Is “The 78” Dead? Or even more alive? Fire announce plans for SSS

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Looks like I have some catching up to do.🙂  Seriously, I'd like to get out and see more MLB parks in the coming years.  My previous visits to other parks was always an enjoyable experience.  I'd say my favorite so far has been Petco Park.  

I've also been to two now-demolished ballparks:  Old Comiskey and County Stadium in Milwaukee (which I didn't count in my 8 current out of town parks visited).  I can't believe I've never been to the Brewers' new stadium.  No excuse for me - it's been around about 25 years now.

Miller Park is worth the trip.  I liked it.

[Lip Man 1]

4 hours ago, greg775 said:

The new owner would be wise to escape all the upcoming taxes, etc. Also like I said, Lip, there won't be a redeveloped Bridgeport. Do you see the new owners wanting to be in that area of the city? They'd be guaranteed a boon if they and the Bears joined forces and built a sports city out by the old Arlington. Why would the Sox stay at 35th and Shields with their brand new, rich owner? Luxury is what he'll want.

The Bears want nothing to do with the Sox or a joint venture. 

[greg775]

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

The Bears want nothing to do with the Sox or a joint venture. 

Interesting. Well then the Bears will get the complex out at Arlington if they are smart IMO.

[greg775]

On 6/25/2025 at 4:07 PM, 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. 

No retractable roofs in Chicago for baseball please unless you wanna hold Final Fours in there. Otherwise the Bears should have a retractable roof even though it's sexy to play playoff football when it's 20 below zero. Sexy but dumb. It's not football at that point.

[NO!!MARY!!!]

17 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

The view from Roosevelt is hard to beat, but it’s not like the skyline view from 35th is non-existent. Dude is just arguing for the sake of it. 

No, I am not. 

[hogan873]

9 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Miller Park is worth the trip.  I liked it.

Been there a few times.  Really nice park and not a bad day trip.

[The Mighty Mite]

19 hours ago, Tnetennba said:

The view from Roosevelt is hard to beat, but it’s not like the skyline view from 35th is non-existent. Dude is just arguing for the sake of it. 

It is a pretty good view of the skyline but only if you are sitting in the upper deck pretty far down the right field line or want to take pictures from some of the ramps. If they build a stadium at the 78 the skyline will be able to be viewed from just about all the seats. The bigger problem is where is the money coming from, from what I keep reading, Chicago and Illinois are close to broke. If Ishbia wants a new stadium he will have to pay for it.

Edited August 7 by The Mighty Mite

[southsider2k5]

13 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Looks like I have some catching up to do.🙂  Seriously, I'd like to get out and see more MLB parks in the coming years.  My previous visits to other parks was always an enjoyable experience.  I'd say my favorite so far has been Petco Park.  

I've also been to two now-demolished ballparks:  Old Comiskey and County Stadium in Milwaukee (which I didn't count in my 8 current out of town parks visited).  I can't believe I've never been to the Brewers' new stadium.  No excuse for me - it's been around about 25 years now.

I have a lot of work to do as well!  I get to NYC on a regular basis, but not much during baseball season.  I definitely need to pick those up.  Some baseball tourism is definitely on my bucket list.

[ThirdGen]

2 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said:

It is a pretty good view of the skyline but only if you are sitting in the upper deck pretty far down the right field line or want to take pictures from some of the ramps. If they build a stadium at the 78 the skyline will be able to be viewed from just about all the seats. The bigger problem is where is the money coming from, from what I keep reading, Chicago and Illinois are close to broke. If Ishbia wants a new stadium he will have to pay for it.

Even if they had pointed the ballpark toward the north you wouldn't see much of the skyline from the lower deck. Take a peek sometime off the ramps behind third base at the 100 level, you can't see much of anything downtown.

Now the upper deck is different, but you would probably be able to see the Milwaukee skyline from there as well.

Do people really buy baseball tickets to look at buildings?  Why not sit on a park bench at Grant Park, completely free.

[southsider2k5]

For the record, on a clear day I can make out the Chicago skyline from 35 miles away across Lake Michigan, in both Indiana and Southern Michigan.  4 miles is fine.

[The Mighty Mite]

9 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

Even if they had pointed the ballpark toward the north you wouldn't see much of the skyline from the lower deck. Take a peek sometime off the ramps behind third base at the 100 level, you can't see much of anything downtown.

Now the upper deck is different, but you would probably be able to see the Milwaukee skyline from there as well.

