77 Hitmen

If JR were a forward thinker, it would have been New Comiskey Park that ushered in the golden age of new, charming "retro" ballparks instead of Camden Yards. Instead, he rejected plans for a retro park in favor of a soulless, generic ballpark with two levels of skyboxes below the upper deck that required $68M to retrofit some charm into about a decade later. And yes, he's always been penny wise and dollar foolish as far as the White Sox go. It'll be up to the new owners after his passing (probably the Ishbia brothers) to spend money on either a new ballpark at the 78 or to redevelop most of the parking around the current park into some sort of entertainment district that will draw more fans to keep up with today's realities of MLB teams getting people through the turnstiles.

Here's a Trib article talking about the possibility of the Sox moving to The 78 along with the Fire: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/04/white-sox-stadium-fire-78/ From the article: "As part of the proposed development, the Fire are buying 9 acres of land at The 78, the team and developer confirmed. That leaves plenty of room for the White Sox to build an adjacent ballpark, Ganis said" And this might not sit well with some Sox fans, but also from the article: “Even when the Cubs stink on the field, they still draw” about 3 million people in the stands most seasons, Ganis said. “That is something the White Sox are sorely missing, and it’s because of the location of their stadium and how walled off it is from where people live, work and play.” As we've all agreed countless times, it'll depend on whether the Sox are willing to commit a significant amount of private money toward a new stadium. We all know the state isn't going to give them $1B for the ballpark itself and JR's offer to pay $200M toward a new ballpark isn't even close to enough. But the Fire building on this site does not kill the opportunity for the Sox to also move there.

This article says: "the Fire’s new stadium proposal almost certainly thwarts any Sox chances of also moving to The 78. While there’s enough room for two stadiums and a mixed-use district that would feature housing, top-tier shopping and dining, outdoor spaces, and other community-building enrichments, it’s doubtful that the Sox will cohabitate with the Fire." Why is it "doubtful that the Sox would cohabitate with the Fire" and why does this proposal "almost certainly" thwart any Sox chance to move to the 78? And if the answer is because Jerry won't pay for it, that's not what is being talked about - that's a separate (though important) issue. What about the Fire announcing plans to build on the site make it less likely that the Sox would build there and where did Jerry say that he wouldn't share the site with the Fire?

Sully weighs in on the latest turn of events for the 78: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/03/chicago-white-sox-the-78-ballpark-fire/

Yes, I agree with this point. Jerry didn't become a billionaire without knowing how to play hard ball in negotiations and that's certainly wise on his part to do so if he can get away with it. We'll just see how this all plays out.

Search for MLB ballpark rankings and you'll find that Rate Field ranks at or near the bottom in almost every review - especially if you discount the A's and Rays stadium debacles. We Sox fans can keep repeating how the current park is "just fine" all we want.....but hardly anyone outside of hard core Sox fans believes this. They did a great job in renovating the park 20 years ago and I agree with the difference between the lower deck experience (pretty good) and upper deck experience (not so great). But, at the end of the day, it's an unremarkable ballpark in an unremarkable neighborhood. The Sox could probably get away with this mediocrity if they didn't share a city with a team that plays in a ballpark that most people outside of the Sox fan base consider a must-see baseball experience. Here's another recent review. Sox fans aren't going to like which park is ranked dead last (after Sacramento and Tropicana Field) and which park is ranked #1. But this is the world we live in.

Agreed. If anything, this is great news for anyone who wants a new Sox stadium at the 78. With the Fire kick-starting infrastructure work and the development of an entertainment district, this should make it more likely for the Sox to build on the site. The hold up for the Sox is Reinsdorf's insistence on public funding for the stadium itself, but as we've discussed in other threads, the huge wild card here is the Ishbia brothers.

