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

[77 Hitmen]

Wow, reading some of the posts here, you'd think Chicago has become a crime-ridden, nightmarish hellhole where people are afraid to venture outdoors even downtown.  I guess someone forgot to tell the 55 million tourist who visited Chicago last year.  All those people pictured crowding the lakefront path in this article don't exactly look like they're running for their lives to me. 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/money/2025/05/16/chicago-visitors-tourists-2024-prepandemic

And it looks like no one is flying into Chicago anymore, either, since this city is going down the toilet:

https://wgntv.com/news/chicago-news/ohare-close-to-dethroning-atlanta-as-americas-busiest-airport/

All snark aside, I know Chicago certainly has its problems, but let's not get carried away here with making it out like it's the Beirut of the Midwest.  

Edited August 10 by 77 Hitmen

[77 Hitmen]

9 hours ago, WBWSF said:

The last I read is that it would take $900 million of Tif money for the infrastructure at the  78. I don't think that type of money makes sense for 20 soccer games a year. It needs a baseball stadium at that site also to justify that type of expense.

I totally agree.  The Fire and the 400k fans max that they'll draw if they sell out all of their home games is nothing compared to what the Sox could bring in to the site - which has been 1.3M fans at the worst over the last 30 years and could be well over 2M fans per year with a good team at the better location. 

If the Ishbias decide that they want to bankroll a privately-funded new ballpark at the 78 as part of their investment into this team, I find it hard to believe the city and state would refuse to pay for infrastructure improvements even though they won't be cheap.  This includes not only the necessary infrastructure work, but also the possibly transformative extension of the riverwalk down to the site and perhaps a new Red Line stop at the site too.  

[greg775]

2 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

I'm not. 

I think its criminally stupid for state/county/city to bail out and help billionaires.

The Bears and the Sox already got one stadium built on someone else's dime.

I ask again when does the BS stop?

 

There are a lot of things stupid and unnecessary about sports, Lip. Taxes being used to pay for stadiums of billionaires is one of them but it's the norm. So you gotta do it. These salaries to play a kid's game also are stupid and unnecessary. I just wonder at what point fans stop going. Not sure where they get all the money to drive to games, park, eat, drink and watch the games. ... The new thing in college sports is having to pay a rental fee just to have your season ticket seat. The cost of the seat is in addition to how much you have to pay lump sum just to have right to the seat.

Edited August 10 by greg775

[greg775]

6 hours ago, nrockway said:

I think people here hand-wave away the crime simply because 'murders' are down; well murders aren't the only crime.

This has nothing to do with Chicago's numbers. I have no idea if they are accurate or not. ... BUT in D.C. did you see the officials were saying via numbers crime is down like 50 percent and lowest since the 1960s or something. Then somebody proved the numbers released were fake news. What a world but we don't know who to believe any more.

[Paulie4Pres]

8 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

Yes, it is absolutely obtuse for you to be like “wow the bears want the city and state to upgrade the surrounding streets and trainstops for the increased business and traffic,  that is totally laughable because they haven’t won a lot of games but also are worth 8.8 billion dollars hahahaa they can f*** themselves they should pay for it themselves” 

it’s amazing that you interview all these people and write all these books and still can manage to not understand the process here.

 They just said they aren’t asking the state for money for the stadium, THAT WAS THE BIG DEAL FOR THE LAST YEAR,  THEY WANTED STATE MONEY FOR THE STADIUM.

 

Why should the people who live in that area pay for infrastructure upgrades that are only needed because the Bears are building a stadium there? What do they get out of it, outside of increased taxes, traffic, headaches, and everything around them being torn up and under construction? 

This mentality is why 60+ million Americans are eating huge electricity price increases so trillion dollar companies have enough power for their fucking AI data centers. Which, ironically, will just put more Americans out of work. 

Rich people are the average Joe's enemy and the quicker people figure this out, the sooner we can start clawing back money from the massive, ever increasing wealth inequality.

The Bears want a new stadium, then pony up the money for EVERYTHING that requires or get fucked. We are all tired of subsidizing rich people.