Do people really buy baseball tickets to look at buildings?  Why not sit on a park bench at Grant Park, completely free.

Agreed, I don’t go to ballgames to see skylines and furthermore I don’t care if the neighborhood has tons of bars and restaurants around it, easy parking like at the Rate is more important.
Back in the day I was a huge Blackhawks fan and attended 200 or so games at the old Madhouse on Madison, horrible neighborhood with maybe a couple of seedy bars that no one frequented, but it had good parking, the Blackhawks were the hottest ticket in town in those days with packed to the the rafters crowds night after night and year after year and no one cared if there  were any restaurants or bars around. The Dodgers have played in a stadium for 65 years with not a restaurant anywhere close to it and surrounded by huge parking lots, hasn’t bothered a soul as they have lead MLB in attendance many many of those 65 years.
I know some will say, look at the Cubs and Red Sox for bars and restaurants and the Pirates who have the best stadium and skyline view  but bottom line is give me a competitive team in a comfortable stadium that is fairly easy to get to by car or public transportation with good parking and it seems to me The Rate fits the bill.
Right now I believe the biggest problem is what JR with his miserly ways has done to franchise and the fan base, it’s going to take Ishbia some big bucks to straighten this mess up on and off the field.

[Snopek]

34 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

Do people really buy baseball tickets to look at buildings?  Why not sit on a park bench at Grant Park, completely free.

I don’t know why I’m taking the bait on this, but do you really not feel that a nice stadium with a nice backdrop improves the experience of going to a game?

[The Mighty Mite]

6 minutes ago, Snopek said:

I don’t know why I’m taking the bait on this, but do you really not feel that a nice stadium with a nice backdrop improves the experience of going to a game?

Winning improves the experience.

[77 Hitmen]

21 hours ago, WBWSF said:

Some fans on this site criticize  the parking at the stadium. I think its one of the best things about going to a game there. In addition JR has to be making a ton of money from the parking.

It's not the existence of parking lots that's a problem, it's the NON-existence of pretty much anything else in the immediate vicinity that's been a problem in bringing people to the park over the years.

Edited August 7 by 77 Hitmen

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, ThirdGen said:

Even if they had pointed the ballpark toward the north you wouldn't see much of the skyline from the lower deck. Take a peek sometime off the ramps behind third base at the 100 level, you can't see much of anything downtown.

Now the upper deck is different, but you would probably be able to see the Milwaukee skyline from there as well.

Do people really buy baseball tickets to look at buildings?  Why not sit on a park bench at Grant Park, completely free.

This is quite literally a discussion about the top baseball stadiums in MLB and what separates one from another.  View is definitely one of the factors, as are many others.

[77 Hitmen]

7 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said:

It is a pretty good view of the skyline but only if you are sitting in the upper deck pretty far down the right field line or want to take pictures from some of the ramps. If they build a stadium at the 78 the skyline will be able to be viewed from just about all the seats. The bigger problem is where is the money coming from, from what I keep reading, Chicago and Illinois are close to broke. If Ishbia wants a new stadium he will have to pay for it.

 

4 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said:

Agreed, I don’t go to ballgames to see skylines and furthermore I don’t care if the neighborhood has tons of bars and restaurants around it, easy parking like at the Rate is more important.
Back in the day I was a huge Blackhawks fan and attended 200 or so games at the old Madhouse on Madison, horrible neighborhood with maybe a couple of seedy bars that no one frequented, but it had good parking, the Blackhawks were the hottest ticket in town in those days with packed to the the rafters crowds night after night and year after year and no one cared if there  were any restaurants or bars around. The Dodgers have played in a stadium for 65 years with not a restaurant anywhere close to it and surrounded by huge parking lots, hasn’t bothered a soul as they have lead MLB in attendance many many of those 65 years.
I know some will say, look at the Cubs and Red Sox for bars and restaurants and the Pirates who have the best stadium and skyline view  but bottom line is give me a competitive team in a comfortable stadium that is fairly easy to get to by car or public transportation with good parking and it seems to me The Rate fits the bill.
Right now I believe the biggest problem is what JR with his miserly ways has done to franchise and the fan base, it’s going to take Ishbia some big bucks to straighten this mess up on and off the field.

