. It seems out of character for you to just write it off to the mystery of it all.

Anyway, let me give it a shot. For me, I think it works like this.

In my life there are few real beginnings, endings, and true wins and losses. Aside from my marriage, the birth of my children and the deaths of my near and dear of course. Things just go on, and there are little victories and losses, but all too quckly they blend into the next day, the next task, the next event.

Sports has a clarity and a finality that I do not find elswhere. The games, and the season, begin and end. There is a winner, and losers. One can argue, but the result is clear. But, in the end, no matter how happy or sad it makes me, I have not really won or lost anything, as VI pointed out.

So it becomes a safe outlet for a lot of feelings of exultation, disappointment, and loss among others.

A cathartic outlet, if you will, and the more you invest in the team, the better the catharsis, to some point.

Excuse me, I have to go tear my hair out in distress over why my teams, the Bears and Sox, are so curs-ed with injuries. How have I offended the Gods?

dicksond wrote:A cathartic outlet, if you will, and the more you invest in the team, the better the catharsis, to some point.

Well yes, but what if the catharsis NEVER comes. On the other hand, what is the value of being a Yankee fan.

By the way, I trust we all noticed that the second space age began Monday, on the anniversary of the first?

Well yes, but what if the catharsis NEVER comes.

I do not think the catharsis comes from winning, but rather from caring, screaming, and feeling strongly. The Cubs are an excellent outlet, better than the Yankees - with them, one might become confused and believe that it really is about defeating the opponents.

I still find it much easier to enjoy the Bears when they are lousy than when they are good and I expect them to win. When they are good, there seems to be all this pressure, where as when they are not so good, I can enjoy a good play, a good moment, and sort of relish it.

As I get older, it also becomes more and more like theater for me. I used to genuinely like and care for the players, but now I see them as actors. Now it is some symbolic battle between good and evil, just a little more real than most theater.

Mike - you need to elaborate on the Space Age reference - I do not get it.

http://www.liketelevision.com/blog/archives/000236.html

MikeG wrote:By the way, I trust we all noticed that the second space age began Monday, on the anniversary of the first?

I know the answer: Sputnik on October 4, 1957!!

I actually knew a few people who worked on Sputnik.

There was a model of Sputnik at the Park of Economic Achievements in Moscow, which I visited a few times. One the grounds were people selling oily street snacks, nearby was a French built hotel Cosmos where there was the only known-to-me source for Dr. Pepper. Once while hanging around, I saw Gregory Peck. Nearby was a statue of a rocket ascending to the Cosmos, which was locally referred to as the Impotent Man's Dream.



To add just a little more weirdness to this information dump, did you know I have a friend who was a Cosmonaut? We used to have some marvelous conversations which scandalized my other friends.

Thanks for the photo. Can't believe I've never seen that. Very cool. Looks like the "before" image for the Gehry bandshell.

So is that enough of an excuse for me to link to the scariest building in the world, and one of my favorite unknown marvels in the world?

http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=130967

Welcome to the Ryugyong Hotel, in Pyongyang. You can check out any time you want, but...

This Tolkienesque concrete ziggurat towers over North Korea's capital. They started it in 1987, intending to build the tallest hotel in the world and thus say up yours to the South Koreans. In fact, its capacity on a single night would have been considerably larger than North Korea's annual tourist population.

One has to say "would have" because even a regime that practices mass starvation occasionally hits cash crunches. It was never finished and is widely believed to be unsafe to inhabit. In fact, it's such an embarassment to the regime that reportedly, if you ask your North Korean guide what that 105-story building with no windows is over there, he will glance nervously in the direction of the world's 17th tallest building and by far the largest item on the landscape, and say, "What building?"

Here's a cool image that shows it in context next to the Hancock and the Amoco building, to show how massive it really is-- it may be only #17 in height but in volume surely ranks much higher. More art by that guy, with a really cool interface, is here.

What's the cathartic value of being a Yankee fan?

I was just thinking about this the other day. Obviously it means less to them when they win because they win often and spend a lot more to do so. So it's really not about any one game or World Series. It's more about the swagger of the Yankees. They are the best franchise in pro sports history. No question about it. I think the cathartic value stems from being able to identify with a powerhouse like that.

