waltwilliams

In the Crain's story, Ishbia also describes the Sox as "Chicago's asset": "I never use the word owner. I talk about the word steward," he said. The Sox are "the community's asset. There will be someone who is the steward after me. But this is Chicago's asset, and I will be the steward for a period of time.

For what it's worth, the Chicago sports broadcaster traditionally was encouraged to be a "homer", because that's supposedly what the market wanted, going back to guys like Jack Brickhouse. If you listen to any of Hawk's games when he broadcast the Red Sox, he was nothing like the Hawk of later years here in Chicago. He was still a character as a Boston broadcaster (as he was as a player), but totally objective when it came to calling the game. Hawk himself said that he changed his style to accommodate the Chicago market. I think Schiffren has improved a lot since last year. And to me, he works pretty well with Stone. Honestly, he reminds me of Chip Caray. I caught a few Cubs games in the 90s on TV with Chip Caray and Steve Stone. And I'm struck by how similar the dynamic is with Schif/Stone as it was with Caray/Stone.

Citi Field (and Shea Stadium before it) is currently surrounded by a wasteland of a neighborhood in Flushing -- all littered streets and autobody shops. (Although Steve Cohen has plans to build a ballpark village around Citi Field) Angel Stadium in Anaheim is surrounded by parking lots -- the Disneyland hotels and Disneyland itself is a half mile away. Royals Stadium is surrounded by parking lots. They fell a few thousand short of 3 million in 2006, the year after the WS. And from 2005 to 2012 , they averaged 2.4 million fans, according to B-Ref. That's not bad at all for the smallest of the two-team markets, especially considering how challenging Chicago is for the entertainment dollar in the summer. You have the Cubs, basically a national team, in arguably the most-admired vintage sports stadium in the country. You've got six other pro minor league teams in the area. And you've got Lolla and dozens of other music fests in perhaps the most vibrant summer city in America. The Sox will have to contend with that at any location -- the 78, 35th and Shields or anywhere else. Also, it bears repeating that the neighborhoods around Sox Park have changed a great deal in the past 30 years. Bridgeport has become one of the hottest neighborhoods in the city: https://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20170720/CRED0701/170729995/chicago-s-hottest-neighborhoods-for-home-sales. CPD headquarters is three blocks away in Bronzeville, also home to a major research university and another hot neighborhood, "The Gap", with half-million dollar homes. True, the bad neighborhood rap comes a lot from perception. But also true, that perception is primarily from older folks who've moved out of the city and area.

I'd say 2013, since they had some fun, good teams in 2008, 2010 and 2012. The 2008 team was an offensive juggernaut -- and of course, there was the "Blackout Game". Should've have gotten in the playoffs in 2012, but they collapsed in the last few weeks. And they had that mid-summer 11 game winning streak in 2010 and again should have been a post-season team, but they couldn't beat the Twins.

You're right! I'll fix the original post. They're a good role model for the Sox -- it only took them two years to turn things around and get back in the playoffs, and they've been a perennial contender ever since (cheating notwithstanding).

Gotta disagree about Adam and Stacey -- they're the best sports play-by-play team in the city, if you ask me. I've never heard them belittle other teams/players -- on the contrary, they're respectful and informative about other teams. True, there's a lot of joking during down moments, but they can call a game with the best of them when it matters. Nothing wrong with being fun on a broadcast, as long as you don't lose track of the game. After all, sports is an entertainment.

According to the Crain's story: "(3rd Ward Ald. Pat) Dowell also restated that her support is contingent on the Fire stadium being the only one at the 78, addressing the lingering question of whether Related would continue to pursue a potential Chicago White Sox stadium at the 78 in the future." https://www.chicagobusiness.com/commercial-real-estate/chicago-fire-related-midwest-win-ok-stadium-78

Sadly, bringing back this thread, as the Sox prepare to make history again as one of the few teams to lose 100 games three years in a row. The last team to do this was the 2004-2006 Royals. It would take them seven years after 2006 to get back to .500, and eight years to get back to postseason in 2014, when they reached the World Series. Hopefully, it doesn't take that long for the Sox.

