01-23-2009, 12:03 AM
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Not only has the light-hitting economy affected the sale of the Cubs and the payroll of the White Sox, it is now getting into hallowed territory — the ivy-covered walls of Wrigley Field.
The Cubs sued apparel maker Under Armour in federal court Thursday for allegedly reneging on a five-year, $10.8 million sponsorship contract to have its logo displayed on the outfield doors in left- and right-center fields.
When the deal was announced two years ago, traditionalists cringed. They believed signs would lead to more advertising encroachment at Wrigley, which already featured a rotating billboard behind home plate. The Cubs argued the extra income would keep Wrigley Field alive and functioning.
The 7-foot-by-12 foot signs were the first ever allowed on the outfield doors and seemed appropriate at the time because new left fielder Alfonso Soriano was a spokesman for the company. Soriano signed an eight-year, $136 million contract the same off-season but since has muffed several balls in front of the logo.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Link(Tribune)
The Cubs sued apparel maker Under Armour in federal court Thursday for allegedly reneging on a five-year, $10.8 million sponsorship contract to have its logo displayed on the outfield doors in left- and right-center fields.
When the deal was announced two years ago, traditionalists cringed. They believed signs would lead to more advertising encroachment at Wrigley, which already featured a rotating billboard behind home plate. The Cubs argued the extra income would keep Wrigley Field alive and functioning.
The 7-foot-by-12 foot signs were the first ever allowed on the outfield doors and seemed appropriate at the time because new left fielder Alfonso Soriano was a spokesman for the company. Soriano signed an eight-year, $136 million contract the same off-season but since has muffed several balls in front of the logo.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Link(Tribune)
@TheBlogfines