Even though each individual World Series victory provides less joy than say, a Royals or Astros World Series victory would for their respective fans, I think if you added up the collective joy of so many championships (and subtracted the miserable years of the Royals and Astros) Yankee fans would still come out on top.

Mets fans? I've never been 100% sure on this. Do they just hate the Yankees? Love all underdogs? Disgruntled or children of disgruntled Dodger fans? Chicago is so much easier. South side/North side. Working class/Upper class.

Personally, I dislike and mock the Mets but I like the Yankees because they beat the Red Sox all the time which is my 3rd favorite thing in baseball after a White Sox victory and a Cub loss.

I don't claim to be a Super Fan, but I pay a little attention to Chicago baseball (really just a little), and I'll never understand the deep feelings of schadenfreude a vocal minority of Sox fans express whenever the Cubs lose a game. And, as others have noted in the past, you usually don't see Cubs fans cheering a Sox loss. Why is that, and why should it even be an issue? I fall into the camp that likes it when either Chicago team wins. The way I see it, the two teams are in different leagues, and in general are not directly competing with each other (yes, I know interleague play makes that more hazy than it used to be). Although I'm more of a long-term Cubs fan, the last two baseball games I attended were Sox home games. Both times, I was happy to be there, happy when the Sox won one of those games, disappointed when they lost the other, and appalled to see vendors selling anti-Cubs t-shirts at both (at least the Sox management kept them outside the ballpark). I found the t-shirts really just shameless and tasteless, not funny, and the aggressive way they were marketed was threatening and not at all amusing. I felt like I had a Scarlet Letter C on my breast, visible only to Sox fans, and I'd better get north of Madison Street before sundown. (O.K., that's a little bit of an exaggeration, and maybe I just failed to get the joke. But I did feel intimidated, even if baselessly. And class-warriors -- I'm ready for you to get all Marxist on my ass for that). But it's as if some of these intense Sox fans seem to have learned a perversion of the old saw, "If you can't say anything nice (about yourself), instead of saying nothing, say something disparaging or wish failure on the other guy." The only time I would ever wish a loss on the White Sox is if they were playing the Cubs in the World Series. It's a game, not a war. So, in sum, why all the hub-bub, bub? (And I know I'm asking people like CMC to defend or explain a type of rabidness they don't actually share, so I'll admit upfront I'm being very, very unfair to you. But I'd appreciate your insight and maybe an explanation of "why I just don't get it.") Plus, the food is so much better at Sox park ...

Oh, and one other point. Getting all happy and excited over a Cubs loss is a little like getting happy and excited over a Yankees victory -- both happen so frequently, it's hard to understand the fervor.

Cub hating isn't new. It has absolutely nothing to do with them winning more the last two years. I will try and explain it as nicely as possible:

0)Yes, I realize it's just baseball, so, for the most part, nothing REALLY matters.

1)North-side/south-side rivalry that exists outside of baseball. South siders perceive north siders as snobs, yuppies, whatever. And north siders, if they even think of the south side, think of it as a ghetto or where all the steel workers live(d).

2)Media bias. I remember as a kid noticing this. The Sox would be in 1st place and the Cubs in last but the Cubs always got the headlines in the Tribune for obvious reasons. Cub fans are perceived to have more money, so advertising dollars are going to dictate that more emphasis is placed on them even when it's not the Tribune.

3)Cub suckiness and the loveable losers. I know neither team has been to a World Series for a long time. However, the Sox have always been decent (rarely finishing under 500) and the loveable losers thing is just pathetic to south siders. The Cubs on the other hand tend to have decent years here and there and a lot of stinker seasons in between.

4)Cub fans. Yes, I know, there are some Cub fans that know baseball--probably as many as Sox fans. It's that 30% more that are poser baseball fans that's more annoying than anything in the world. Moreover it's also undeniable that Wrigley Field deserves it's World's Biggest Beer Garden moniker. Not to mention the Cubs hat that is given to you when you graduate from a Big Ten university and move to the proper north side neighborhood. I really can't stress how much I dislike Cub fans (not the 8 thousand real baseball fans, but the other 32 thousand that show up every game). I think most Sox fans will agree that they dislike the fans much more than the team itself (athough Sosa will always be hated with a passion--which, by the way, is just damn hilarious now that Cub fans are FINALLY seeing him for the fraud that he is).

