southsider2k5 Posted November 25 Share Posted November 25 1 hour ago, The Mighty Mite said: I agree that 35th and Shields has never been the greatest spot for the White Sox, they drew well in the early years of the franchise and again in the Go Go years. IMHO biggest problem has been that there has been no period of sustained winning baseball except again in the Go Go years but even then we only had 1 trip to the World Series in those 17 straight winning seasons. They win the division once in awhile, lose in the first round of the playoffs and then we have to go through 5-10 of mediocre baseball only to see the same scenario. Meanwhile I’m pretty sure the fan base because of Reinsdorf’s miserly ways has dwindled down pretty low to where most of the metro population could care less about the White Sox. The only hope right now is Ishbia but there are no guarantees, I thought when Reinsdorf took over in 1981 that we would have a premier franchise rivaling the Yankees, Dodgers and Cardinals, boy was I ever wrong. This is kind of the point. If you aren't going to win every year, something other than winning has to be a draw to your stadium. Teams all over baseball have figured this out and made it work. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NO!!MARY!!! Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 5 hours ago, Tnetennba said: Parking has been discussed so many times, yet the question still arises because some just can’t fathom a ballpark without a sea of parking lots. The Cubs have managed to survive just fine without acres of parking as people became more car dependent and more people moved to the suburbs over the years. The Sox ballpark model is antiquated and 30 years behind the times, and is one of many reasons why they have struggled with attendance. Yet some just can’t or refuse to connect the dots. The future of the franchise hinges on changing the way the org operates once new ownership takes over, and it also means changing the fan experience before and after games to meet what consumers demand now. That simply cannot be done without a new park that caters to those interests, or drastically altering the area surrounding Rate Field. The later of which feels like a bandaid more than a long term solution. I remember when new owners came in 1981 and changed the way the organization operated. They were greeted with anger, hostility, vows to never go near the park again, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 (edited) 20 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said: I agree that 35th and Shields has never been the greatest spot for the White Sox, they drew well in the early years of the franchise and again in the Go Go years. IMHO biggest problem has been that there has been no period of sustained winning baseball except again in the Go Go years but even then we only had 1 trip to the World Series in those 17 straight winning seasons. They win the division once in awhile, lose in the first round of the playoffs and then we have to go through 5-10 of mediocre baseball only to see the same scenario. Meanwhile I’m pretty sure the fan base because of Reinsdorf’s miserly ways has dwindled down pretty low to where most of the metro population could care less about the White Sox. The only hope right now is Ishbia but there are no guarantees, I thought when Reinsdorf took over in 1981 that we would have a premier franchise rivaling the Yankees, Dodgers and Cardinals, boy was I ever wrong. Good points. It won't matter if they build a new stadium and/or move to a new location if the new owners continue to run this organization the way Reinsdorf has (especially over the last 20 years). Ishbia and his team need to rebuild the organization into a competent one, otherwise the Sox will continue to be an afterthought in Chicago no matter where they play. Honestly, I'd be thrilled if the Sox could somehow figure out a way to get consistently good attendance, win back market share, draw more than just die-hard generational fans, and generate robust revenue streams at the current location just by being better on the field. This would have to continue through ups and downs that most franchises go through, not just a short-lived boost by winning another pennant only to have attendance slide again the moment the team doesn't make the playoffs. I just think they'd continue to have nagging attendance issues with the current "it's not as bad as people think" ballpark and its mostly parking lots surroundings. Could they find lasting success by building Comiskey III across the street and turning the area into a thriving entertainment district to attract today's fans? I have serious doubts, but I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong. Edited November 26 by 77 Hitmen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 (edited) 43 minutes ago, NO!!MARY!!! said: I remember when new owners came in 1981 and changed the way the organization operated. They were greeted with anger, hostility, vows to never go near the park again, etc. You mean the same Jerry and Eddie who almost immediately bad-mouthed and alienated Bill Veeck, insulted Sox fans by vowing to get rid of the riff raff that was currently attending Sox games, told Sox fans the team was moving to pay TV and that they'd better get used to it, and let their popular broadcaster jump ship to the Cubs? You forgot to mention that part of the story. Edited November 26 by 77 Hitmen 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 7 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: This is kind of the point. If you aren't going to win every year, something other than winning has to be a draw to your stadium. Teams all over baseball have figured this out and made it work. I'd say all but a handful of teams have figured this out. The ones with non-descript "nothing wrong with it" stadiums that don't have much else to do around them can probably be counted with one hand. The business model that JR created for himself 35 years ago at New Comiskey is sorely outdated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said: I'd say all but a handful of teams