I love football. I really do. But sometimes those football folks overstep their bounds. And this is one of those times.
The fact they painted the Wrigleyville marquee purple makes me sick to my stomach. As a born and bred Chicagoian who lost her first teeth in the shadow of that very marquee, that purple is just... perverse. I don't understand why they felt the need to paint it, you don't see Yankee Stadium decking itself out in camo paint for Army/Notre Dame game this weekend. According to the Cubs' president, they "want the building to reflect a Northwestern feeling" so that "Northwestern didn't lose a home game" -- I'm pretty sure the boys aren't going to be thinking about how home-y the marquee is when they're running into the giant brick wall six inches behind their end zone.
The president went on to prattle about how they've 'changed the colors on the marquee before' and how it 'wasn't a big deal'; I call BS. I can't find one example on my cursory search of the Googles that supports that claim. The closest I came was when I discovered that back in the 60's the sign was blue. As a matter of fact, what I did find was that when Valspar became a sponser of Wrigley Field in 2009, they freshened the paint on that sign and revealed it to much hoopla and ado. This suggests to me that maybe painting the giant stadium-side sign is more than a little effort.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it really is "every Chicago kid's dream to see Wrigley Field not only for baseball, but football and the history it had with football." I don't know. All I do know is, come April, that sign better have no hint of 'Wildcat purple'.
The fact they painted the Wrigleyville marquee purple makes me sick to my stomach. As a born and bred Chicagoian who lost her first teeth in the shadow of that very marquee, that purple is just... perverse. I don't understand why they felt the need to paint it, you don't see Yankee Stadium decking itself out in camo paint for Army/Notre Dame game this weekend. According to the Cubs' president, they "want the building to reflect a Northwestern feeling" so that "Northwestern didn't lose a home game" -- I'm pretty sure the boys aren't going to be thinking about how home-y the marquee is when they're running into the giant brick wall six inches behind their end zone.
The president went on to prattle about how they've 'changed the colors on the marquee before' and how it 'wasn't a big deal'; I call BS. I can't find one example on my cursory search of the Googles that supports that claim. The closest I came was when I discovered that back in the 60's the sign was blue. As a matter of fact, what I did find was that when Valspar became a sponser of Wrigley Field in 2009, they freshened the paint on that sign and revealed it to much hoopla and ado. This suggests to me that maybe painting the giant stadium-side sign is more than a little effort.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it really is "every Chicago kid's dream to see Wrigley Field not only for baseball, but football and the history it had with football." I don't know. All I do know is, come April, that sign better have no hint of 'Wildcat purple'.