5)Nation-wide adoration. "You're from Chicago and don't like the Cubs? White Sox? I didn't know anybody wasn't a Cubs fan." That's the general perception and while it's probably not noticeable to a Cubs fan, it's grates on a Sox fan's nerves. (Imagine going to a Belle & Sebastian concert and see a Scottish wannabe-poet-singer wearing a Cubs hat (just an example but the White Sox are really the forgotten step-child of Chicago sports nation-wide)).

I can understand why Cub fans are perplexed by this. In a class struggle the only class that knows there is a struggle is the class on the bottom.

I forgot to mention the anti-Cub shirts. Most of them are fairly good natured, none are really offensive. I suppose "suck" in Cubs Suck can be offensive, but that's about as bad as it gets. Cubs magic number:911. That's nothing.

Anyway, I think wearing an anti-Cub shirt (shirts that have been around long enough for me to remember asking my dad to buy me one) is essentially just wearing a Sox shirt. I always remember wearing anti-Cub shirts as a kid mainly as a joke or a way to rib a relative or teacher. Nothing seriously hateful about it. Now I think they can serve the purpose to let people know, albeit bluntly, that not everybody is a Cubs fan like the media portrays.

Thanks, your responses have explained a lot about where the anti-Cubs vibe is coming from, although I still think it would be nicer if folks could express their feelings more civilly. Not having grown up here, I'm not as in touch with a lot of what you as a native understand intuitively. However, the points of contention seem to have very little at all to do with the sport of baseball itself, or of city pride (I'll wager there's no measurable difference in civil piety north or south of Madison). It's more an issue of the nature of the fans, the press and other factors that have little to do with the game. (Regarding the fans, I'll be the first to say that I've encountered a lot more drunken louts at Wrigley who ruined my day than ever at Cellular Field or Comiskey.) That said, it should be instructive to Sox fans that what they perceive as either an expression of frustration or simple good humor is unfortunately being perceived by others as immaturity and poor sportsmanship (sorry, but that's what it looks like until you see it from the inside). And while you've done a lot here to increase my understanding, I won't waver from the position that it is wrong ever to wish a team to lose, unless your team is actually playing them in a game that counts -- in which case you should still feel good about your team winning, not about the other team losing.

I suppose if what you say is true (that Sox fans are from the "underclass" and Cubs fans are from the "upper class," an allegation that, looking out my window here in Logan Square, I actually think demands proof), then Sox fans may be using baseball as a surrogate for their real gripes. I can understand how a person might find strength and enjoy the camaraderie of fandom when they feel their own "real" lives kinda suck. However, considering what it costs to go to a ball game at either park, I really don't think any actually POOR people are attending Cubs or Sox games (and if they are actually poor, I am sorry to see them spending so much of their money on baseball which, as we've stipulated, is just a game). Basically, everybody may just want to think about "getting real." The North Side does not have a lock on opportunities in this city. Yes, the college grad newbies do flock there. So what? Most of them will be moving somewhere else (i.e., a suburb) as soon as they reproduce. I can think of a couple of South Sider boys who grew up not far from Comiskey (name begins with a "D" and ends in "aley") who managed to literally take control of the whole city of Chicago.

Regarding one of your more intriguing points, press bias, I suppose the Reinsdorfs have no intention of selling the Sox to the Sun Times, so I suppose the bias in the press won't be ending any time soon -- assuming the only way to fight fire is with fire. There is no answer to that, I am afraid.

Regarding the "loveable losers" mystique of the Cubs and lack of recognition outside Chicago for the Sox, I can't offer any solace or solution. That's a peculiar sociological question that may just be insoluble. Considering the love for underdogs, you'd think the pendulum would swing back toward the Sox who, while on average a better baseball team, have routinely taken it in the chops when it comes to getting respect among the general public. I will point out, however, that growing up in Indianapolis, my aunt (who as a woman earned a Masters in Library Science in 1946 and was certainly neither foolish, whimsical nor a member of the "underclass") was a life-long Sox fan, as was her husband. I wonder how many others there are out there.

