fathom Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 9 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: I was under the impression that was his brother. I do expect there will be more spending for sure, I just don't know that we are looking at a Stearns situation either. Yes his brother, but always assumed they have similar philosophies 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 (edited) 3 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: I was under the impression that was his brother. I do expect there will be more spending for sure, I just don't know that we are looking at a Stearns situation either. Justin is a minority owner of the Suns with brother Mat being majority owner. I believe brother Mat is expected to be a minority owner of the White Sox. In other words, the reverse of the Suns ownership. I'm not sure how that works as far as using their combined fortunes to operate the team and how that currently works in Phoenix. Just like the 2025 Sox were almost certainly going to be an improvement over the 121 loss team, the Sox under the Ishbias are almost certainly going to be bigger spenders that the Sox under JR - not just on major league payroll, but on the organization as a whole. In other words, it's a very low bar to clear for the incoming ownership. In the end though, if the Sox are to become consistent top-tier, big-market spenders, the new owners - even if they're billionaires - will want to improve revenue streams for the franchise. That's why Justin Ishbia is telling the Pope about his intentions for a new stadium and why he'll likely pay for most of it privately if that's what it takes to get one built. Edited November 20 by 77 Hitmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 It’s kinda wild that our owners are telling the pope of future white sox plans, lmao. I’m not a religious fella but I understand the meaning and importance of the pope and having one with a direct connection to Chicago is crazy, and to see the overall reaction to him has been equally as crazy. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 14 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: We will see when he is the guy writing the checks. It is an easy thing to say now. I see your point but he is businessman not some guy spouting off on a fan forum. He knows the risk reward of what he is saying. My guess is he is more aggressive than Ricketts and there is something in the works either renovating New Comiskey or moving somewhere in the Loop area. If the Bears pay off the bonds a 40K seat venue to replace Soldier Field would be ideal. Some form of Chicago leadership to replace Soldier Field with something that could compete with the Bears venue in Arlington Heights while the Sox are main tenant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 35 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said: I see your point but he is businessman not some guy spouting off on a fan forum. He knows the risk reward of what he is saying. My guess is he is more aggressive than Ricketts and there is something in the works either renovating New Comiskey or moving somewhere in the Loop area. If the Bears pay off the bonds a 40K seat venue to replace Soldier Field would be ideal. Some form of Chicago leadership to replace Soldier Field with something that could compete with the Bears venue in Arlington Heights while the Sox are main tenant. There is no way they are gonna put a Sox stadium on the soldier field site. Bonds or no bonds. And honestly they need to just concentrate on it being a historical building/site, have some international soccer games there, have their high school football games and playoffs there, and college football. Chicago Park district can f*** off, they wanted to control it all, now they can. I don’t want the Sox to be involved in that at all 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan18 Posted November 20 Author Share Posted November 20 2 hours ago, Harry Chappas said: I see your point but he is businessman not some guy spouting off on a fan forum. He knows the risk reward of what he is saying. My guess is he is more aggressive than Ricketts and there is something in the works either renovating New Comiskey or moving somewhere in the Loop area. If the Bears pay off the bonds a 40K seat venue to replace Soldier Field would be ideal. Some form of Chicago leadership to replace Soldier Field with something that could compete with the Bears venue in Arlington Heights while the Sox are main tenant. Soldier Field is in an AWFUL location. It can't be overstated how bad the experience is getting in and out of there. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 Yeah, I can't see anything else bigger ever being done on that site. If anything they tear down the Bears monstrosity and restore it to it's historic self. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 Hard to really say someone's spending tendencies in the NBA since it's a capped league. There's some stuff on the fringe (how nice is the team plane, etc.) and every now and then a team is good enough that owner has to make tough decisions about staying above the apron. But the aggressive moves after Mat Ishbia took over the Suns just looked like management being aggressive and not ownership shelling out money. Had it worked out better, we might have learned about Ishbia's tolerance for paying cap penalties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 2 hours ago, Kyyle23 said: There is no way they are gonna put a Sox stadium on the soldier field site. Bonds or no bonds. And honestly they need to just concentrate on it being a historical building/site, have some international soccer games there, have their high school football games and playoffs there, and college football. Chicago Park district can f*** off, they wanted to control it all, now they can. I don’t want the Sox to be involved in that at all I don't think they would. Ishbia is going to want to own the new stadium. Working with the Friends of the Park is nothing but a disaster. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 29 minutes ago, soxfan18 said: Soldier Field is in an AWFUL location. It can't be overstated how bad the experience is getting in and out of there. Bingo. That'd be a terrible location for a Sox stadium. I'm not sure why it keeps getting suggested as a new Sox home. It would be a traffic nightmare and it's a 20 minute walk to the nearest L stop. They'd also need to put at least a retractable roof on the thing with those ice-cold winds blowing right off the lake in the early part of the season. That could add a few hundred million to the price of the structure. Not much night life around it and the Friends of the Park would never allow an entertainment district to be built next to it either. They'd be much better off staying at 35th & Shields than moving to the Soldier Field site. If Ishbia is really going to bankroll a new stadium, it's either going to be at the 78 or on the site of Old Comiskey Park with an entertainment district around it. If he's really going to privately finance a new stadium, I'd have to think the 78 site would be his first choice. But we'll see, it's not my money. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 12 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: Bingo. That'd be a terrible location for a Sox stadium. I'm not sure why it keeps getting suggested as a new Sox home. It would be a traffic nightmare and it's a 20 minute walk to the nearest L stop. They'd also need to put at least a retractable roof on the thing with those ice-cold winds blowing right off the lake in the early part of the season. That could add a few hundred million to the price of the structure. Not much night life around it and the Friends of the Park would never allow an entertainment district to be built next to it either. They'd be much better off staying at 35th & Shields than moving to the Soldier Field site. If Ishbia is really going to bankroll a new stadium, it's either going to be at the 78 or on the site of Old Comiskey Park with an entertainment district around it. If he's really going to privately finance a new stadium, I'd have to think the 78 site would be his first choice. But we'll see, it's not my money. 100% agree here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/11/20/chicago-bears-poll-stadium/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NO!!MARY!!! Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 20 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said: Actually his brother is the majority owner of the Suns but he is involved. And yes, they made the moves to get guys like Beal and Durant to go along with Booker. It didn't work out but they at least tried At least they tried. Ok. I’m sure if that happened here fans would say “at least they tried.” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 3 minutes ago, NO!!MARY!!! said: At least they tried. Ok. I’m sure if that happened here fans would say “at least they tried.” Considering JR doesn't even do that any more, realistically trying to win would be met with open arms by the fan base in my opinion. It's not like the Suns were signing stiffs and has-been's. It simply didn't work out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxrwhite Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 7 hours ago, Kyyle23 said: There is no way they are gonna put a Sox stadium on the soldier field site. Bonds or no bonds. And honestly they need to just concentrate on it being a historical building/site, have some international soccer games there, have their high school football games and playoffs there, and college football. Chicago Park district can f*** off, they wanted to control it all, now they can. I don’t want the Sox to be involved in that at all Its a very interesting notion puting the Sox on the site of Soldier Field, but it's very cold and windy right on the lakeshore. Didn't the indians play on the shore of lake Erie in Memorial Stadium? It was not a popular spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 20 Share Posted November 20 1 hour ago, soxrwhite said: Its a very interesting notion puting the Sox on the site of Soldier Field, but it's very cold and windy right on the lakeshore. Didn't the indians play on the shore of lake Erie in Memorial Stadium? It was not a popular spot. 8 to 10 times a season is fine to go to Soldier Field. The Sox season ticket base would get hammered harder than 121 loss seasons if they played 81 games there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 2 hours ago, soxrwhite said: Its a very interesting notion puting the Sox on the site of Soldier Field, but it's very cold and windy right on the lakeshore. Didn't the indians play on the shore of lake Erie in Memorial Stadium? It was not a popular spot. Candlestick Park as well. The Mistake by the Lake that CLE stadium was universally referred to... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 On 11/20/2025 at 11:11 AM, southsider2k5 said: 100% agree here. I seriously can't think of any viable options for the Sox other than the current site or the 78. Anything else would be a step down from 35th & Shields. The Soldier Field and Michael Reese sites are NOT better locations than the current site. I know some fans will insist that they should move to the suburbs - Arlington Park (w/ the Bears) or somewhere SW like Tinley Park, but I really don't see that as a successful option even if it would be more convenient for a segment of the fan base. I will be shocked if Ishbia decides to pour $1B into a stadium way out in the suburbs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 A lot of people in the know don't think 2 stadiums on the 78 is feasable from a space perspective, especially with all the add ons requred for a new place today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 25 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: I seriously can't think of any viable options for the Sox other than the current site or the 78. Anything else would be a step down from 35th & Shields. The Soldier Field and Michael Reese sites are NOT better locations than the current site. I know some fans will insist that they should move to the suburbs - Arlington Park (w/ the Bears) or somewhere SW like Tinley Park, but I really don't see that as a successful option even if it would be more convenient for a segment of the fan base. I will be shocked if Ishbia decides to pour $1B into a stadium way out in the suburbs. Rosemont would be the only suburb where a new stadium would do well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 6 minutes ago, WBWSF said: Rosemont would be the only suburb where a new stadium would do well. Why Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 (edited) 6 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said: Why Because fans want to go to an MLB stadium where loud jets fly overhead every few minutes? Edited November 22 by 77 Hitmen 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 1 hour ago, WBWSF said: Rosemont would be the only suburb where a new stadium would do well. The is the complete opposite area of the White Sox fan base. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 (edited) 1 hour ago, Dick Allen said: A lot of people in the know don't think 2 stadiums on the 78 is feasable from a space perspective, especially with all the add ons requred for a new place today. Who are the people in the know? City officials? Land developers? I'm not questioning your info, but I'm curious because the Sox sure seem to be still talking as if they still have aspirations for a stadium at the 78. I think it was Brooks Boyer who said so in a press release this summer. The soccer stadium will take up about 10 acres and some other MLB parks take up about 15 acres. Of course, as you said, there are other things that need to go around such facilities, so it's not as simple as adding up acreage until you get to 62 (the total acres at the 78 site). Edited November 21 by 77 Hitmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted November 21 Share Posted November 21 29 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: Who are the people in the know? City officials? Land developers? I'm not questioning your info, but I'm curious because the Sox sure seem to be still talking as if they still have aspirations for a stadium at the 78. I think it was Brooks Boyer who said so in a press release this summer. The soccer stadium will take up about 10 acres and some other MLB parks take up about 15 acres. Of course, as you said, there are other things that need to go around such facilities, so it's not as simple as adding up acreage until you get to 62 (the total acres at the 78 site). I've seen 2 developers, a politician, and Our Chuck just mentioned it the other day, but said he was then told it could work. 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.