77 Hitmen

Couldn't the Sky be accommodated at the United Center if the Wintrust Arena is too small for the growing interest in the WNBA? The WNBA and NBA/NHL seasons barely overlap, if at all. And as I said earlier, if the Sox get a new park and GRF is converted to a soccer stadium, that would address the issue with the Red Stars. I think the only person who thought funding for a new Sox stadium would be approved this spring was Jerry Reinsdorf. I don't think it'll be settled this fall either other than a flat out rejection.

If they're not going to move to Lot 78, IMO they may as well stay at 35th and Shields. I can't think of any available land that would be a better option for the Sox. Any suburban location would be a TERRIBLE idea. I have thought all along that, once the state officially tells Jerry to take a hike on public funding for a new Sox stadium and he exhausts efforts to squeeze money out of the state, he'll somehow find a way to come up with something around $1B in private financing to make a new stadium happen. That should cover most, if not all, of the cost of a new ballpark itself minus infrastructure work at the site. A new stadium would give a huge boost to the franchise's value, so he'll be motivated to make it happen. Jerry didn't become a billionaire in real estate by disclosing how much he's willing to pay right off the bat before engaging in negotiations.

When you say "women's sports stadium", do you mean soccer or basketball? If we're talking about soccer, didn't the proposed South Loop renderings also show GRF being converted to a soccer stadium? If the Sox do move to a new park, seems the obvious solution is to make the current park the new home of the Fire and the Red Stars.

Richard Sherman, co-creator (with his brother) of music for many Disney movies and theme park rides, has died at age 95. Their song "It's a Small World" is possibly the most played song in the world.

There's nothing much else to say. The Sox and Bears proposals are non-starters. The Governor and some state reps have clearly said so. That doesn't mean a Sox stadium will never be built at Lot 78. But it might several years from now and under a new ownership who will be willing to cover most, if not all, of the cost of a stadium itself. My guess is that would be enough to sell politicians on paying for the infrastructure costs to develop the site. Until something else is built on that site, it'll still be an option for the Sox once ownership decides to privately finance something like $1B toward such a stadium. As far as the Bears go, I actually wouldn't be surprised if they end up back at Arlington Park. There's simply too huge of a funding gap to bridge in that jaw-dropping price tag for their lakefront dome proposal

First, I do indeed agree that JR is bluffing on his veiled threat of a franchise move for the reason you state. However, in the unlikely event that the Sox do move, I just don't see MLB having any interest in putting a team back in Chicago. The A's are leaving one of the biggest TV markets in the nation (The Bay Area) for what will be one of the smallest ones. In response, Manfred shrugged and said MLB is already covered in the Bay Area by the Giants. If an expansion team comes out west, it'll likely be in Salt Lake City (a much, much smaller market than the Bay Area) and not as a reincarnation of the Oakland A's. I expect a similar scenario if the Sox ever moved. MLB will be interested in expanding into some untapped, growing market from a city/state that is willing to spend lots of public dollars on an MLB ballpark (just like Salt Lake City where the state of Utah is willing to spend $900M in public money on an MLB park). I don't think the Sox are moving, but Sox fans need to stop fooling themselves into thinking MLB cares about putting a 2nd team back here into an also-ran ballpark (sorry, I like GRF too, but let's face reality, most people don't) and a neighborhood without much else to draw people in. Sox fans shouldn't panic and cave in to JR's demands by any means, but the danger is that too many will think it "won't matter" if the Sox move because we'll certainly get White Sox 2.0 asap. That smacks of whistling past the cemetery to me.

That arrangement with the Browns is by far the exception and not the rule of what happens when teams move. If I recall correctly, this was done as part of a lawsuit settlement between the NFL and the City of Cleveland after Modell moved the team after the city approved funding for a new stadium. The only other instance I can think of this happening is with the Charlotte Hornets after the original team moved to New Orleans. Any way, this is moot because Chicago will NOT get an expansion team if the Sox leave and I stated above. MLB will want to give a franchise to some growing sunbelt city who will pony up public funding for a ballpark and not to a city with a declining population that is totally dominated by the Cubs.

^THIS Fans needs to stop deluding themselves into the idea that having the Sox move won't be that bad because MLB will quickly give Chicago an expansion team. If the Sox did move, this is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN! The fact that Chicago has 2 teams is a relic of a bygone era where a) several cities had 2 teams (Boston, Philly, St. Louis) and b) Chicago was the 2nd largest city in the US - larger than L.A. Chicago is no longer a 2-team city for any of the major sports leagues. The only 2-teams cities left are NY and LA which each have a metro area population something like double the size of Chicago's . And for anyone clinging to the idea that MLB will want an "American League" team in Chicago, that distinction has become basically meaningless. The AL and NL are no longer unique. Everyone has the DH and every team plays every other team every year. Don't be surprised if MLB pushes radical realignment at some point that will totally kill off the AL and NL for all intents and purposes. This is much, much, much, much more likely to happen than Chicago being awarded a 2nd MLB team via expansion to maintain an "AL" presence here.

Yes, according to the ISFA. It doesn't sound like that includes the portion the Bears will be paying, either. That would be the cost over 40 years. But, would the stadium even last 40 years without at least a major renovation? https://wgntv.com/news/chicago-news/report-bears-new-stadium-would-cost-taxpayers-almost-7-billion-higher-than-team-says-according-to-state-official/ https://www.wbez.org/stories/bears-proposed-stadium-could-be-an-additional-12-billion/2d273753-7c61-4792-9314-608d068001e2

If the Sox are such a money loser, why has the franchise value gone up significantly over the years? The latest I've read put their value at around $2B and around middle of the pack among MLB teams. I'm not a business guy or an accountant, but how can such a thing be true if the team has been losing money for several years now? Serious question - not just a rhetorical one. Maybe there's a great explanation for this. According to this site, they've gone up $400M in value since 2020, in other words, since Covid started. https://www.statista.com/statistics/194606/mlb-franchise-value-of-the-chicago-white-sox-since-2006/

Oh absolutely. I'm not advocating for a continuation of a Reinsdorf ownership of the Sox in any way. I was just wondering about his motivation for saying such a thing and, given his reluctance to talk to the press, how often he's actually expressed this desire.

