The Chicagoist will be launching later but in the meantime please enjoy our archives.

This Post Presented By State Farm

By Benjy Lipsman in News on Mar 13, 2008 3:00PM

2008_wrigley_my_name_is.jpgOK, some of you have already had enough of all the Wrigley Field naming rights talk. We understand. But new details give some answers as to how the naming rights might be applied and who some of the bidders might actually be.

The Tribune reports that multiple companies might be involved in partial naming rights deals, which combined could bring in the same amount of money as a single deal for naming rights.

Tribune officials have met recently with executives from the New York Yankees, who have chosen to keep the Yankee Stadium name on their new park while generating revenue from smaller deals.

In such a scenario, a presenting sponsor might have its moniker applied to the stadium itself, but in a way that keeps the Wrigley Field name as well. Additionally, corporate names might be applied to sections of the park.

For the first time, we're also getting some idea of the companies who might be interested in associating with the historic ballpark. State Farm Insurance and Walgreen's are both rumored to be involved in negotiations.

So would it be Wrigley Field Presented By State Farm? State Farm Stadium at Wrigley Field? We're not sure exactly how Wrigley will remain in the name. We can also expect to see names applied to sections of the park. They've already got the Bud Light Bleachers -- we can now expect something along the lines of the Walgreen's Upper Deck. Chicagoist was all for section naming rights when Mark Cuban proposed such a measure in order to cut ticket prices. Now it looks like a similar deal may simply help fund the state's purchase and renovation of the park.

At the Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. annual meeting on Wednesday, company chairman William Wrigley Jr. fielded questions about his company and any interest in ponying up for what it's gotten free since the 1920s. He indicated that while he wouldn't entirely rule it out, that it didn't fit into the company's brand-based marketing. Wouldn't it be ironic if Wrigley did pay, only to change the name to Orbit Field?