The Commanders new stadium has a price tag of $2.7B (which the team is paying) but the whole project will cost ~$4B when you count infrastructure and other development at the site.   That's probably how you get to $5B for the Bears since they want to develop more than just a stadium at Arlington Park.   Heck, the 1901 Project at the UC is supposed to cost $7B.  And the proposed redevelopment of the parking lots around Citi Field in NYC reportedly has an $8B price tag.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/44893202/washington-commanders-dc-reach-deal-new-stadium-rfk-site

Edited July 8, 2025Jul 8 by 77 Hitmen

4 hours ago, Harry Chappas said:

Working in Illinois does double projects like that.  The state of Illinois is a cesspool of grift and incompetency. 

I would venture to guess that in cook county 75% of the people are union grifters and government workers (who are also union).

I would love to see the cost to build the stadium in NW indiana. 

So being a worker who organizes to increase bargaining power and make things more even makes one a grifter... then what are business owners?

17 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

While more expensive for sure, I doubt that being in IL would more than double the price of a stadium.   There has to be more to the $5B figure than just the stadium itself.   

We'll see what happens in the fall IL legislative session.  One of the state reps suggested they were really close to a deal, but ran out of time in the spring.

If what you're saying is true,  that they were close to a deal on the new Bears stadium. If something is done in the fall session, I would like to think that some sort of deal will be worked out for a new White Sox stadium.

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

So being a worker who organizes to increase bargaining power and make things more even makes one a grifter... then what are business owners?

Benevolent men of industry. 

1 hour ago, Quin said:

Benevolent men of industry. 

Except for those greedy hedge fund types, obviously.

2 hours ago, WBWSF said:

If what you're saying is true,  that they were close to a deal on the new Bears stadium. If something is done in the fall session, I would like to think that some sort of deal will be worked out for a new White Sox stadium.

This was the story I read with the one rep saying they were "close and just ran out of time."  We'll see in a few months - it's just one elected official saying that while the reps from Chicago (who would lose the Bears to AH) don't share the same optimism.  

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/01/general-assembly-bears-stadium/

I'm not sure how this would impact the White Sox, but I'd imagine *IF* Justin Ishbia wants a new stadium for the team he's going to buy AND is willing to commit private financing for the ballpark itself, then a deal to help the Bears could help pave the way for action to help with infrastructure needs for a new Sox stadium.  And there's also the Fire saying they want to break ground at the 78 this fall.  We'll see if that indeed happens and what kind of infrastructure investment the city/state commits for that site to get the Fire stadium built.

 

 

On 6/30/2025 at 3:21 PM, WBWSF said:

Assuming they build a stadium at the 78, the longer they wait  to start building the stadium, the more it will cost. The Bears have said a number of times that they wanted to start  building  their new stadium this year. They maintain that the longer they wait the more it will cost. I'm told the Bears simply don't have the money for a new stadium. They have $2  billion dollars and need another $3 billion dollars which they  don't have.

Nobody is building Sox a new grifted home. Generic Jerry Park is their home. They don't deserve 10 cents. 

8 minutes ago, pcq said:

Nobody is building Sox a new grifted home. Generic Jerry Park is their home. They don't deserve 10 cents. 

The A's have started their new park but do not have the money to finish it. 

48 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

This was the story I read with the one rep saying they were "close and just ran out of time."  We'll see in a few months - it's just one elected official saying that while the reps from Chicago (who would lose the Bears to AH) don't share the same optimism.  

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/01/general-assembly-bears-stadium/

I'm not sure how this would impact the White Sox, but I'd imagine *IF* Justin Ishbia wants a new stadium for the team he's going to buy AND is willing to commit private financing for the ballpark itself, then a deal to help the Bears could help pave the way for action to help with infrastructure needs for a new Sox stadium.  And there's also the Fire saying they want to break ground at the 78 this fall.  We'll see if that indeed happens and what kind of infrastructure investment the city/state commits for that site to get the Fire stadium built.

 

 

It definitely seems like the 78 site is getting prepped, saw people surveying out there last week and the storage are near the bridge seems like its being disassembled. Obviously that's the spot where the Fire stadium is set to be, but there's definitely some movement going on there. 

55 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

This was the story I read with the one rep saying they were "close and just ran out of time."  We'll see in a few months - it's just one elected official saying that while the reps from Chicago (who would lose the Bears to AH) don't share the same optimism.  

