Ricketts Family Annoyance Thread

[Quality Start Machine]

Clark the Cub.

The Cubs say Clark will be a champion for Cubs Charities' mission of targeting improvements in health and wellness, fitness and education for children, and families at risk. Young fans will see the mascot at schools during Cubs Caravan or "Cubs on the Move" fitness program visits; hospital appearances; and other family-focused events, such as the upcoming Cubs Convention.

God fucking damnit. Ricketts claims to be a Cub fan yet he fails to understand that Wrigley is for drinking and whoring and swearing and taking pictures from 500 feet away to post on the bookfaces.

What have you got against towel drills?

[Saul Goodman]

Clark the Cub.

The Cubs say the mascot will not be on top of the dugout between innings, tossing T-shirts or hot dogs into the stands, and it won't disrupt the game.

What fans won't see is Clark riding an ATV around the warning track or interfering with fans' views of the field during the game, the team said.

Famous last words.

[CBStew]

http://cubs.mlb.com/index.jsp?c_id=chc

"ClarK"?   This is just embarrassing.

[Armchair_QB]

Clark the Cub.

The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.

[Saul Goodman]

Clark the Cub.

The marketing twinkie that came up with this needs to be beaten into a coma.

"unbearably cute"

[CT III]

You think you're annoyed?  What about Billy Cub?

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Billy-Cub-Disappointed-by-Cubs-Mascot-Snub-240020121.html

[Tony]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

[Saul Goodman]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

It's because it sucks.  It looks like a Clip Art mascot, like they just picked a cheap one off the shelf using the absolute minimum of thought.  And then there's the whole tradition, Wrigley Field, only a few teams don't have mascots and the Cubs were one of them, baseball is serious business stuff.

[SKO]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

It's because it sucks.  It looks like a Clip Art mascot, like they just picked a cheap one off the shelf using the absolute minimum of thought.  And then there's the whole tradition, Wrigley Field, only a few teams don't have mascots and the Cubs were one of them, baseball is serious business stuff.

And yet I've never once given two shits about the existence of Staley, who is basically the same thing. Who cares? This is the dumbest thing since the last dumb thing that was dumb.

[R-V]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

It's because it sucks.  It looks like a Clip Art mascot, like they just picked a cheap one off the shelf using the absolute minimum of thought.  And then there's the whole tradition, Wrigley Field, only a few teams don't have mascots and the Cubs were one of them, baseball is serious business stuff.

And yet I've never once given two shits about the existence of Staley, who is basically the same thing. Who cares? This is the dumbest thing since the last dumb thing that was dumb.

My 3 year old had me rewind the news like 5 times this morning so he could see Clark over and over. Kids will love this pervy weirdo and the Cubs will sell a fuckton of Clark merchandise that can be spent on a Brian Roberts signing and we'll all have something to make fun of so I don't see a downside.

[Chuck to Chuck]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field.  And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.

If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored.  Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.

[Quality Start Machine]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field.  And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.

If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored.  Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.

So given the choice (if it were a choice) between a guy in a bear suit and Soriano redux, you'd pass on the guy in the bear suit?

It's a dopey mascot. It'll get kids and furries excited. The Cubs need to drum up something, and it's somewhat better than just putting cardboard cutouts of Baez, Bryant, Soler and Almora out there.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

Seriously. It's for kids. It really is that simple.

And irrationally hating it means you're agreeing with Chuck.

[BH]

I've heard a lot of people making fun of the new mascot because it looks like it's for kids. Aren't mascots supposed to be for kids? It's not a new logo. I don't understand why this is even a story.

Because not only does it suck, but it comes at a time when there is little interest on the actual product on the field.  And this comes up as another piece of proof that ownership knows they have to generate interest in a way other than the actual product the produce.

If the Red Sox did this, it would be seen as dumb and silly, but would probably be ignored.  Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.

The red sox already have a mascot.

[Quality Start Machine]

 Right now, this is Illinois introducing a new, cartoon Chief Illiniwek.