77 Hitmen

If the Bears are running into this much resistance even with them offering to pay for the entire stadium, what does this mean for any chance of the Sox getting a stadium built at the 78....or even on the site of Old Comiskey? Certainly Ishbia will have to privately finance the entire cost of any new stadium. That might not be out of the question given his and his brother's deep pockets. But will state officials balk at any property tax relief or infrastructure spending for the Sox like they're doing with the Bears? Some of the Bears situation might be due to state reps from Chicago who want to kill the Arlington Heights project because the Bears will be leaving the city limits. Also, the debt on Soldier Field is immensely larger than the one on Rate Field. But the Bears are wayyyy more popular than the White Sox, so I don't expect anyone going out of their way to help the Sox get a stadium built.

I think the pressure has shifted and is now on IL officials to get a deal done or at least to demonstrate that the Bears' request is completely unreasonable. The highest any stadium pays in taxes as far as I know is SoFi stadium. If IL is holding out to stick the Bears with a $100M property tax bill, they'll end up with nothing. They aren't going to get $100M in taxes on that property when they carve it up to build a bunch of Costcos, car washes, apartment complexes, etc. It's an election year and there will be a lot of egg on people's faces - including the Governor - if the Bears sign a deal to move to Indiana after they offered to pay $2B for the stadium itself here. The Hoosier State will have a field day saying it's another example of people fleeing IL's high taxes....and that's why IN politicians from both sides of the aisle are eager to pass this quickly.

Can they sell naming rights for the bidet?

Here is WTTW's interview with Indiana state rep Earl Harris about the stadium bill they're pushing through. It passed the IN Senate 46-2. Off to the IN House next, but with such a lopsided passage in the Senate, I can't imagine there'd be problems getting this through their House. https://news.wttw.com/2026/02/04/indiana-lawmakers-continue-pushing-bears-stadium-let-s-get-it-moving If IL officials want to keep thumbing their noses at the Bears, a deal between the team and Indiana could happen fast.

Thank you, I'll be here all week.

This may come in handy when yet another season goes down the crapper.

Jerry Reinsdorf is a lot of things, but everything indicates that racist is not one of them. I can't thing of anything he's said or done as Sox owner over the years that shows that he's prejudiced against any minority group. The best explanations to me is that this snub is a) due to organization incompetence or b) veiled vindictiveness against someone who doesn't sing praises to the Sox organization. Both of those possibilities is very much on brand with Sox ownership. Who knows, maybe JR doesn't like the way Big Frank eats. Also, he's not a Boomer. Boomers are people born between 1946 and 1964. He predates that by almost a decade being born in Feb. 1936.

Ah yes, I somehow missed the "or" in that sentence. Too bad for all of us the "or" exists and is accurate.

That would be my guess. That's how things roll under Jerry Reinsdorf, if you're not a total loyalist, you're blacklisted. If you ARE a total loyalist, there's surely some important position for you in the front office.

"If not, we’ll have to wait until Justin Ishbia takes over in three or more years for the best player in Sox history to feel welcome back at Sox Park." Three more years at the earliest. Under his agreement with Ishbia, Jerry can choose not to invoke the option to sell the team until 2034!

Maybe Frank was too critical of the team during the 121 loss season. If you're not a total ass kisser, you're persona non grata in this organization - it's the Jerry Reinsdorf way.

Well, this is the organization who hired Schriffen to be their TV PBP guy. He didn't even know how to pronounce Bill Veeck's last name!

The Sox have one of the lowest payrolls in MLB and yet, Jerry wants to accept a lower return in talent from this trade so that he doesn't have to pay ANY of Robert's salary. Ridiculous, but very much expected. The Ishbia era can't arrive soon enough for us Sox fans.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7007520/2026/01/30/mets-mlb-offseason-overhaul-bo-bichette/ "After agreeing to a deal with Bichette, the Mets informed Chicago they were willing to absorb all of Robert’s salary ($20 million for 2026), which lowered the asking price to Acuna and minor-league pitcher Truman Pauley."

