ron883 Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 9 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: Paul Sullivan has an article in the Trib today says he believes if Ishbia is going to build a new stadium at the 78, it's "imperative" that he comes up with plans for a retractable roof stadium. He says the intense heat/humidity we've had in recent days is a good argument for a retractable roof stadium. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/25/chicago-white-sox-stadium-retractable-roof/ Thoughts on this? One obvious downside would be that it costs a lot more to build such a stadium vs an open air ballpark (which is already very expensive at over $1B). But what about aesthetics? One big selling point of a ballpark at the 78 is a stunning skyline view it would offer. Wouldn't that be negated with a retractable roof stadium? IMO, comparing most retractable roof stadiums to an open air stadium is like comparing a car w/ a sunroof to a convertible. The parks in Arizona and Milwaukee lack a certain charm due to the roof structure IMO. That being said, I would probably change my tune if I had to sit there in frigid early season games, a rain out, or when the heat index is 110. Great, more of this "global warming" Chinese hoax bullshit. Sullivan is trying to push the hoax even more. I just watched a Joe Rogan Experience podcast and Joe actually said we are in a global cooling pattern when you look at the big picture. We don't need a retractable roof. It's going to get cooler here based on what Joe said. 1 1 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 12 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: Paul Sullivan has an article in the Trib today says he believes if Ishbia is going to build a new stadium at the 78, it's "imperative" that he comes up with plans for a retractable roof stadium. He says the intense heat/humidity we've had in recent days is a good argument for a retractable roof stadium. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/25/chicago-white-sox-stadium-retractable-roof/ Thoughts on this? One obvious downside would be that it costs a lot more to build such a stadium vs an open air ballpark (which is already very expensive at over $1B). But what about aesthetics? One big selling point of a ballpark at the 78 is a stunning skyline view it would offer. Wouldn't that be negated/blocked by the structure needed for a retractable roof stadium? IMO, comparing most retractable roof stadiums to an open air stadium is like comparing a car w/ a sunroof to a convertible. The parks in Arizona and Milwaukee lack a certain charm due to the roof structure IMO. That being said, I would probably change my tune if I had to sit there in frigid early season games, a rain out, or when the heat index is 110. You build a roof which opens up to the sklyline. Houston is a great example of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 A retractible roof would add millions of dollars to the cost of the stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiddleCoastBias Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said: You build a roof which opens up to the sklyline. Houston is a great example of it. Miami's stadium has a wall of windows in left field with a retractable roof. Say what you will about the rest of the park but the core features would line up very well with our proposed location. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 1 hour ago, MiddleCoastBias said: Miami's stadium has a wall of windows in left field with a retractable roof. Say what you will about the rest of the park but the core features would line up very well with our proposed location. The 78 has been proposed for an open air soccer stadium. Several decisions have been made by the architects/land planners as can be seen below. Note how there is almost no vehicular or pedestrian access to the East save for Roosevelt Rd. which is +20 ft. or so in elevation along the North end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 1 hour ago, WBWSF said: A retractible roof would add millions of dollars to the cost of the stadium. Do you have a source for this claim? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaleAleSox Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 12 minutes ago, supernuke said: Do you have a source for this claim? I mean, that is sort of common sense. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 44 minutes ago, supernuke said: Do you have a source for this claim? Millions is low. It is more like hundreds of millions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopek Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 4 hours ago, ron883 said: Great, more of this "global warming" Chinese hoax bullshit. Sullivan is trying to push the hoax even more. I just watched a Joe Rogan Experience podcast and Joe actually said we are in a global cooling pattern when you look at the big picture. We don't need a retractable roof. It's going to get cooler here based on what Joe said. Now this is committing to the bit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snopek Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 hours ago, MiddleCoastBias said: Miami's stadium has a wall of windows in left field with a retractable roof. Say what you will about the rest of the park but the core features would line up very well with our proposed location. Retractable roof stadiums too often feel like fully enclosed domes. I really like how Miller Park/American Family Field has the windows in both left and right field. It really opens it up. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 17 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: You build a roof which opens up to the sklyline. Houston is a great example of it. 15 hours ago, MiddleCoastBias said: Miami's stadium has a wall of windows in left field with a retractable roof. Say what you will about the rest of the park but the core features would line up very well with our proposed location. 13 hours ago, Snopek said: Retractable roof stadiums too often feel like fully enclosed domes. I really like how Miller Park/American Family Field has the windows in both left and right field. It really opens it up. I just searched for images of the Houston ballpark. Wow, I didn't realize that it opened up so completely. That looks pretty good. Thanks for the views of Miami and Milwaukee, too. Chase Field in AZ also has panes in the outfield that open when the roof is opened. Those are nice touches, but Milwaukee and AZ still feel like a "building" and such a design at the 78 would still block the skyline. I've been to Seattle's ballpark and it really opens up great, but that stadium is not climate controlled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 (edited) 14 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: Millions is low. It is more like hundreds of millions. Yep, it would easily add a few hundred million to the cost of a stadium. That would be on the new ownership's dime and it's not clear they even plan to pay for an open air stadium to replace the current one. On the plus side, such a stadium could be used for other events like concerts during more of the year - especially since the chances of an indoor football stadium, which would compete for such events, being built nearby are close to zero. But do such events and the number of times the Sox play in bad weather justify the cost? I