Well summarized. One thing I don't get is why would he care if any of his offspring own the White Sox after he's gone? I keep hearing that, but why would he care what business decisions they make after he's dead? Surely Michael or any other Reinsdorf children are old enough and experienced enough to make their own decision on this. Are there multiple sources and/or interviews to confirm this? Or is this based on one comment he made one time?

The trend nationwide is toward stadiums without the acres of parking lots around them. See what the Mets and Phillies/Eagles are proposing. Even if the Sox stay at GRF, I expect much of the parking lots to be converted to mixed use development at some point.

IMO, this will be the make-or-break issue for the Sox and Bears proposals. It's one thing to get public funding solely by extending the current hotel tax, but who picks up any shortfalls? It should be the teams that are on the hook for this. Infrastructure costs will be another issue that'll need to be settled. Some of that would certainly come from public funding, but how much of that could be justified and approved? I know that some people will argue that there shouldn't be a single dime spent even on infrastructure needed for these projects, but I think that's an easier sell to the public. I guess we'll see.

According to the Sun-Times, the Bears proposal would still leave enough money from the hotel tax to fund a new Sox ballpark. So, I don't see this as the Bears beating the Sox to that funding source. https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2024/04/23/bears-new-stadium-dome-lakefront-soldier-field

Oh, absolutely I think a new Sox owner would want the team to play at the South Loop site instead of being locked in long-term at Guaranteed Rate Field in an area that just doesn't draw much visitors outside of attending a baseball game. Catering to fans who want a ballpark surrounded by a sea of parking lots isn't working out and isn't a good business model going forward. My guess is that if the team was sold in the next year or two (let's say Jerry suddenly passes) and The 78 lot was still available, they'd find a way to come up with $1B or so in private funding to make that ballpark happen because they realize that would boost market share and revenue for this team plus give a huge boost to the value of the franchise. As far as whether a new owner would move them out of state. I wouldn't say the chances of it are zero. The other markets don't compare to Chicago now, but they are booming. What if the new owner has roots in North Carolina or San Antonio? It's not implausible that they'd buy the team and move it to their home state. Utah has given the green light to spend $900M in public funds toward a new MLB stadium - do people really think that there isn't a buyer out there who wouldn't jump at the chance to play there instead of being the forgotten stepchild in Chicago being forever overshadowed by the Cubs and playing at what will soon be a 40-year old generic ballpark with not much around it?

In his mind, Eddie was never wrong about anything. He was right about SportsVision being a gold mine and he was right about Tropicana Field in St. Pete being a gold mine for MLB. What a visionary! Interesting quote from Jerry. That's about as close to admitting a mistake as he'll ever get. And note how his wording puts the blame back on the fans. It was us fans who weren't ready for their business model! It's like when someone says "I'm sorry you took it the wrong way" when they make a non-apology.

Yes, wasn't the subscription price something like $21/month? That's in 1982 dollars! It's equivalent to $68/month today. I don't remember if that was for both ON-TV and SportsVision and if there was a cheaper price for just SportsVision.

Wow - Sox fans advocating for the demise of our franchise so that Chicagoans can make a "Super Cubs" franchise a possibility. Simply incredible. I've said it before and it's worth repeating, the Sox must have the only fan base with diehards practically offering to drive the moving trucks out of town. I guess that's what 43 years of emotional abuse at the hands of Jerry and Eddie will do.

Agreed. There's no way this is going forward without JR committing a significant amount of private financing toward this project. Surely the city and state officials have made this clear to him and he'd have to be delusional to not realize this. Even the Royals are committing about $1B in private funds toward their new stadium proposal. Of course, we don't know all that's being discussed behind closed doors - and I don't expect all the finer details of what's being discussed in opening discussions to be made public. And I realize that Uncle Jerry didn't become a billionaire by conceding his final offer at the start of negotiations. But, in the end, I expect that Jerry or a new Sox owner will have to come up with something like $1B in private financing to make this happen.

The city has rejected a proposal by the White Sox to use the city's amusement tax as part of the funding stream for the new stadiums. https://www.chicagobusiness.com/politics/chicago-bears-white-sox-new-stadium-revenue-source-rejected-city

Jerry owes every Sox fan an apology.

Interesting. That would explain what's going on with this team, which is more than Jerry's usual level of incompetence.

I agree, but Jerry is 88 years old and will be 93 when the Sox current lease is up. Even if the South Loop ballpark goes forward, there's a very good chance he won't be around to see its opening. He's also said his family will sell the team after he's gone. Ownership change is coming. Of course, some might say that a new owner could be even worse than the way JR has run this team, but unless they move the team out of town, I don't see how that's possible.

The Bears hold their first meeting with the ISFA on their lakefront stadium plan: https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2024/04/04/bears-new-stadium-illinois-sports-facilities-authority-white-sox-south-loop-funding “Both teams appear to understand that the continuation of the 2% hotel tax is unlikely to pay for two new stadiums and pay off the legacy [outstanding] stadium debt,” Bilecki told the Sun-Times. “Which, I assume, is part of the ongoing discussion between the teams. That’s up to them to try and figure out. ... It’s the million-dollar question. We’ve got to wait to see what they propose.”