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/06/01/general-assembly-bears-stadium/

I'm not sure how this would impact the White Sox, but I'd imagine *IF* Justin Ishbia wants a new stadium for the team he's going to buy AND is willing to commit private financing for the ballpark itself, then a deal to help the Bears could help pave the way for action to help with infrastructure needs for a new Sox stadium.  And there's also the Fire saying they want to break ground at the 78 this fall.  We'll see if that indeed happens and what kind of infrastructure investment the city/state commits for that site to get the Fire stadium built.

 

 

That one rep and the Mayor may be the only politicians in favor of giving tax payer money to the Bears and White Sox. I've seen numerous stories (and posted the links) where politician after politician is basically saying 'no way' as far as giving money to them. Politics of course is a strange game so we'll see what happens. 

5 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

That one rep and the Mayor may be the only politicians in favor of giving tax payer money to the Bears and White Sox. I've seen numerous stories (and posted the links) where politician after politician is basically saying 'no way' as far as giving money to them. Politics of course is a strange game so we'll see what happens. 

The only thing that is clear to me is that the Bears and the Sox will have to come up with all (or at least nearly all) of the money for the stadium itself.  The Bears are said to be committing at least $2B in private financing toward a new stadium. But there's still a lot of tax payer money that could potentially be approved for infrastructure and development of the land around the actual stadium.  That's what's happening in DC - the Commanders are paying $2.7B for the stadium itself but there's something like $1B in public money that will be spent to develop the rest of the site.  

Right or wrong, good investment or bad, I can see politicians approving such costs when they can go back to the voters and say these are privately financed stadiums.  

As far as the Sox go, my guess is that the new owner will need to commit at least $1B in private financing if he wants a new stadium as Jerry has been angling for.  Let's say for the sake of argument that Ishbia does exactly that - say he'll privately finance $1B to build a new Sox ballpark.  Is it still a "no way" from state officials as far as any public money going to that project?  I really don't know.  I don't think it's quite so obvious at that point.  

Edited July 9, 2025Jul 9 by 77 Hitmen

9 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

The only thing that is clear to me is that the Bears and the Sox will have to come up with all (or at least nearly all) of the money for the stadium itself.  The Bears are said to be committing at least $2B in private financing toward a new stadium. But there's still a lot of tax payer money that could potentially be approved for infrastructure and development of the land around the actual stadium.  That's what's happening in DC - the Commanders are paying $2.7B for the stadium itself but there's something like $1B in public money that will be spent to develop the rest of the site.  

Right or wrong, good investment or bad, I can see politicians approving such costs when they can go back to the voters and say these are privately financed stadiums.  

As far as the Sox go, my guess is that the new owner will need to commit at least $1B in private financing if he wants a new stadium as Jerry has been angling for.  Let's say for the sake of argument that Ishbia does exactly that - say he'll privately finance $1B to build a new Sox ballpark.  Is it still a "no way" from state officials as far as any public money going to that project?  I really don't know.  I don't think it's quite so obvious at that point.  

If Ishbia is going to give money towards a new White Sox stadium I wish he would say that. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned. I still can't see the City of Chicago spending all that money on infrastructure at the 78 on 20 soccer games a year.  The 78 needs a White Sox stadium to justify spending all that infrastructure money.

16 minutes ago, WBWSF said:

If Ishbia is going to give money towards a new White Sox stadium I wish he would say that. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned. I still can't see the City of Chicago spending all that money on infrastructure at the 78 on 20 soccer games a year.  The 78 needs a White Sox stadium to justify spending all that infrastructure money.

They aren't going to say anything publicly until a deal is done.  Good businessmen don't negotiate in public.

On 6/30/2025 at 3:21 PM, WBWSF said:

Assuming they build a stadium at the 78, the longer they wait  to start building the stadium, the more it will cost. The Bears have said a number of times that they wanted to start  building  their new stadium this year. They maintain that the longer they wait the more it will cost. I'm told the Bears simply don't have the money for a new stadium. They have $2  billion dollars and need another $3 billion dollars which they  don't have.

The Bears have sent out a survey to fans about various costs and amenities at a new stadium:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2025/07/12/bears-test-waters-on-fan-appetite-for-amenities-exorbitant-prices-at-potential-new-stadium

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/07/10/bears-send-out-stadium-survey-to-season-ticket-holders/

12 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

The Bears have sent out a survey to fans about various costs and amenities at a new stadium:

https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2025/07/12/bears-test-waters-on-fan-appetite-for-amenities-exorbitant-prices-at-potential-new-stadium

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2025/07/10/bears-send-out-stadium-survey-to-season-ticket-holders/

Those prices they are considering (LOL) are simply outrageous. 