Edited August 10 by Paulie4Pres

[Paulie4Pres]

Also, people need to stop watching Fox "News". Or just continue to s%*# yourself anytime you drive through a neighborhood where minorities live. 

The most dangerous parts of the country are pretty much all found in RURAL America. PER CAPITA is an important part of statistics. Crime is also down EVERYWHERE in this country, even if the media wants you to believe otherwise. The data is readily accessible to anyone who gives a damn. Try reading sometime. 

[Kyyle23]

3 hours ago, Paulie4Pres said:

Why should the people who live in that area pay for infrastructure upgrades that are only needed because the Bears are building a stadium there? What do they get out of it, outside of increased taxes, traffic, headaches, and everything around them being torn up and under construction? 

This mentality is why 60+ million Americans are eating huge electricity price increases so trillion dollar companies have enough power for their fucking AI data centers. Which, ironically, will just put more Americans out of work. 

Rich people are the average Joe's enemy and the quicker people figure this out, the sooner we can start clawing back money from the massive, ever increasing wealth inequality.

The Bears want a new stadium, then pony up the money for EVERYTHING that requires or get fucked. We are all tired of subsidizing rich people.

This is jobs created.  Simply put.  This is subsidizing growth in the area, which Arlington Heights has agreed to with the Bears.  No, I don’t think I want the bears paying for interchanges and new train stops because I don’t want them to have a say in any of that, I want them to be properly constructed so that we can’t ask ourselves if someone cut corners because they wanted to save money because they didn’t even want to build this s%*# anyways, they just wanted to build their stadium on their plot.

if you want to rage against the entire idea of building a stadium, have at it.  I’m not arguing with you about that.  Usually these things are boondoggles because of the public money asked for to build things that the owners should pay for themselves, like part of the stadium.  I’m operating under the assumption that they are being honest about paying for their own stadium.  Infrastructure upgrades are necessary at the city and state level for this, it is what it is.  That is the states property.  The increased traffic is business for everyone and they need it addressed.

[WBWSF]

8 hours ago, greg775 said:

There are a lot of things stupid and unnecessary about sports, Lip. Taxes being used to pay for stadiums of billionaires is one of them but it's the norm. So you gotta do it. These salaries to play a kid's game also are stupid and unnecessary. I just wonder at what point fans stop going. Not sure where they get all the money to drive to games, park, eat, drink and watch the games. ... The new thing in college sports is having to pay a rental fee just to have your season ticket seat. The cost of the seat is in addition to how much you have to pay lump sum just to have right to the seat.

Nobody seems to be talking about this but going to a White Sox gam is much cheaper than going to a Cubs, Bears, Bulls or  Blackhawks game.

[southsider2k5]

11 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

I'm not. 

I think its criminally stupid for state/county/city to bail out and help billionaires.

The Bears and the Sox already got one stadium built on someone else's dime.

I ask again when does the BS stop?

 

It is would be criminally negligent to be the one community losing businesses because you are the only one NOT offering incentives. 

[77 Hitmen]

19 hours ago, Paulie4Pres said:

Also, people need to stop watching Fox "News". Or just continue to s%*# yourself anytime you drive through a neighborhood where minorities live. 

The most dangerous parts of the country are pretty much all found in RURAL America. PER CAPITA is an important part of statistics. Crime is also down EVERYWHERE in this country, even if the media wants you to believe otherwise. The data is readily accessible to anyone who gives a damn. Try reading sometime. 

You mean "people are saying!!!...." and "I keep hearing!......" shouldn't be passed off as fact?  You don't say.

And no offense to other posters, but it seems to me that some of the more vocal proponents of moving the Sox out to the suburbs (because they think Chicago is so dangerous that nobody goes into the city for events and nightlife anymore and nobody in their right mind would go to a Sox game unless they can drive up to a stadium right off the expressway, see the game, and then get the hell out of the city) are people who don't even live in Illinois.

