53 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Project in the same location without the balpark village does pretty much nothing for changing the future trajectoru of the team.

Forward/outside the box thinking is actually a good thing.

Because what they've been doing the last forty five years certainly hasn't been working out.

FIFY

3 hours ago, DFAthewave69420 said:

Heard a rumor from the construction circle Ishbia is a madman (in a good way). This project will be nothing short of perfect.

STEP 1: find out how Jerry Reinsdorf would approach this project and do the exact opposite.

The challenge with that, of course, is that Jerry is still team owner and will very much be involved in this.

The good news here is that, if true, it's yet another sign that Ishbia really is serious about building a new stadium. Not that the news about him working on buying the Amtrak maintenance yard across the river from the 78 wasn't a strong indication of his intentions.

Here's an interview with state rep Kam Buckner from a few days ago that suggests that progress is being made with the Bears stadium legislation.

On 3/27/2026 at 10:52 PM, mmmmmbeeer said:

Fenway is such an overrated dump. Nostalgia aside, it’s awful.

Kauffman was stale as could be outside of the waterfalls. I haven’t been since the new updates have been made, so maybe it’s much better?

Truist should be higher. The Battery gets all the love but that’s a really cool ballpark inside.

I agree about Fenway. Wrigley is highly overrated, too. But it is what it is - most people outside the White Sox fan base overlook their faults and consider going to those 2 ballparks a must-see, bucket list experience. We Sox fans have been saying for years that those places are overrated, but it's like trying to shout something right next to a huge waterfall.

As much as we hate it, it's obvious that most paying customers these days will take those faults in exchange for a ballpark with lots of character in an area with lots of nightlife.

Edited Thursday at 06:05 PM2 days by 77 Hitmen

23 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

I agree about Fenway. Wrigley is highly overrated, too. But it is what it is - most people outside the White Sox fan base overlook their faults and consider going to those 2 ballparks a must-see, bucket list experience. We Sox fans have been saying for years that those places are overrated, but it's like trying to shout something right next to a huge waterfall.

As much as we hate it, it's obvious that most paying customers these days will take those faults in exchange for a ballpark with lots of character in an area with lots of nightlife.

Old is a thing. Not sure if reminds certain people of their childhoods, or some sort of idyllic fantasy of old timey baseball, but it is definitely a thing to a LOT of people.

1 minute ago, southsider2k5 said:

Old is a thing. Not sure if reminds certain people of their childhoods, or some sort of idyllic fantasy of old timey baseball, but it is definitely a thing to a LOT of people.

Nostalgia is one hell of a drug

Not sure I understand the Wrigley and Fenway hate. What about them makes them overrated?

Season tickets to either obviously lessens the charm as you deal with seating, sight line, etc issues on a regular basis, but I always think of ballpark rankings based on relatively few visits rather than what it would be like to regularly attend games there.

Wrigley and Fenway are both really unique experiences and I totally get why they’re bucket list destinations and always near the top of lists.

1 hour ago, DoUEvenShift said:

Nostalgia is one hell of a drug

No one cares about nostalgia anymore. Its a thing of the past!

2 hours ago, Snopek said:

Not sure I understand the Wrigley and Fenway hate. What about them makes them overrated?

Season tickets to either obviously lessens the charm as you deal with seating, sight line, etc issues on a regular basis, but I always think of ballpark rankings based on relatively few visits rather than what it would be like to regularly attend games there.

Wrigley and Fenway are both really unique experiences and I totally get why they’re bucket list destinations and always near the top of lists.

I've never been to Fenway. Been to Wrigley a handful of times for crosstown series. And honestly, I had a great time at each and every one. I'll probably get flack for this but it is a cool place to catch a game. And the ballpark tour is pretty cool.

"As much as we hate it, it's obvious that most paying customers these days will take those faults in exchange for a ballpark with lots of character in an area with lots of nightlife."

The demographics around Wrigley include a lot of younger couples and singles. That really works well with the bars, night clubs and night life in that area. I don't think that dynamic (between younger fans and a hip area) can be replicated at the 78 or across the canal at the Amtrak site. Of course, bars and restaurants could be built anywhere but Wrigley and Wrigleyville are unique. I'm too old for that scene any more but I once was, so I get it.

6 hours ago, Snopek said:

Not sure I understand the Wrigley and Fenway hate. What about them makes them overrated?

Season tickets to either obviously lessens the charm as you deal with seating, sight line, etc issues on a regular basis, but I always think of ballpark rankings based on relatively few visits rather than what it would be like to regularly attend games there.

Wrigley and Fenway are both really unique experiences and I totally get why they’re bucket list destinations and always near ieve. top of lists.

The only unique thing about Wrigley is a brick wall behind the ivy. It's overrated I believe.

41 minutes ago, tray said:

"As much as we hate it, it's obvious that most paying customers these days will take those faults in exchange for a ballpark with lots of character in an area with lots of nightlife."

The demographics around Wrigley include a lot of younger couples and singles. That really works well with the bars, night clubs and night life in that area. I don't think that dynamic (between younger fans and a hip area) can be replicated at the 78 or across the canal at the Amtrak site. Of course, bars and restaurants could be built anywhere but Wrigley and Wrigleyville are unique. I'm too old for that scene any more but I once was, so I get it.

They are doing it in suburban Atlanta. The South Loop can handle it.