have figured this out. The ones with non-descript "nothing wrong with it" stadiums that don't have much else to do around them can probably be counted with one hand. The business model that JR created for himself 35 years ago at New Comiskey is sorely outdated. Royals have this problem, but also have Arrow head in the same complex with miles of parking lots and at one point a Taco Bell, FCA building and Drury Inn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcq Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 14 hours ago, Tnetennba said: Parking has been discussed so many times, yet the question still arises because some just can’t fathom a ballpark without a sea of parking lots. The Cubs have managed to survive just fine without acres of parking as people became more car dependent and more people moved to the suburbs over the years. The Sox ballpark model is antiquated and 30 years behind the times, and is one of many reasons why they have struggled with attendance. Yet some just can’t or refuse to connect the dots. The future of the franchise hinges on changing the way the org operates once new ownership takes over, and it also means changing the fan experience before and after games to meet what consumers demand now. That simply cannot be done without a new park that caters to those interests, or drastically altering the area surrounding Rate Field. The later of which feels like a bandaid more than a long term solution. Hard to believe people don't give a hoot about the Sox. zzzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxrwhite Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 5 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: I'd say all but a handful of teams have figured this out. The ones with non-descript "nothing wrong with it" stadiums that don't have much else to do around them can probably be counted with one hand. The business model that JR created for himself 35 years ago at New Comiskey is sorely outdated. It was outdated the day it opened. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 9 hours ago, caulfield12 said: Royals have this problem, but also have Arrow head in the same complex with miles of parking lots and at one point a Taco Bell, FCA building and Drury Inn... Yes, but the Royals intend to leave Kauffman Stadium for a new ballpark at one of 3 possible sites. No matter where they land, it'll be a ballpark that's either downtown or built along with an entertainment district. https://www.kmbc.com/article/royals-fan-feedback-survey-future-stadium-kansas-city-2025/69240460 https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/46030983/mlb-ballparks-future-stadiums-kansas-city-royals-downtown-suburbs-village-model With two states (and 2 different counties on the Missouri side) pitted against each other, I think the chances of them getting something done are pretty good. The A's and Rays will end up with a new stadium/entertainment district development, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 “When the [parking] lease comes due in the next few years, there’s a chance to rethink the entire idea — hopefully with the White Sox involved,” Wood said. “We should look at it with a different set of lens, and say, ‘That’s prime real estate that’s really well serviced by transit, and we should do something with it.’ In terms of the six Chicago Model principles, there’s nothing that couldn’t happen at Rate Field.” https://chicago.suntimes.com/real-estate/2025/11/25/chicago-architecture-center-report-urban-stadiums-development Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 17 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: Good points. It won't matter if they build a new stadium and/or move to a new location if the new owners continue to run this organization the way Reinsdorf has (especially over the last 20 years). Ishbia and his team need to rebuild the organization into a competent one, otherwise the Sox will continue to be an afterthought in Chicago no matter where they play. Honestly, I'd be thrilled if the Sox could somehow figure out a way to get consistently good attendance, win back market share, draw more than just die-hard generational fans, and generate robust revenue streams at the current location just by being better on the field. This would have to continue through ups and downs that most franchises go through, not just a short-lived boost by winning another pennant only to have attendance slide again the moment the team doesn't make the playoffs. I just think they'd continue to have nagging attendance issues with the current "it's not as bad as people think" ballpark and its mostly parking lots surroundings. Could they find lasting success by building Comiskey III across the street and turning the area into a thriving entertainment district to attract today's fans? I have serious doubts, but I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong. It would take longer than the average bar/restaurant lifespan for any entertainment district at the current location to take hold at this point IMO. The novelty of a new park at 35th & Shields alone won’t be enough without winning baseball to back it up, and even then I have my doubts. Bridgeport just won’t ever have the same draw that Lincoln Park, Lakeview/Wrigleyville, or the South Loop has for tourists/visitors seeking entertainment not directly linked to a baseball game. Same for any suburban location. For a Sox ballpark village concept to work, a new park needs to be in a location that already draws people in. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NO!!MARY!!! Posted November 26 Share Posted November 26 18 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said: You mean the same Jerry and Eddie who almost immediately bad-mouthed and alienated Bill Veeck, insulted Sox fans by vowing to get rid of the riff raff that was currently attending Sox games, told Sox fans the team was moving to pay TV and that they'd better get used to it, and let their popular broadcaster jump ship to the Cubs? You forgot to mention that part of the story. Well, Bill Veeck himself called Comiskey Park “the world’s largest outdoor saloon” and there were drunken brawls in the stands. So I honestly can’t blame them for wanting to clean the place up. As for Harry, they made him an offer. He took less to go to the Cubs. I don’t hold them responsible for that. Caray didn’t want to work for them. Period. Einhorn was also a TV executive, he thought he could come in and be a loudmouth and bully everyone like he was used to doing in the world of television. It got so bad a PR firm they hired eventually told him to take a low profile. I did not forget any of that. I just think it’s only a matter of time before the new ownership says or does something to piss people off and make them vow never to go to the park again. It happened with Beck and the Allyns too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted November 28 Share Posted November 28 On 11/26/2025 at 1:54 PM, NO!!MARY!!! said: Well, Bill Veeck himself called Comiskey Park “the world’s largest outdoor saloon” and there were drunken brawls in the stands. So I honestly can’t blame them for wanting to clean the place up. As for Harry, they made him an offer. He took less to go to the Cubs. I don’t hold them responsible for that. Caray didn’t want to work for them. Period. Einhorn was also a TV executive, he thought he could come in and be a loudmouth and bully everyone like he was used to doing in the world of television. It got so bad a PR firm they hired eventually told him to take a low profile. I did not forget any of that. I just think it’s only a matter of time before the new ownership says or does something to piss people off and make them vow never to go to the park again. It happened with Beck and the Allyns too. That's a bit of a defeatist attitude and, I know, I know, why wouldn't a Sox fan have a defeatist attitude. Sounds like something JR would say - he's not tone-deaf and out of touch, Sox fans are and they'll turn on the next owner no matter who it is. I know most sports team owners are unpopular to some degree, but I find it hard to believe that it's the Sox fans who are at fault and were being unfair for turning on Jerry Reinsdorf and Eddie Einhorn and that they're sure to apply the same level of vilification to the next owner. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted November 28 Share Posted November 28 41 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: That's a bit of a defeatist attitude and, I know, I know, why wouldn't a Sox fan have a defeatist attitude. Sounds like something JR would say - he's not tone-deaf and out of touch, Sox fans are and they'll turn on the next owner no matter who it is. I know most sports team owners are unpopular to some degree, but I find it hard to believe that it's the Sox fans who are at fault and were being unfair for turning on Jerry Reinsdorf and Eddie Einhorn and that they're sure to apply the same level of vilification to the next owner. At least Ishbia with the Suns has totally changed his modus operandi. He seemingly puts the fans first or at least speaks to their wants. JR has become more stubborn and entrenched in his bunker...scoring at the very idea of being in the Ohtani market while being totally blind to the marketing value of the Japanese players or likes of Bryce Harper. You have to spend money to make money. A cliche, sure, but truer words were never spoken. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted Wednesday at 08:17 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 08:17 PM (edited) On 11/28/2025 at 2:38 PM, caulfield12 said: At least Ishbia with the Suns has totally changed his modus operandi. He seemingly puts the fans first or at least speaks to their wants. JR has become more stubborn and entrenched in his bunker...scoring at the very idea of being in the Ohtani market while being totally blind to the marketing value of the Japanese players or likes of Bryce Harper. You have to spend money to make money. A cliche, sure, but truer words were never spoken. The Ishbia brothers presumably are not idiots. In spending somewhere close to $2B for the White Sox, they surely know that this franchise has serious troubles and a change in modus operandi is a MUST for them. They also know that the Cubs have become even more dominant in Chicago, that Wrigley Field is more popular than ever after the Ricketts renovations, and that Rate Field is one of the more obsolete stadiums in the league at this point. He also knows that, while the Sox have a hard-core group of die hard fans that are as passionate as any fan base, the fanbase is not growing and, if anything, market share is probably shrinking. It's no accident that he told the Pope his intentions to put the Sox in a new stadium. He wouldn't have said this with the press listening if the dream of a new stadium was unlikely. He also knows very well that the state isn't handing them $1B for the stadium, either, so that leads me to believe he's looking to privately finance the stadium. Turning this team into a winner on the field is paramount, but at this point it has to be more than that unless the Sox can somehow win several pennants in quick succession. They've made mistakes with the Suns, but that doesn't mean they can't learn from their mistakes. At any rate, having them take over the White Sox seems like the best option possible that I can think of - certainly better than keeping the team in the Reinsdorf family after Jerry passes. Edited Wednesday at 08:18 PM by 77 Hitmen 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted Wednesday at 09:09 PM Share Posted Wednesday at 09:09 PM The price tag for the Fire's soccer stadium is up by $100M and now is listed as $750M. But there's no mention of Mansueto backing away from his stadium plan. Levy was announced today as having all the concessions at the new Fire stadium. “They’re going to work to engage local culinary talent, local restaurateurs, to bring some of the flavors from around the different 77 neighborhoods into the stadium,” https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/12/03/levy-food-service-new-chicago-fire-stadium/ 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.