Edited August 11 by 77 Hitmen

[Lip Man 1]

6 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

This is jobs created.  Simply put.  This is subsidizing growth in the area, which Arlington Heights has agreed to with the Bears.  No, I don’t think I want the bears paying for interchanges and new train stops because I don’t want them to have a say in any of that, I want them to be properly constructed so that we can’t ask ourselves if someone cut corners because they wanted to save money because they didn’t even want to build this s%*# anyways, they just wanted to build their stadium on their plot.

if you want to rage against the entire idea of building a stadium, have at it.  I’m not arguing with you about that.  Usually these things are boondoggles because of the public money asked for to build things that the owners should pay for themselves, like part of the stadium.  I’m operating under the assumption that they are being honest about paying for their own stadium.  Infrastructure upgrades are necessary at the city and state level for this, it is what it is.  That is the states property.  The increased traffic is business for everyone and they need it addressed.

There have been a number of documented reports over the decades that show the "jobs created" part of stadiums is a myth. it is short lived for the most part.

How accurate those studies are, I don't know but there have been a number of them.

It was even written about in the book, "The Big Show" by Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann.

[77 Hitmen]

6 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

This is jobs created.  Simply put.  This is subsidizing growth in the area, which Arlington Heights has agreed to with the Bears.  No, I don’t think I want the bears paying for interchanges and new train stops because I don’t want them to have a say in any of that, I want them to be properly constructed so that we can’t ask ourselves if someone cut corners because they wanted to save money because they didn’t even want to build this s%*# anyways, they just wanted to build their stadium on their plot.

if you want to rage against the entire idea of building a stadium, have at it.  I’m not arguing with you about that.  Usually these things are boondoggles because of the public money asked for to build things that the owners should pay for themselves, like part of the stadium.  I’m operating under the assumption that they are being honest about paying for their own stadium.  Infrastructure upgrades are necessary at the city and state level for this, it is what it is.  That is the states property.  The increased traffic is business for everyone and they need it addressed.

 

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

It is would be criminally negligent to be the one community losing businesses because you are the only one NOT offering incentives. 

Let's say hypothetically that the Bears are indeed offering to spend up to $3B in private money for the new stadium development but the IL elected officials tell the McCaskeys that they can go to hell unless they pay for infrastructure improvements themselves and pretty much kill the deal.   Would it be that far-fetched to think Indiana officials could then work out a deal to let the Bears build their stadium complex somewhere along the Borman X-way?

That would be a huge black eye to Illinois and Cook County, but at least they got to tell off the McCaskeys!

And Lip does have a point that these expenditures benefit billionaires and the net benefit to the local economy for stadium projects is questionable, but at some point the whole idea that Chicago is a decay, crumbling, dying city/metro area becomes a self-fulling prophecy if there's no public expenditures for things like Millennium Park, new terminals at O'Hare, or infrastructure investments in mega projects.  

I get that there's a limit to this.  The whole Lincoln Yards debacle is an example and I'm certainly no fan of enriching people like the McCaskeys or Reinsdorf.  But, I don't expect the Bears to stay as tenants to the Chicago Park District at a stadium with limited seat capacity and cramped concourses forever.

Edited August 10 by 77 Hitmen

[nrockway]

10 hours ago, Paulie4Pres said:

Also, people need to stop watching Fox "News". Or just continue to s%*# yourself anytime you drive through a neighborhood where minorities live. 

The most dangerous parts of the country are pretty much all found in RURAL America. PER CAPITA is an important part of statistics. Crime is also down EVERYWHERE in this country, even if the media wants you to believe otherwise. The data is readily accessible to anyone who gives a damn. Try reading sometime. 

I feel like this is a white guy, internet take because it ignores the fact that, you know, the people who live in those neighborhoods don't exactly like living around crime either and being the victim of a stray bullet or mistaken identity. Black people are moving out of Chicago at a faster rate than any other group (this is from 2016, but it has accelerated, these people do some good research on it). Most of the victims of violent crime are Black. White North Siders are pretty much segregated from it, probably drive a car, and tend to have opinions like this. It's not a binary between "Chicago is hell on Earth" and "Chicago is just fine, nothin' to see here".

