77 Hitmen

The price tag for the Fire's soccer stadium is up by $100M and now is listed as $750M. But there's no mention of Mansueto backing away from his stadium plan. Levy was announced today as having all the concessions at the new Fire stadium. “They’re going to work to engage local culinary talent, local restaurateurs, to bring some of the flavors from around the different 77 neighborhoods into the stadium,” https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/12/03/levy-food-service-new-chicago-fire-stadium/

The Ishbia brothers presumably are not idiots. In spending somewhere close to $2B for the White Sox, they surely know that this franchise has serious troubles and a change in modus operandi is a MUST for them. They also know that the Cubs have become even more dominant in Chicago, that Wrigley Field is more popular than ever after the Ricketts renovations, and that Rate Field is one of the more obsolete stadiums in the league at this point. He also knows that, while the Sox have a hard-core group of die hard fans that are as passionate as any fan base, the fanbase is not growing and, if anything, market share is probably shrinking. It's no accident that he told the Pope his intentions to put the Sox in a new stadium. He wouldn't have said this with the press listening if the dream of a new stadium was unlikely. He also knows very well that the state isn't handing them $1B for the stadium, either, so that leads me to believe he's looking to privately finance the stadium. Turning this team into a winner on the field is paramount, but at this point it has to be more than that unless the Sox can somehow win several pennants in quick succession. They've made mistakes with the Suns, but that doesn't mean they can't learn from their mistakes. At any rate, having them take over the White Sox seems like the best option possible that I can think of - certainly better than keeping the team in the Reinsdorf family after Jerry passes.

That was basically his point - this franchise could be a powerhouse if run the right way. But that's certainly not the case right now.

Ah yes, I forgot the Giants as one of the major market teams. They have the Bay Area all to themselves now. High-price area with a huge corporate presence and they play at one of the most popular ballparks in the league. I agree that SD is an interesting situation. Sort of a unique market - very popular ballpark, only city with a MLB but no NFL/NBA/NHL team, but also a metro area that's somewhat boxed in. Yeah, I'd consider SD, AZ, and SEA as mid-market. WAS should be too and perhaps DET. Colorado should be mid market, but they're obviously a total mess. Of course, we all know about the Sox. Should be major market team, but under JR's stewardship, he's managed to make them small market nested within the 3rd largest metro area.

1) As @caulfield12 said, the value gets reset for heirs. If I'm not mistaken, let's say your parents bought a vacation home decades ago for $200,000 and it's worth $700k now. If they pass, you inherit the property, and decide to sell it, your capital gains would be based on the value it had at the time you inherited it. You would not be subject to tax on the $500k increase in value of the property from the time your parents purchased it. 2) There's a lot more to generating revenue for a franchise than number of tickets sold. Local TV revenue, corporate sponsorship, luxury suites, and even price of the tickets are much higher in they are in the major markets than in Milwaukee and the State of Wisconsin. The Dodgers, for example, get over $300M per year in local TV revenue. The Brewers get about 1/10th of that. Plus, some teams generate revenue from the developments around their team's stadium (e.g.; Braves, Cubs, Cardinals) whereas Am Fam Field is surrounded by parking lots. Would the Brewers be losing money if they jacked up their payroll to major market level? None of us would know for sure unless MLB teams agreed to open their books (which they won't). But there was a report earlier explaining how the Pirates and Twins are losing money. At least the Twins ($400M) and White Sox (~$150M?) have a sizable debt. When the Brewers say this, it sounds plausible. When the Yankees say they're not making money, that's what I find hard to believe. Do I feel sorry for ANY of the rich MLB owners? NO. But I also find it an incredible coincidence that all the small market teams can't keep up with big market payroll while almost all the major market teams are able to spend big bucks on high-prices free agents. NYY, NYM, BOS, PHI, TOR, LAD, LAA, CHC, HOU, TEX, ATL - probably a couple of others I'm missing - these are the HAVES. Teams like MIL, TB, and CLE that actually try to win are the Have Nots. They're NOT going to spend $200M on players like Dylan Cease.

That's a bit of a defeatist attitude and, I know, I know, why wouldn't a Sox fan have a defeatist attitude. Sounds like something JR would say - he's not tone-deaf and out of touch, Sox fans are and they'll turn on the next owner no matter who it is. I know most sports team owners are unpopular to some degree, but I find it hard to believe that it's the Sox fans who are at fault and were being unfair for turning on Jerry Reinsdorf and Eddie Einhorn and that they're sure to apply the same level of vilification to the next owner.