The Fire's owner is putting up $650M of private money toward this new stadium after recently spending $100M on a new practice facility for a franchise that is valued at $530M. Meanwhile Billionaire Jerry says he can only put $200M in private financing toward a new Sox stadium for a franchise that is valued somewhere around $2B. Pathetic. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/03/chicago-fire-new-soccer-stadium/

George Wendt has died at age 76. https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/20/entertainment/george-wendt-death

Yes, Angel Stadium opened in 1966. Kaufmann Stadium and Rogers Centre are older too. But, regardless, your point is still a valid one. Unfortunately, New Comiskey became outdated one year after it opened when Camden Yards opened the floodgates to new ballparks with character. Last I heard, Uncle Jerry hinted that he could commit ~$200M. And yes, that's far short of what would be needed and what the ownerships of Tampa Bay ($700M) and Kansas City (~$1B) have said they'd commit in private funding for a new stadium.

Yep. It should be loud and clear to the White Sox by now that if they want a new stadium, it'll have to be privately financed except for infrastructure costs. Good question. If I had to guess, I'd imagine sharing infrastructure costs at the AH would be less costly overall. On the other hand, if the City of Chicago ever wants The 78 to be developed into anything but a vacant lot, it's going to involve a lot of infrastructure costs. The factors driving the Bears back to AH over the site next to Soldier Field seem a lot more obvious. First there's a huge legal barrier in trying to build on the lakefront site and then the costs to develop that site that has been floated are astronomical. Or the Ishbia brothers.

State Farm Stadium in Arizona says they have 120 events per year. https://www.statefarmstadium.com/about So, 30 dates is perhaps a low estimate. I don't know how that compares to other indoor football stadiums such as the ones in Minneapolis, Detroit, or Indy. An indoor stadium in AH could very well host Beyonce/Taylor Swift-level mega concerts and not worry about winter weather or (as was the case this week) thunderstorms.

Lots of stories in the local news today about the Bears shifting their focus back to Arlington Heights. I have yet to hear the Sox mentioned as a possible co-tenant on the Arlington Park land. The only mention of the Sox that I'm aware of is from weeks ago when the incoming new AH mayor was dreaming out loud about bring the Sox to the site, too.

New Comiskey for that movie. The old park was in the John Hughes film Only the Lonely starring John Candy with Maureen O'Hara as his overbearing mother.

Famous 80s film maker Johh Hughes was a White Sox fan. He reportedly wanted to have that famous Ferris Buehler playing hooky at Wrigley Field scene done at Comiskey Park, but the Sox weren't home when he was in town filming.

Yes, but there's no restriction for the Commissioner to remove. If the people with votes want to put Sammy Sosa in the Hall, they are not forbidden from doing so.

I seem to recall that some of the people who get to vote were not happy with Santo's self-promoting campaign to get himself into the Hall. This is just based on stuff I recall reading at the time, but I don't have any links to support this theory.

Craig Robinson was hilarious in The Office and Brooklyn Nine-Nine. Doug Judy!

I know the Sox don't exactly have a ton of celebrity fans, but this is kind of a weak list IMO. Justin Fields and a few singers make the list because they were invited to throw out the first pitch but who weren't life-long Sox fans, but Michael Clarke Duncan, Bernie Mac, Richard Roeper, George Wendt, Laurie Metcalfe, Jean Shepherd, Richard J. and M. Daley don't make the list?

I guess that settles it. I'll never support his brother for the papacy!

Now that we've settled his fandom, time for a tough question for the new pontiff that will really fire up and divide fans: Should the Sox stay at 35th and Shields or moved to the 78? Or perhaps a new domed stadium in Dolton?

It looks like the 2nd Reformation rests on whether he's a soccer fan.

Why punish the guy?

At about 1:00 into this NBC News clip, the new Pope texts back to a priest who's known him for years where his Chicago baseball allegiance lies: https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/pope-leo-xiv-is-a-chicago-native-who-led-augustinian-order-239203909684 (For anyone who doesn't want to open the clip, the reply from Pope Leo is "Sox".)

There are three things I've learned never to discuss with people: religion, politics, and the Great Pumpkin.