Regarding the t-shirts, it just seems like kid stuff that grownups should have outgrown. Not much different from the Big-Tenners with the backward caps and > 0.08 BACs at Wrigley. It is not dignified, and dignity is not exclusive to the rich or privileged, either as an opportunity or an imperative. Epictetus was a slave and exile, but he maintained his dignity in the face of adversity few Americans, even downtrodden Southsiders, could begin to comprehend or ever have to fear. And anyway, dignity and fellowship and friendliness have completely predominated during all my trips to Sox park. It really does seem to be a vocal minority making the majority of Sox fans look bad (I tend to think it's also a beer-swilling, recently graduated frat-boy minority among Cubs fans that make them look bad, but what do I know?). So 'nuff said on that point.

I don't remember this when I use to watch the Sox in the 70s and 80s but what bugs me now is that almost all the celebrities go to see the Cubs.The only one I can think of watching the Sox is George Wendt.

Jim,

Why I dont like the Cubs (and I will keep it civil)

DISCLAIMER: I like to watch good baseball and am not a fan of ANY franchise. Heck, I will stop and watch a good little league game.

1) Never has one franchise consistently (until recently) done so little to put a good team on the field.

2) The atmosphere at Wrigley. Public drunkeness is accepted. You can't take a kid there without hearing f*** this and f*** that. I have heard all those words before but why does a 6 year old kid? BTW, that conduct is not tolerated at Miller Park or Busch Stdium as they have real ushers and security.

(Bought a season ticket package this year at Miller Park for my employees.)

3) Wrigley Stadium is a mess. It is not kept up. Twice this year, I had broken seats ... and when you are paying THOSE ticket prices ...

4) Since the Tribune owns WGN, the local paper, the Cubs and about half the town, a lot of stuff goes unreported. Also, anything the the White Sox do goes underreported.

5) I am not going into a critique of the product on the field. Let's just say that if you look at the effort of certain Cubs players - well, it doesn't really seem that they are putting out the effort. Of course, i grew up watching Pete Rose, Joe Morgan, et al. doing anything on the field to win a game so maybe I expect more.

To be honest with you, for the entertainment value, Cubs and White Sox baseball is a very poor value. Over the past few years, I have seen a lot better baseball played in Beloit, WI (Class A Brewers) and Kane County (Class A A's). And you get a LOT more for your dollar.

Next year, we are probably going to rent one of the party tents at Kane County and for about $22 a head have a picnic, baseball game, etc. The employees seem to prefer that over MLB tickets

jlawrence, I agree -- MLB is way overpriced for what you get, and I think most of your complaints about Wrigley (at least the drunken louts) are mirrored in my earlier posts. In fact, the most recent baseball game I attended was a minor league (AAA) game on July 4 in Indianapolis, with my wife and my parents. That was a lot of fun. The tickets were about $12, food was decent and decently priced, the stadium was beautiful and meticulously kept (Victory Field), the staff were friendly, the fans were polite and the play was exciting (until about the 6th inning, I think, when Louisville began to mercilessly pummel the Indians). They also threw in a decent fireworks show after the game (of course, it was July 4, but still a nice gesture). I'll probably take your advice and try one of the AA teams in the area before returning to either a Sox or Cubs game. Part of the reason I go to Sox games is because my firm represents the team owner, and therefore we have easy access to a bunch of good tickets -- but no discounts!

Jim -

A couple more comments regarding the "entertainment value" of minor league baseball.

1) Two years ago, I am sitting in Beloit. I had season tickets out there and I am sitting in my usual seat - Section C, Row 3, Seat 8. It is right behind the plate perhaps 15 feet behind the screen. They were playing a DOUBLEHEADER. (For you major league fans, that is two games played back-to-back with a single admission as opposed to the DAY-NIGHT rip-off that you see in MLB.) An older couple sits down. The guy is Bill Lajoie, the former GM of Detroit and the guy who put together the Atlanta Braves pitching staff in the '90's. You get to meet a lot of people.