It remains to be seen if this is a bad contract. If Toronto wins the WS next year with the help of Cease and then he's washed up during the last half of the contract, will it still be a bad contract?

Who is that in the middle of table 3? In fact, I could use help with a lot of these faces. Some are obvious.

Yep. As Sox fans, we've spent the last 20-30 years remarking at how certain free agent contracts have been terrible for that other team and that they're going to regret it. Meanwhile, the Sox have held the line at the $75M contract mark and have been one of the worst teams over the last 20 years in terms of making the playoffs and actually winning playoff games. I don't know about you guys, but I'm not going to pity these other franchises for their supposed stupidity, I'm going to ENVY them because we're stuck with the Sox organization's stupidity at how they do things.

Yes, but the Royals intend to leave Kauffman Stadium for a new ballpark at one of 3 possible sites. No matter where they land, it'll be a ballpark that's either downtown or built along with an entertainment district. https://www.kmbc.com/article/royals-fan-feedback-survey-future-stadium-kansas-city-2025/69240460 https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/46030983/mlb-ballparks-future-stadiums-kansas-city-royals-downtown-suburbs-village-model With two states (and 2 different counties on the Missouri side) pitted against each other, I think the chances of them getting something done are pretty good. The A's and Rays will end up with a new stadium/entertainment district development, too.

I'd say all but a handful of teams have figured this out. The ones with non-descript "nothing wrong with it" stadiums that don't have much else to do around them can probably be counted with one hand. The business model that JR created for himself 35 years ago at New Comiskey is sorely outdated.

The CBA expires in 53 weeks. Get ready for a lot of posturing by both sides over the next year.

You mean the same Jerry and Eddie who almost immediately bad-mouthed and alienated Bill Veeck, insulted Sox fans by vowing to get rid of the riff raff that was currently attending Sox games, told Sox fans the team was moving to pay TV and that they'd better get used to it, and let their popular broadcaster jump ship to the Cubs? You forgot to mention that part of the story.

Good points. It won't matter if they build a new stadium and/or move to a new location if the new owners continue to run this organization the way Reinsdorf has (especially over the last 20 years). Ishbia and his team need to rebuild the organization into a competent one, otherwise the Sox will continue to be an afterthought in Chicago no matter where they play. Honestly, I'd be thrilled if the Sox could somehow figure out a way to get consistently good attendance, win back market share, draw more than just die-hard generational fans, and generate robust revenue streams at the current location just by being better on the field. This would have to continue through ups and downs that most franchises go through, not just a short-lived boost by winning another pennant only to have attendance slide again the moment the team doesn't make the playoffs. I just think they'd continue to have nagging attendance issues with the current "it's not as bad as people think" ballpark and its mostly parking lots surroundings. Could they find lasting success by building Comiskey III across the street and turning the area into a thriving entertainment district to attract today's fans? I have serious doubts, but I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong.

It seems like this has been discussed several times in this thread and it's been stated repeatedly that even if the Sox built a new stadium at the 78, there almost certainly will be parking available for people who can't or won't take public transportation to the game. Now, it won't be the same number of parking spots as at Rate Field and it won't be on acres of surface lots and it won't cater to people who won't go to games unless the stadium has ample surface lots and is right next to an expressway, but I think it's time to put the rest the notion that a hypothetic stadium at the 78 (or anywhere else) would leave fans with nowhere to park and would only be accessible by mass transit. To your last point, you said transportation has never been a problem at 35th & Shields. Yeah, but has that really helped with attendance over the years? Since the new park opened, I believe Sox attendance has been 15th or lower in MLB all but the opening years of 1991-94 and 2006. Even when they were playing well a number of other seasons between 2000-2010, attendance was lackluster given the team's level of performance. They won 88 games in 2010 and were still 17th in MLB in attendance. https://www.thebaseballcube.com/content/mlb_attendance/ Are there downsides if they do indeed move to a new stadium at the 78? Yes. It won't be as convenient for fans driving in as the current park is. Each site has its pros and cons and will leave some fans unhappy. Same with possible suburban sites. It'll be up to the Ishbias to decide where they want to spend their money on this franchise. Maybe they'll decide to build a new park at 35th St and try to create an entertainment district around it.