77 Hitmen

It would be interesting to see a breakdown by age group of Sox fans who strongly believe the status quo of current stadium design and surroundings (namely, tons of surface lots) should remain vs. those who would be in favor of building on most of those lots or even a new South Loop stadium. Change is difficult and I get that. Anyone on this site is probably not a good person to ask, either, because we're all diehards who still care enough about this team to be here. At any rate, even though I (obviously) am a big proponent of a new ballpark at the 78, I'm more and more thinking that the likeliest outcome is for the team to stay at the current stadium. Even with the Ishbias' deep pockets, $1B+ for a new stadium really is a LOT of money after paying JR $2B(?) or so for the franchise itself. If so, we'll see what they have planned for the next 30 years or so as the team's current lease ends. I just hope there are some improvements coming.

Fair enough about whether people would walk. Some would. Right now, some people do walk 15 minutes to/from Union Station to catch the Red Line to a Sox or Cubs game. Do people walk 20 minutes to events/attractions downtown anymore? I don't know, maybe someone who spends more time at events there can weigh in. What do you mean by "make that detour"? Do you mean for a possible Red Line stop at 15th and Clark?

Excellent point. Seems like some people are acknowledging that Sox fans will only show up if they win big over multiple seasons. Either Sox fans are fair weather fans (which they are not) or the current ballpark situation isn't working that well for them. And maybe the answer will be staying at the current park but making major changes. Since you mentioned transit friendly, I wonder if there is current stadium in MLB that is as close to so many transit options as the 78 would be. Within a ~20 minute walk from that site is a station for every CTA L line except the Yellow line, the LaSalle Street Metra station, and Union Station (if they do indeed extend the Riverwalk all the way down to that site). I'm not even counting water taxis since I'm not sure how many people those could accommodate or how many fans would actually use them to get to games. And yes, there would have to be parking available at the site since not everyone can or will take mass transit.

The Bears issue an open letter about their intention to build a stadium in Arlington Heights. The letter suggests they could bid to host a Super Bowl as soon as 2031. https://www.chicagobears.com/news/open-letter-regarding-arlington-heights-stadium-from-president-ceo-kevin-warren

It took 62 years for someone to break the expansion 1962 Mets record of 120 losses. I'm in my 50s and I don't expect 121 losses to be broken in my lifetime even if I live as long as Jerry Reinsdorf.

Wow - that's a great baseball moment.....unless you're the Dodgers or a Dodgers fan, of course. Very thrilling.

For those who don't have a Trib subscription, here are the key points from the article: - Bears plan to publicly present their stadium plans (w/ Q&As) this fall and hope to break ground next spring. - Legislative action to give the Bears power to negotiate property taxes is a long shot in the brief fall veto session and will have to be addressed next spring. Legislator from Arlington Hts says they want to get the bill right, not get it done fast. - Only 3 other NFL stadiums have been privately financed: SoFi, MetLife, and Gillette. Each are in the suburbs and have had help with tax breaks, tax-funded infrastructure, and/or a nearby entertainment zone. Two of these three stadiums are shared by 2 teams.

There seems to be something ingrained in modern American culture to just step over everyone else to get what you want right or wrong. It's nothing new, but it's been normalized and in some cases lauded in the last few years.

Except that isn't what happened here. The women in question wasn't in possession of the foul ball and then was shamed for not "handing a kid a baseball". Quite the opposite, the kid was in the possession of the ball and a grown women demanded that the ball be handed over to her. If it was the former scenario, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Can people not see the difference?

I'm a suburbanite and if they move to the 78, I'd just walk 20 minutes or so along the riverwalk to Union Station and catch a Metra train to and from the game. I wouldn't need to use the CTA at all. This is just me, but I can see myself going to more weeknight games with that arrangement since driving into the city from where I live can be such a pain in the ass with the traffic. Right now, taking the train to a game involves a lot more steps, including the CTA. Post game, it means waiting on the crowded red line platform for a train to the loop and then walking 15 minutes to Union Station. People do it now - I often see fans coming out of Union Station all decked out in Sox gear as I'm heading home from work. For people who want to drive to the game, there will be parking at the ballpark even if they redevelop much of the lots and stay at Rate Field or they move to a new park at the 78. The Fire already said there will be 2000 parking spaces at the site for their new soccer stadium.