MM, here are my thoughts:

If Ishbia wants a new stadium he will have to pay for it.  That's pretty much understood at this point.  We have no idea what Ishbia has planned.  It could very well be that he isn't going to foot the bill for a new stadium, but the idea that he'd pay for a new stadium isn't outlandish.  There are several franchise owners in the major sports leagues that are committing something like $1B in private money toward a new stadium.  In my uneducated guess, I'd say it's a coin flip as to whether the new owner decides to pay up for a new stadium as he takes control of this team.  

I don’t go to ballgames to see skylines and furthermore I don’t care if the neighborhood has tons of bars and restaurants around it, easy parking like at the Rate is more important.  You don't.  But you're a Boomer and I'm an older Gen Xer.  Maybe that's what appeals to our age demographic groups, but it's been shown time and again that this isn't what people want these days when they decide how to spend their entertainment dollar.  Fun (scary) fact:  the oldest Millennials will start turning 50 two years after the Sox current lease ends.  The oldest of Gen Z are turning 30 in a couple of years from now.  Guess which generational age groups Sox ownership will have in mind when they decide where they want the Sox to play after the current lease ends?

Back in the day I was a huge Blackhawks fan and attended 200 or so games at the old Madhouse on Madison, horrible neighborhood with maybe a couple of seedy bars that no one frequented, but it had good parking, the Blackhawks were the hottest ticket in town in those days.  I'm sure that's 100% correct, but there are a lot of things that worked in the 1960s that are no longer the case today.  We also had leaded gas and nobody wore seatbelts back then either.  

The Dodgers have played in a stadium for 65 years with not a restaurant anywhere close to it and surrounded by huge parking lots, True, but they're the LA Freaking Dodgers.  They're in a metro area that has 18M people and they've won 13 pennants and 7 WS titles since moving out west.  Meanwhile, we Sox fans want to think 2005 was yesterday and are still waxing nostalgic  about 1959.  Aside from the Yankees, the Dodgers are arguably the most elite, premier team brand in MLB.

Right now I believe the biggest problem is what JR with his miserly ways has done to franchise and the fan base,  Amen, Mighty Mite.  You are 100% correct with no argument for me.

Edited August 7 by 77 Hitmen
typos

[77 Hitmen]

36 minutes ago, Snopek said:

I don’t know why I’m taking the bait on this, but do you really not feel that a nice stadium with a nice backdrop improves the experience of going to a game?

 

5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This is quite literally a discussion about the top baseball stadiums in MLB and what separates one from another.  View is definitely one of the factors, as are many others.

Yeah, we just had 2 or 3 pages of discussion about this in this very thread.  I don't feel the need to rehash the same explanation again about all the factors that go into a successful MLB stadium these days.  

[77 Hitmen]

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

I have a lot of work to do as well!  I get to NYC on a regular basis, but not much during baseball season.  I definitely need to pick those up.  Some baseball tourism is definitely on my bucket list.

I've been to Citi Field and had a great time there.  Since I like to get some food from the concessions that seem appropriate to the area I'm visiting, I got an arancini when I was there.  I also remembered that they played (and the crowed sang along with) The Piano Man during the 7th inning stretch after Take Me Out to the Ballgame.  

[ThirdGen]

48 minutes ago, Snopek said:

I don’t know why I’m taking the bait on this, but do you really not feel that a nice stadium with a nice backdrop improves the experience of going to a game?

Nice stadium, absolutely. Tall buildings in the background, who cares?

[The Mighty Mite]

22 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

It's not the existence of parking lots that's a problem, it's the NON-existence of pretty much anything else in the immediate vicinity that's been a problem in bringing people to the park over the years.

I realize things change but back in the GO GO years when the Sox had 17 straight winning seasons they outdrew the Cubs every year but 1, both parks are in the same neighborhood they were 70 years ago, the difference was winning baseball. Back before the Tribune bought the Cubs, attendance was just about equal in the 70s and 80s with the better team for a particular year drawing a bit better than the other one. What has helped the Cubs more than anything is that Wrigley Field along with Fenway is that they’re old, neither are great ballparks but old, back in the day no one raved about them, they were just ballparks like Comiskey Park, Tiger Stadium, old Yankee Stadium, Ebbets Field and Crosley Field just to name a few.

[The Mighty Mite]

22 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

 

MM, here are my thoughts:

If Ishbia wants a new stadium he will have to pay for it.  That's pretty much understood at this point.  We have no idea what Ishbia has planned.  It's likely that he isn't going to foot the bill for a new stadium, but the idea that he'd pay for a new stadium isn't outlandish.  There are several franchise owners in the major sports leagues that are committing something like $1B in private money toward a new stadium.  In my uneducated guess, I'd say it's a coin flip as to whether the new owner decides to pay up for a new stadium as he takes control of this team.  