I wonder when the insanity of NFL stadiums "needing" to be replaced every 25-30 years is going to end? The turnover seems to be much worse than in MLB where the only 1992 or later stadiums that were replaced were Turner Field and Globe Life Park....and they each had their own unique problems. Otherwise, I can't think of an MLB stadium in the post-Camden era (which is now into its 34th year) where there's any hint of replacement. Renovations, yes, but not outright abandonment. At least Arrowhead and Highmark are over 50 years old, but lots of other NFL teams are really pushing to replace their late 90s/early 00s stadiums.

In other stadium news, the Royals have ruled out Overland Park, KS as a location for their new stadium. With North Kansas City, MO already eliminated, it looks like downtown KC would be the only remaining viable option. I suppose they could remain at Kaufmann long-term, but based on everything the team has said, I don't see that happening. https://frontofficesports.com/royals-stadium-plans-hit-suburban-dead-end-push-back-downtown/

Indiana officials would love nothing more than to poke Illinois in the eye by stealing the Bears from Illinois. IMO, they'd be happy to back up a dump truck full of money to the McCaskeys to make it happen. I still think a deal gets done for Arlington Park, though. The site is just too attractive to the Bears and I don't think money is the only factor in their decision. But Indiana could definitely happen if IL officials keep saying they won't even consider a legislative package for the Bears.

Yeah, our team's stadium has a super-generic name (Rate Field) and has a logo that mimics the team's fortunes over the last decade and a half. I'm not going to sweat them having a CME patch on their sleeves.

If I'm not mistaken, it's been reported that the most any professional sports team pays in property taxes is $9M for SoFi Stadium. It's crazy to think the Bears would agree to pay $200M in property taxes for an Arlington Park stadium when all other teams are paying a fraction of that. One question for IL lawmakers is how much tax money would they get from that property if the Bears do indeed move to NW Indiana and the land gets developed into a bunch of townhomes and strip malls? I would think the bigger deal to lawmakers is the $850M tab for infrastructure costs for building the stadium. That's a huge amount.

Am I correct that the Baltimore Orioles became the Yankees and the Milwaukee Brewers became the St. Louis Browns? After that early shuffling, AL and NL teams stayed static for half a century until the NL Braves move to Milwaukee in 1952 and the first AL team to move was the Browns who became the Baltimore Orioles (taking their name from that long-departed team) after the 1953 season. This ushered in 2 decades of numerous MLB franchise relocations.

A new Rays stadium is estimated to cost $2.3B. https://www.tampabay.com/news/tampa/2026/01/27/tampa-rays-stadium-economic-impact-study/

I think a big issue that cabal needs to address is local TV revenues. Many, mostly smaller market teams, have seen their RSNs go belly up and as a result a huge source of revenue dried up. On the other hand, teams with massive, national fan bases like the Dodgers, Cubs, and Yankees can still make good money off of TV revenue. This has made the competitive balance issue worse. This wasn't nearly as much of an issue 10 or 15 years ago when the RSN gravy train was doing just fine. I want to say that the Cardinals had a $1B RSN deal a while back. Those days are long gone.

Agreed. I'm sure we'll never know the real numbers.

Yeah, while I don't doubt the Sox are near the bottom of such a ratio list, the overall list doesn't pass the smell test. Aside from a few outliers like the Cubs and Royals, it's almost all big market teams near the top and small market teams near the bottom. Are owners like Reinsdorf and Nutting (Pirates) a big part of the problem? Absolutely YES. But now we're arguing that even good, competitive small market teams like the Guardians and Brewers are the problem because they're not outspending teams like the Dodgers, Mets, and Yankees. Logic tells me that it's extremely unlikely that all the owners willing to spend to win just happen to be in major markets and almost every single small market owner, even those of winning franchises, are all cheap bastards and the sole cause of MLB's competitive balance. I just don't buy it and whataboutisms about the Pirates and White Sox doesn't change that.

I don't disagree with that. But they need to stop saying it's a "taxpayer-funded stadium". The stadium itself is being privately financed. The Bears are putting a lot more private money toward the stadium than other teams like the Titans, Chiefs, and Commanders are. Sure, there's still a ton of public money going into infrastructure and there's a legitimate argument as to whether that's a good use of tax payer money and they'll have to answer to the voters whatever decision they make. But when politicians go around to the media saying they're not going to give the Bears a "taxpayer-funded stadium", it seems to me that some elected officials are trying to turn public opinion against it.