Yeah, I think some are missing this point. The Sox are not ELIMINATING parking at the ballpark no matter what they end up doing. For anyone who can't or won't ride the CTA, there will be parking spaces either at the current stadium or the 78 for fans who want to drive to the game. It just likely won't be 70 acres (or whatever) of surface lots.

But it is so important that a middle aged woman get a baseball? Maybe all middle age fans who berate others into getting their way should get free tickets and free food and gift bags? All for free.

Your first four words are key - PART of the issue. We can all agree that JR has made misstep after misstep in his 44 years of ownership that has left the White Sox franchise reeling. At least it looks like he's doing one right thing at the end by lining up a local billionaire to be the next Sox owner after he's gone. But it's going to take a lot of work on the Ishbias part to right this ship. It won't be as simple as just cranking out checks for free agents. They've probably already learned that with their first few years of owning the Suns. Yes, this team needs to eventually start spending on premium free agents just like the big boys but there's a lot of leg work that needs to be done before we get to that point such as rebuilding all the scouting, player development, coaching, etc. that has been a failure over the last 2 decades. IMO, while the on the field stuff is of primary importance, there's other work that needs to be done to win back fans. That includes the ballpark experience and yes, even down to jettisoning that incompetent clown in the broadcast booth. It's not just that White Sox fans are angry. Worse than that - many are just indifferent and really don't care anymore. That's what the new owners need to overcome. Also note that the people who remember the White Flag trade, the 1994 strike, SportsVision, etc. aren't the future. The youngest of us are pushing 40 or 50. What have they done to attract any younger fans in the last 15 years who don't even remember the 2005 WS win let alone all the pre-2005 missteps?

Using a very very very very very extremely unlikely scenario is a rather weak argument. I guess we can just go ahead an excuse any boorish behavior because we just never know if that person is doing something for a dying child. That asshole who cut me off in traffic the other day? I shouldn't get mad, he might be rushing to see a dying child! Come on. And to be clear, this person didn't wrestle the ball away from a kid, she KARENED her way to getting the baseball after some kind dude gave it to a child. You know what I'm getting tired of? These loudmouths who think they can verbally bully their way into getting what they want. And people might be tired of the term "Karen", but this women fits the bill to a tee and totally deserves it.

The Rockies will have to go 1-19 from here on out to match the 2024 Sox and lose all 20 of their remaining games to break our futility record for losses in a season. Jerry Reinsdorf's infamy is almost certain to be safe.

So many other franchises are moving away from stadiums surrounded by so much surface lots and they all seem to be doing just fine to the point where other franchises are rushing to follow suit. I'm not sure what's so unique about the White Sox that we must have a stadium that is near mass transit lines and yet has to be surrounded by acres of surface lots. The only MLB teams that come to mind to me that plan to stick with extensive surface lots around their ballpark are the two L.A. teams and Milwaukee. But even with the Angels, there's a huge $4B entertainment district under construction within walking distance of Angel Stadium and surrounding the Honda Center (home of NHL Anaheim Ducks).

Yep, we Sox fans should be the last people to poke fun at the crosstown rivals skipping over someone we picked later. We picked Nick Madrigal at #3 and the Cubs took Nico Hoerner at #24. Ouch. And how about that guy we picked just ahead of Ian Happ? Woof!

If the Ricketts, even with owning a team that always draws well, has a huge fan base, and plays at a popular location that already had a lot of things around it, decided that they needed to spend a ton of money to develop the land around Wrigley to generate more money, what are the Ishbias intending to do with the White Sox who have NONE of those things? Whether they stay at the current park or move to the 78, I can't imagine the new owners intend to keep the status quo of current ballpark surrounded by acres of parking lots. Those fans who think that the Ishbias will spend their fortune on $300M payrolls forever more once they own the Sox without enough money coming in to sustain that kind of expenditure are in for disappointment. With a change in ownership (eventually) coming, don't expect the new guys, rich as they are, to go into this planning to operate at a loss indefinitely. And for those fans who think all they need to do is win and fans will come, the real world is not that simple or easy. Over the last 30 years, even when the Sox were fielding competitive teams, the only time they've been higher than 15th in attendance is the year after they won the World Series. And winning pennants are easier said that done. Teams like the Mets and Padres have been spending a ton of money on their payroll for years now and how many pennants have they won in the last 20 years?