I don’t go to ballgames to see skylines and furthermore I don’t care if the neighborhood has tons of bars and restaurants around it, easy parking like at the Rate is more important.  You don't.  But you're a Boomer and I'm an older Gen Xer.  Maybe that's what appeals to our age demographic groups, but it's been shown time and again that this isn't what people want these days when they decide how to spend their entertainment dollar.  Fun (scary) fact:  the oldest Millennials will start turning 50 two years after the Sox current lease ends.  The oldest of Gen Z are turning 30 in a couple of years from now.  Guess which generational age groups Sox ownership will have in mind when they decide where they want the Sox to play after the current lease ends?

Back in the day I was a huge Blackhawks fan and attended 200 or so games at the old Madhouse on Madison, horrible neighborhood with maybe a couple of seedy bars that no one frequented, but it had good parking, the Blackhawks were the hottest ticket in town in those days.  I'm sure that's 100% correct, but there are a lot of things that worked in the 1960s that are no longer the case today.  We also had leaded gas and nobody wore seatbelts back then either.  

The Dodgers have played in a stadium for 65 years with not a restaurant anywhere close to it and surrounded by huge parking lots, True, but they're the LA Freaking Dodgers.  They're in a metro area that has $18M people and they've won 13 pennants and 7 WS titles since moving out west.  Meanwhile, we Sox fans want to think 2005 was yesterday and are still waxing nostalgic 1959.  Aside from the Yankees, the Dodgers are arguable the most elite, premier team brand in MLB.

Right now I believe the biggest problem is what JR with his miserly ways has done to franchise and the fan base,  Amen, Mighty Mite.  You are 100% correct with no argument for me.

You make some good points and it sucks that we only have 2005 while the Dodgers, Yankees, Cards and Red Sox have so many more great memories, actually when I see those banners at The Rate for 1906, 1917 and 2005, it’s a little bit embarrassing, 3 World Championships in 125 years, ugh.

[southsider2k5]

13 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

Nice stadium, absolutely. Tall buildings in the background, who cares?

Obviously other people do care. We get it, you don't.

[southsider2k5]

8 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

I realize things change but back in the GO GO years when the Sox had 17 straight winning seasons they outdrew the Cubs every year but 1, both parks are in the same neighborhood they were 70 years ago, the difference was winning baseball. Back before the Tribune bought the Cubs, attendance was just about equal in the 70s and 80s with the better team for a particular year drawing a bit better than the other one. What has helped the Cubs more than anything is that Wrigley Field along with Fenway is that they’re old, neither are great ballparks but old, back in the day no one raved about them, they were just ballparks like Comiskey Park, Tiger Stadium, old Yankee Stadium, Ebbets Field and Crosley Field just to name a few.

1959 was 66 years ago.  The youngest people that might remember that era are now in their 70s.  While it is easy to revert to the back in my day speech, even for myself at now 51, the fact is the entire world has changed since then.  One of MLBs biggest problems is they are by far the slowest of the major pro sports in America to adjust to those changes.  The vast majority of the future of baseball fans knows nothing of this time, place or existence.  

[ThirdGen]

5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Obviously other people do care. We get it, you don't.

I guess I'm just not a skyscraper guy. If the backdrop was mountains, an ocean, or some other natural beauty I would probably get it. Tough to find in Chicago, other than the lakefront.

[77 Hitmen]

20 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

I realize things change but back in the GO GO years when the Sox had 17 straight winning seasons they outdrew the Cubs every year but 1, both parks are in the same neighborhood they were 70 years ago, the difference was winning baseball. Back before the Tribune bought the Cubs, attendance was just about equal in the 70s and 80s with the better team for a particular year drawing a bit better than the other one. What has helped the Cubs more than anything is that Wrigley Field along with Fenway is that they’re old, neither are great ballparks but old, back in the day no one raved about them, they were just ballparks like Comiskey Park, Tiger Stadium, old Yankee Stadium, Ebbets Field and Crosley Field just to name a few.

I remember the days when the Cubs would close off the entire upper deck at Wrigley on days when there weren't that many people there.   We as kids also just showed up the day of the game to buy bleacher tickets for something like $5. To anyone under age 40, that'd probably blow their minds.   I'm talking about early 80s when this was happening, not way back in the 60s.