8 hours ago, Snopek said:

Not sure I understand the Wrigley and Fenway hate. What about them makes them overrated?

Season tickets to either obviously lessens the charm as you deal with seating, sight line, etc issues on a regular basis, but I always think of ballpark rankings based on relatively few visits rather than what it would be like to regularly attend games there.

Wrigley and Fenway are both really unique experiences and I totally get why they’re bucket list destinations and always near the top of lists.

6 hours ago, Ducksnort said:

I've never been to Fenway. Been to Wrigley a handful of times for crosstown series. And honestly, I had a great time at each and every one. I'll probably get flack for this but it is a cool place to catch a game. And the ballpark tour is pretty cool.

When I say Wrigley is overrated, I admit that it's my Sox fan bias showing. I realized long ago that most people outside of our fan base think seeing a game at Wrigley is a great experience, especially after the Ricketts renovated the place.....and that the "we Sox fans are right and the rest of the world is wrong" and the "people hate Rate Field because the world is against the White Sox" point of view isn't very sensible or realistic.

If Ishbia does pay to get a new ballpark built, and does it right, can you imagine Chicago having both a Petco-like or PNC-like ballpark with the skyline as a backdrop as well as the iconic ballpark on the North Side both within the city limits? That would be great for the city. It might even help take some of the sting of the Bears moving to Arlington Heights.

Edited Friday at 05:08 AM2 days by 77 Hitmen

I stopped going to Wrigley Field years ago. My last time there was in 2002. It took us over a hour and a half to get out of their parking lot. I'm told their parking costs $65 now. Its so expensive to go there. Its not worth it to me anymore.

21 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

Old is a thing. Not sure if reminds certain people of their childhoods, or some sort of idyllic fantasy of old timey baseball, but it is definitely a thing to a LOT of people.

21 hours ago, DoUEvenShift said:

Nostalgia is one hell of a drug

If there's one sport that has nostalgia woven into its fabric, it's baseball. That's something that I never thought Jerry and Eddie really appreciated after they bought the White Sox.

Its stadiums are rather unique among major sports too as the dimensions of each ballpark is different and you potentially have an impressive backdrop that can be viewed from many of the seats and even from the playing field.

46 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

If there's one sport that has nostalgia woven into its fabric, it's baseball. That's something that I never thought Jerry and Eddie really appreciated after they bought the White Sox.

Its stadiums are rather unique among major sports too as the dimensions of each ballpark is different and you potentially have an impressive backdrop that can be viewed from many of the seats and even from the playing field.

I think JR actually does appreciate it.

The problem is that appreciation is focused only on the Brooklyn Dodgers.

6 hours ago, WBWSF said:

I stopped going to Wrigley Field years ago. My last time there was in 2002. It took us over a hour and a half to get out of their parking lot. I'm told their parking costs $65 now. Its so expensive to go there. Its not worth it to me anymore.

Take the L just like one might do with Sox games. Never park at Wrigley games. But yes, tickets are expensive. But honestly not terrible if you get upper deck seats, and you can get some pretty decent upper deck seats at Wrigley with a good view of the field.

On 4/3/2026 at 1:07 AM, 77 Hitmen said:

When I say Wrigley is overrated, I admit that it's my Sox fan bias showing. I realized long ago that most people outside of our fan base think seeing a game at Wrigley is a great experience, especially after the Ricketts renovated the place.....and that the "we Sox fans are right and the rest of the world is wrong" and the "people hate Rate Field because the world is against the White Sox" point of view isn't very sensible or realistic.

If Ishbia does pay to get a new ballpark built, and does it right, can you imagine Chicago having both a Petco-like or PNC-like ballpark with the skyline as a backdrop as well as the iconic ballpark on the North Side both within the city limits? That would be great for the city. It might even help take some of the sting of the Bears moving to Arlington Heights.

He won’t do it right because whatever happens will get criticized. People will move to the “They had a perfectly fine ballpark in the Rate, why did they knock it down?” line, along with “they tore down a classic ballpark in Comiskey. They never do anything right. And now they’re on yet another ballpark while Chicago’s true and only team will play in the Sacred Cathedral of Wrigley forever.”

I know it seems like I’m Cubsessed, but the Sox will always suffer in comparison to them.

Edited 22 hours ago22 hr by NO!!MARY!!!

20 minutes ago, NO!!MARY!!! said:

He won’t do it right because whatever happens will get criticized. People will move to the “They had a perfectly fine ballpark in the Rate, why did they knock it down?” line, along with “they tore down a classic ballpark in Comiskey. They never do anything right. And now they’re on yet another ballpark while Chicago’s true and only team will play in the Sacred Cathedral of Wrigley forever.”

I know it seems like I’m Cubsessed, but the Sox will always suffer in comparison to them.

While it was a neat park. Old Comiskey was literally falling apart. It wasn't an option without TONS of work.

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

While it was a neat park. Old Comiskey was literally falling apart. It wasn't an option without TONS of work.

I agree. It’s just that I see the attitude of “why did they tear it down” online a lot, or at least it seems like it. It also gets far more reverence as a “Baseball Cathedral” now than it ever did in its lifetime.

The Washington Post editorial board has a column today (I don't have access to the story itself) with this headline:

Never subsidize a sports stadium. And definitely not like this.

The subheadline then says "Jacksonville fans are getting fleeced"