Per capita is a useful statistic, but think about how much a singular crime will affect a population of 2,000,000 vs a population of 5,000. Rural America is in fucking trouble too, we shouldn't ignore this. They don't have grocery stores either. There are no jobs unless the town has a mine or a furniture workshop or something. Drugs infect these communities. It's sad, you can go town by town in Wisconsin or wherever and see the places where methamphetamine has shown up.  Check it out, crime usually stems from a lack of jobs. You don't go robbing people when you're gainfully employed, do you? You make a good point that this has absolutely nothing to do with race but primarily economic anxiety.

Check out this report from the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority: there is a strong positive correlation between 'fear of crime' and 'social vulnerability'. AKA the people in wealthy neighborhoods think there is nothing wrong but those who are vulnerable might disagree with them.

There's the point about Fox News and there's a reason that propaganda works, because there's a shred of truth to it. Of course they misinterpret it for evil, hateful purposes, but you can't really address the propaganda and counter it if you just stick your fingers in your ears and pretend everything is just fine.

edit: anecdotally, I'm thinking about some meeting I attended years ago discussing development around the 43rd Green Line where a bunch of idealistic white people were talking about how the "no loitering" signs around the area were racist, but the Black business owners are like, "uh, we put those signs up". Consequently, that project went forward and now a bunch of whites live there in what is pretty much a gated community (go check out The Forum though, what a cool place. give them money).

Edited August 10 by nrockway

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

There have been a number of documented reports over the decades that show the "jobs created" part of stadiums is a myth. it is short lived for the most part.

How accurate those studies are, I don't know but there have been a number of them.

It was even written about in the book, "The Big Show" by Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann.

The question isn't the right question.  You should be asking what happens if you don't offer incentives.   This is exactly how Chicago recruited away a company like Boeing, and exactly why Motorola left the burbs.

[Paulie4Pres]

9 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

This is jobs created.  Simply put.  This is subsidizing growth in the area, which Arlington Heights has agreed to with the Bears.  No, I don’t think I want the bears paying for interchanges and new train stops because I don’t want them to have a say in any of that, I want them to be properly constructed so that we can’t ask ourselves if someone cut corners because they wanted to save money because they didn’t even want to build this s%*# anyways, they just wanted to build their stadium on their plot.

if you want to rage against the entire idea of building a stadium, have at it.  I’m not arguing with you about that.  Usually these things are boondoggles because of the public money asked for to build things that the owners should pay for themselves, like part of the stadium.  I’m operating under the assumption that they are being honest about paying for their own stadium.  Infrastructure upgrades are necessary at the city and state level for this, it is what it is.  That is the states property.  The increased traffic is business for everyone and they need it addressed.

Why do people who already have jobs, and likely much better jobs than these theoretical "jobs created" from the Bears moving, give a s%*# about this? I sure don't. All I know is my taxes are going to go up and I won't see any benefit whatsoever as a result. It all goes in the Bears' pockets.

 

Also, this "jobs created" by new stadiums has proven to be bullshit repeatedly.

[Kyyle23]

14 minutes ago, Paulie4Pres said:

Why do people who already have jobs, and likely much better jobs than these theoretical "jobs created" from the Bears moving, give a s%*# about this? I sure don't. All I know is my taxes are going to go up and I won't see any benefit whatsoever as a result. It all goes in the Bears' pockets.

 

Also, this "jobs created" by new stadiums has proven to be bullshit repeatedly.

They are gonna pay a lot of people to build a lot of s%*# in and around that property once this gets going.  Plus the entertainment district they intend to build.  If you dont think that is created jobs, I dont know what to tell you.  Companies all over the Chicagoland area have been positioning themselves for bids as soon as this became a reality.

Again, if you have a problem with all stadiums, that’s fine whatever.  I get that, all I’m saying here is no the Bears shouldn’t make decisions on necessary infrastructure around this park, that they do not own.  
 

 

[greg775]

14 hours ago, Paulie4Pres said:

The data is readily accessible to anyone who gives a damn. Try reading sometime. 

ls the data correct though? Or it is Soros-sized

Edited August 10 by greg775

[77 Hitmen]

9 hours ago, WBWSF said:

Nobody seems to be talking about this but going to a White Sox gam is much cheaper than going to a Cubs, Bears, Bulls or  Blackhawks game.