That's 30 miles away from the city center. If anything would kill the Sox, that kind of move would.

Chicago's MSA is around 9.5 million, Dallas is 7.6 million, so not all that close. True, the Chicago area population is shrinking, but it still has a lot going for it, with regards to location, especially due to climate change. Of course, it's got its issues: underfunded pensions, crime, taxes. But Texas is a major disaster waiting to happen, with increasing heat, operating off its own vulnerable electrical grid, etc. Here's the top 20 MSA's, btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area

The only reason why there wasn't development around New Sox Park was because Reinsdorf never wanted it -- he wanted the parking lots. Period. Shortly before his death, Jim Thompson remembered that the master plan was always to build a hotel along with housing and retail complexes on the site of old Comiskey Park. Here's Thompson's quote on this topic, from his State of Illinois Oral History. Thompson: "When I was chair of the Sports Facilities Authority, later, I had visions of building across the street from the park, on 35th Street, that whole block. But I couldn’t get Reinsdorf to do it. He just didn’t see the utility of that or its relevance to him and the White Sox organization and the ballpark. But I’m a dreamer and a builder—as we’ve already determined—so I wanted to see commercial activity right across the street. I was thinking of apartments and a hotel and a retail complex." Here's the complete transcript: https://presidentlincoln.illinois.gov/oral-history/collections/thompson-james-1-1-1/interview-detail/ Also, remember that an entire neighborhood (South Armour Square) was leveled to build the new park, so there's plenty of room for a housing/hotel/retail complex -- much more acreage than the 78.. Also, note that Ald. Nicole Lee is in full support of development around the new park: https://www.chicagomag.com/chicago-magazine/april-2024/the-new-sox-parks-billion-dollar-question/ And remember, the area is much different now that it was 30 years ago -- Bridgeport has been revitalized by the Chinese community and others. And Bronzeville on the other side is 30 years removed from housing projects, etc. Could this attract visitors year round? It's a good question, although the infrastructure (multiple modes of transportation, existing vital neighborhood flanking the area) is already there.

Gotta give it to the Colorado fans, who always show up. The team's headed toward a 115-120 loss season, and they're in 15th place, drawing over 2.2 million fans. Meanwhile, Pittsburgh and its touted "best stadium in baseball" is just above the Sox in 26th place. The Pirates haven't drawn over 2 million fans to incredible PNC Park in 10 years -- proof that stadiums alone don't draw fans, good teams do.

Meanwhile, in 78 news, the alderman (Pat Dowell) representing the South Loop supports the Fire stadium, but only if a second (Sox) stadium is NOT part of the equation. The alderperson's blessing puts the development on track for consideration by the city's Plan Commission on Sept. 18 and possibly the full City Council the following week: https://www.chicagobusiness.com/sports/fire-south-loop-soccer-stadium-wins-aldermans-blessing-if-sox-stay-away?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter-breaking-news-20250910&utm_term=

Soldier Field generated $54 million in revenue for the city last year, only $7 million came from the Bears: https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears-stadium/2025/08/15/soldier-field-future-chicago-bears-arlington-heights-stadium-brandon-johnson The city is already talking about Soldier Field post-Bears, but tearing it down is not a part of that equation. According to the article above, without the Bears, they can attract more Big 10 games during the fall (neutral sites) without the Bears blacking out the period between September and January. More music is part of the equation as well. Transportation issues would not lend itself being a good location for the Sox and their 81 games. The city wouldn't want them there anyway, because they'd have a situation where the premium summer earning months (with concerts, etc.) would be blocked by the robust MLB scheduling of games.

The national media will certainly miss Soldier Field. The backdrop of the lakefront, the park surrounding the stadium and the skyline backdrop is a staple for every Bears telecast -- it's unlike any other backdrop in pro football. Last night, it seems like they spent half the game with beautiful aerial shots showing off the surroundings.