It is indeed true that the Sox MLB payroll was higher than the Cubs in 2022, but there needs to be some context to go with those numbers: First, even when JR puts money into the major league payroll, he doesn't invest elsewhere in the organization. Scouting, player development, major league coaching/conditioning/analytics, getting international talent have been terrible for many years. Successful teams invest in both the MLB payroll and the rest of the organization. The Sox always seem to skimp on the latter. Second, 2022 was the result of the common ebb and flow of payrolls as multiyear contracts get more expensive in the later years resulting in bloated payrolls and then teams need to retool as their previous core of talent leaves. Of course, in the case of the Sox, it wasn't that the players they signed to multiyear deals got old, they just totally fizzled out. Perhaps that's part of how Jerry's bargain hunting backfired - sign all this emerging talent to extensions before they get too expensive but before they've proved themselves. It worked splendidly for the Chris Sale extension, so therefore it became their template going forward.

Wasn't the theory at the time that Jerry handed out that huge contract to Belle to spite the other owners for not sticking to their guns enough during that 1994 strike? And JR was very smart in giving Belle an out clause after 2 seasons, which made it very likely that he wouldn't be on the hook for the entire contract - which is indeed what happened.

Excellent summary. To your point #7, I think what also prompted JR to make a deal for a future sale now is that he saw Ishbia (as a current minority owner and potential source of cash infusion) was on the verge of buying the Twins and wanted to make this deal before he got away. It's also possible that, since his proposal to publicly finance a new ballpark at the 78 was DOA in Springfield, he needed to make a deal with Ishbia now to get the private funding needed to keep his ballpark dream alive. Was it just coincidence that they went public with their deal within a few days of the Fire's announcement that they intent to build at the 78? Whether ballpark funding is part of this deal is anyone's guess at this point.

I hate Jerry as an owner as much as anyone, but I suspect many fans still think he's raking in huge profits on this team thanks to the sweetheart stadium lease and all the parking lot fees he collects. The economics of baseball has changed such that these don't translate into huge profits anymore, especially with the collapse of the RSN money stream teams have been relying on for a few decades now.

I'm not sure why people actually expect JR to suddenly spend more money in 2026 ahead of a possible strike/lockout. It should be clear to all that the money Ishbia is putting into this franchise this year and next is not going to free agents. They've said it's to pay down debts and support organizational operations, not to go on a payroll spending spree. To be honest, I'm not all that worked up about this. It's not like the Sox are going to suddenly go out and sign Kyle Tucker to some massive contract as long as JR is the owner. The Sox are still by far the 2nd worst team in MLB this year, there's a lot of things they need to fix organizationally before I'm going to lose sleep over the 2026 MLB payroll numbers. I'd rather the next owners put money into getting this organization turned around long term than handing out huge contracts in the short term.

Pretty crazy that teams 1, 2, and 3 have an equal shot at any of the first six picks with team #4 having negligibly worse odds. Why not give a bit more weight to the eligible team with the worst record? I suppose that's because they don't want bad teams in September having an incentive to lose instead of winning a meaningless game. But as I suggested earlier, it would be such a White Sox thing to have the most losses in MLB history and then another season where they have the worst record of any team eligible for the top pick and end up with the #10 and #7 picks out of it. Of course, this front office got the #4 and #3 picks not too long ago and totally botched both of those, so maybe I shouldn't fret too much about the lottery system.

Pretty cool story. For those who don't want to bother watching, some dude in the UK who's never been to Chicago found a late 70s era Sox jacket on eBay that was apparently used by a player and was not a retail jacket. As he tracks down the owner, he gives a brief history of the late 70s/Veeck era Sox and particularly the 1977 team. Any Sox fan who wants to nitpick this to death needs to lighten up and perhaps get a life.