That's because many people don't want to pay money to see a historically bad team play in a forgettable stadium in an area without much else to do.  People don't always equate "cheaper" for a good value on their entertainment dollar.   

The Bulls and Blackhawks are bad too, but have half as many home games and half as many seats per game to fill in a climate controlled facility.  The Bears are the NFL and will sell out their 10 home dates a year no matter what (just like most other NFL teams).   And we all know all the factors of why the Cubs always draw fans.

 

Edited August 10 by 77 Hitmen

[Kyyle23]

1 hour ago, greg775 said:

ls the data correct though? Or it is Soros-sized

This is garbage.  Stick to what you said, and don’t talk politics 

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, greg775 said:

ls the data correct though? Or it is Soros-sized

In a nice consumable small sized package so that even people who don't want to actually read something can understand it?

[caulfield12]

2 hours ago, greg775 said:

ls the data correct though? Or it is Soros-sized

Joe Rogan-sized?

[soxfan18]

22 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

I'm not. 

I think its criminally stupid for state/county/city to bail out and help billionaires.

The Bears and the Sox already got one stadium built on someone else's dime.

I ask again when does the BS stop?

But the state isn't building them new stadiums. They're paying for the infrastructure that their responsible for to turn empty, non-tax revenue generating land into tax revenue generating land. 

Would you rather Arlington Park and The 78 just sit empty with nothing happening on them, not contributing anything? I guess from your position on your couch in Idaho it doesn't matter and this isn't about anything more than sports, but at least try to look at the big picture a bit. 

[greg775]

3 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

This is garbage.  Stick to what you said, and don’t talk politics 

I knew greg would get called out for drifting to politics. Why did I go there? Check the thread and there are some political comments in here. I drifted there in response figuring I'd prolly get gregged. I was crossing my fingers I wouldn't get suspended.

Edited August 11 by greg775

[Lip Man 1]

1 hour ago, soxfan18 said:

But the state isn't building them new stadiums. They're paying for the infrastructure that their responsible for to turn empty, non-tax revenue generating land into tax revenue generating land. 

Would you rather Arlington Park and The 78 just sit empty with nothing happening on them, not contributing anything? I guess from your position on your couch in Idaho it doesn't matter and this isn't about anything more than sports, but at least try to look at the big picture a bit. 

I am looking at the big picture eventually the majority cost is going to filter down to the tax payers in some way shape or form. Let's not forgot they are still trying to pay off the Soldier Field renovations. 

We'll see what happens but given the state of the nation right now and the way things are going the politicians are going to have to make a very strong case somehow to convince an angry public to support giving benefits and millions of dollars to the McCaskey family and Reinsdorf both of whom already were given benefits totaling millions is sweetheart deals and leases. 

And from what has been published in the Sun-Times and the Tribune the majority of the politicians who have gone on the record, have said they are against giving them anything (not being willing to risk their own political future.)

The Bears and Sox may either have to face reality and figure out a way to pay for everything or shut up, keep making their money, putting out garbage teams and remain in their current locations. 

Time will tell.  

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

I am looking at the big picture eventually the majority cost is going to filter down to the tax payers in some way shape or form. Let's not forgot they are still trying to pay off the Soldier Field renovations. 

We'll see what happens but given the state of the nation right now and the way things are going the politicians are going to have to make a very strong case somehow to convince an angry public to support giving benefits and millions of dollars to the McCaskey family and Reinsdorf both of whom already were given benefits totaling millions is sweetheart deals and leases. 

And from what has been published in the Sun-Times and the Tribune the majority of the politicians who have gone on the record, have said they are against giving them anything (not being willing to risk their own political future.)

The Bears and Sox may either have to face reality and figure out a way to pay for everything or shut up, keep making their money, putting out garbage teams and remain in their current locations. 

Time will tell.  

Taxes are too low in Idaho!!! 

Live free or Jermaine die trying.

Edited August 11 by caulfield12