Last summer, I met Tony Gwynn and Cecil Fielder, as they both had sons playing.

Admission for the best seat in the house is $7. They have waitress service in the box seats. Most food is $2-2.50. Great cheese curds.

2) In April, I bought group tickets to the Kane County Cougars. They had a special. Bring a group to the game on two April dates for $2 a head. Bought a mess of tickets and passed them out.

3) Many Chicago law firms and companies sponsor cookouts at Kane County. For $10-15 a head plus the cost of a ticket, they put out a nice spread which includes a ticket and a meal. And they have pretty decent food - roast corn, pork chop sandwiches and Haagen Daz ibce cream bars are the best.

Parking - it is free - and plentiful in Kane Co.

In both cases, they have a promotion nearly EVERY inning - promotions that you actually have a good chance of landing. And the handouts are pretty good at both places if you get out there early. I have to confess at Beloit, I have asked the promotions people to pass me up as I was winning something every night for a while.

Got a complaint in either place and you can talk to the GM to get it rectified.

BTW, the fireworks displays at Kane County are better than any I have seen in a MLB stadium, FWIW.

A couple of comments on Cubs/Sox.

How things change. In the 1970s, the White Sox were the more popular team--consistently filling old Comiskey, while Wrigley attracted about 10,000 fans per game. Why? A few reasons. The Cubs were playing all day games, so the only time you could reasonably take your family was on weekends. During the week, Wrigley catered to the unemployed, unemployable, and no-intention-of-ever-being-employed. "Bleacher bums" was more of a statement of fact than a cute term.

Meanwhile, Bill Veeck's White Sox were providing bread and circuses, along with night baseball, and somewhat competent teams. In fact, back then, it was Comiskey that was known as the world's largest saloon. Disco Demolition gets all the publicity, but there were other times when the crowd, and the amount of beer consumed, led to dangerously anrchic situations. And I'm speaking as someone whose father took him to Comiskey on South Side Irish night--we left in the third inning, as it was no place for a kid--or even an adult who wished to remain relatively sober and avoid a fistfight.

Finally, the area around Wrigley in the 1970s was pretty seedy. One of the biggest changes in Chicago in my lifetime is the almost complete disappearance of the white Appalachian and the American Indian communities. But back then, there were concentrated pockets of both these groups around Wrigley, and both these communities had enourmous problems with poverty, drug addiction and alcoholism, and the resulting crime. And gangs--the north side was full of gangs back then. Off the top of my head, within a two mile radius of Wrigley, you had the Latin Eagles, Gaylords, TJOS, Simon City Royals, Latin Kings, Uptown Rebels, and Dueces--and probably 20 more. They weren't as inclined to do drive-by shootings back then, but you could certainly get your head kicked in pretty easily. It wasn't until Lakeview started gentrifying that the Cubs became the flavor of choice.

Plus, the food was always a hell of a lot better at Comiskey.

john m wrote:Finally, the area around Wrigley in the 1970s was pretty seedy. One of the biggest changes in Chicago in my lifetime is the almost complete disappearance of the white Appalachian and the American Indian communities. But back then, there were concentrated pockets of both these groups around Wrigley, and both these communities had enourmous problems with poverty, drug addiction and alcoholism, and the resulting crime. And gangs--the north side was full of gangs back then. Off the top of my head, within a two mile radius of Wrigley, you had the Latin Eagles, Gaylords, TJOS, Simon City Royals, Latin Kings, Uptown Rebels, and Dueces--and probably 20 more. They weren't as inclined to do drive-by shootings back then, but you could certainly get your head kicked in pretty easily. It wasn't until Lakeview started gentrifying that the Cubs became the flavor of choice.

It is true how much the area around Wrigley has changed. I remember going as a kid and being concerned about not parking too far away.

The other thing that has changed so much in the dynamic of Wrigley is the ending of same game tickets. One reason 1984 was so special was because it was still possible to go to games, abeit if one was willing to get to the park early.