don't know - it's not my money. Edited June 26 by 77 Hitmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joejoesox Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 just copy/paste the brewers stadium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: Yep, it would easily add a few hundred million to the cost of a stadium. That would be on the new ownership's dime and it's not clear they even plan to pay for an open air stadium to replace the current one. On the plus side, such a stadium could be used for other events like concerts during more of the year - especially since the chances of an indoor football stadium, which would compete for such events, being built nearby are close to zero. But do such events and the number of times the Sox play in bad weather justify the cost? I don't know - it's not my money. I don’t have any evidence for this, but it feels like retractable roof stadiums require a larger footprint than open air parks. If they are already sharing the 78 with the new Fire stadium, space limitations might be an issue as well. April weather sucks for baseball, but I struggle to see how a few cold/wet series in April and maybe a few overly hot series in late June or July justify the cost of a roof. Same with the handful of games impacted by rain every season. Chicago has weather extremes, sure, but we aren’t Houston, Phoenix, or Seattle. Domed baseball in Chicago will never make sense to me. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 18 hours ago, PaleAleSox said: I mean, that is sort of common sense. 17 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: Millions is low. It is more like hundreds of millions. So your trying to tell me that a large additional feature would cost more? I think I'll need to see some accounting to back this up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 23 hours ago, ron883 said: Great, more of this "global warming" Chinese hoax bullshit. Sullivan is trying to push the hoax even more. I just watched a Joe Rogan Experience podcast and Joe actually said we are in a global cooling pattern when you look at the big picture. We don't need a retractable roof. It's going to get cooler here based on what Joe said. Ah yes, renowned climate change scientist Joe Rogan. Let’s hang onto his every word for all things climate change related. 😅😂🤣 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 46 minutes ago, Thad Bosley said: Ah yes, renowned climate change scientist Joe Rogan. Let’s hang onto his every word for all things climate change related. 😅😂🤣 Thad. I do believe Ron was being a bit silly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 3 hours ago, Tnetennba said: I don’t have any evidence for this, but it feels like retractable roof stadiums require a larger footprint than open air parks. If they are already sharing the 78 with the new Fire stadium, space limitations might be an issue as well. April weather sucks for baseball, but I struggle to see how a few cold/wet series in April and maybe a few overly hot series in late June or July justify the cost of a roof. Same with the handful of games impacted by rain every season. Chicago has weather extremes, sure, but we aren’t Houston, Phoenix, or Seattle. Domed baseball in Chicago will never make sense to me. Good point about the footprint needed. Just doing a quick online search of a few random open air and retractable roof stadiums showed that the retractable ones took up something like twice the amount of acreage. Something like 12-15 acres vs. about 25 or so. And yes, it's a legitimate question as to whether (no pun intended) such a thing is necessary in our part of the country. The only cold weather cities with retractable roof ballparks are Toronto and Milwaukee. The other northeast/midwest cities seem to have managed without a roof. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 45 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said: Thad. I do believe Ron was being a bit silly. Dude hasn't made a serious post this decade. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcq Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 When you see Vegas 33K guess again. 30K seats and 3K standing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron883 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 9 hours ago, Thad Bosley said: Ah yes, renowned climate change scientist Joe Rogan. Let’s hang onto his every word for all things climate change related. 😅😂🤣 Joe Rogan is based Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 (edited) On 6/25/2025 at 5:26 PM, MiddleCoastBias said: Miami's stadium has a wall of windows in left field with a retractable roof. Say what you will about the rest of the park but the core features would line up very well with our proposed location. I admire creativity and forward thinking from those who can think outside the box. Imagine that kind of stadium located somewhere down the shore of Lake Michigan with a view of the lake. Ishbia has the resources and proven expertise as demonstrated from his recent dealings in Winnetka where he swapped private property for Lake Michigan beachfront. Imagine if he and the ISFA swapped all GRate land for some area near or around the 31st beach or something like that. Game changer in the Chicago sports market. Creative and beautiful, not a hole next to the Cal sag canal bordered by the Lumber st. railroad boneyard elevated streets and the Metra tracks. Edited June 28 by tray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted June 28 Share Posted June 28 On 6/27/2025 at 12:32 AM, ron883 said: Joe Rogan is based He needs to watch out for crazy Liver King. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox guy Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 On 6/27/2025 at 12:32 AM, ron883 said: Joe Rogan is based Is he also "redpilled" I can't believe some here are suggesting a retractable dome in our town. WTH. Do you also want astroturf. Hell yeah, let's do it, 80s style turf, not the grassy kind of today. also, we need to change our team names to singular abstract nouns, that's what's cool. The Chicago Roar, the Chicago Bravery, the Chicago Stampede, The Chicago Purchase, the Chicago Cuteness. Hell, yeah, with more teal and purple for all of them. Come on, yall, outdoor sports are meant to be played in the elements. Drink hot cocoa and wear layers in april, drink lots of water and use the CF shower in the heat. You can do it. Whatever happened to Chitown Tough. Plus, rain delays are a chance to watch Top Prospects or Don't Stop Believing: a 2005 reunion. Doubleheaders are a chance to wear the blacktop at home, which has only been done once this year, which is baffling. They were worn way more often previously, does anyone know why it's only been once so far. This really bothers me, we've worn them at home at least 20x per year since 91. Brooks probably fears it would impede cityconnect sales, which it won't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted June 29 Share Posted June 29 Actually the “rain delay keep the park open so people drink more until we call the game” trick sucks ass and I would love a retractable roof to prevent that. Would also love if there was a chance for this team to ever go to the Playoffs/World Series again that a October rainstorm doesn’t make a game miserable for the fans. all for a retractable roof on a new ball yard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.