 

On 7/9/2025 at 7:04 AM, southsider2k5 said:

They aren't going to say anything publicly until a deal is done.  Good businessmen don't negotiate in public.

Nor do they buy stadiums and always get someone else to pay for it

On 7/8/2025 at 5:14 PM, pcq said:

The A's have started their new park but do not have the money to finish it. 

Nobody believes Sox org would have any skills in getting a stadium deal done. 

16 hours ago, kitekrazy said:

Nor do they buy stadiums and always get someone else to pay for it

that is commonplace now, across pretty much all sports 

On 7/12/2025 at 8:27 PM, pcq said:

Nobody believes Sox org would have any skills in getting a stadium deal done. 

In case you haven't heard, there's are super-rich billionaire brothers lined up to be the next Sox owners.   I think it's very clear to everyone at this point that the notion of Jerry getting the state to build him a new stadium with $1B in public money is dead, including to Reinsdorf himself.    

Going forward, it'll all depend on what the Ishbias want to do with the stadium situation in preparation of them assuming control of the franchise between 2029 and 2034.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the window for Ishbia taking control starts the same year that the current lease is up.  

 

 

Edited July 14, 2025Jul 14 by 77 Hitmen

13 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

In case you haven't heard, there's are super-rich billionaire brothers lined up to be the next Sox owners.   I think it's very clear to everyone at this point that the notion of Jerry getting the state to build him a new stadium with $1B in public money is dead, including to Reinsdorf himself.    

Going forward, it'll all depend on what the Ishbias want to do with the stadium situation in preparation of them assuming control of the franchise between 2029 and 2034.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the window for Ishbia taking control starts the same year that the current lease is up.  

 

 

Oh boy. 

17 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

In case you haven't heard, there's are super-rich billionaire brothers lined up to be the next Sox owners.   I think it's very clear to everyone at this point that the notion of Jerry getting the state to build him a new stadium with $1B in public money is dead, including to Reinsdorf himself.    

Going forward, it'll all depend on what the Ishbias want to do with the stadium situation in preparation of them assuming control of the franchise between 2029 and 2034.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the window for Ishbia taking control starts the same year that the current lease is up.  

 

 

And to be clear, there almost certainly is going to be some change to the "stadium situation" as team ownership gets handed over in a few years since the current lease is up in 2029 and I doubt there's simply going to be a new long-term "sweetheart" lease that incentivizes mediocre performance.

This doesn't mean the team is certainly moving to the 78.  My guess is that there's a good chance that the new owners keep the Sox at 35th and Shields long-term.  But if anyone thinks this won't come with major changes to the current park and the acres of parking surrounding it, you aren't paying attention to the current economics of stadiums and their surroundings.   Heck, that could even mean a new retro-style stadium on the site of Old Comiskey.  Maybe that alternative isn't likely, but it's more plausible than just keeping the same status quo for the next 30 years.  

Chinatown residents express concern about the new Fire stadium at the 78:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/chicago-sports-bears-sox-cubs-bulls-blackhawks/chinatown-residents-express-concerns-over-proposed-chicago-fire-stadium/3802086/

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2025/07/30/chinatown-chicago-fire-stadium

 

In other sports facility news, the San Antonio Spurs are committing $1B toward a new downtown basketball arena and entertainment district.  

https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2025/07/25/san-antonio-spurs-outline-proposed-investment-details-for-downtown-arena/

If built, this would be their 3rd new stadium since 1993.

On 7/15/2025 at 11:34 AM, 77 Hitmen said:

And to be clear, there almost certainly is going to be some change to the "stadium situation" as team ownership gets handed over in a few years since the current lease is up in 2029 and I doubt there's simply going to be a new long-term "sweetheart" lease that incentivizes mediocre performance.

This doesn't mean the team is certainly moving to the 78.  My guess is that there's a good chance that the new owners keep the Sox at 35th and Shields long-term.  But if anyone thinks this won't come with major changes to the current park and the acres of parking surrounding it, you aren't paying attention to the current economics of stadiums and their surroundings.   Heck, that could even mean a new retro-style stadium on the site of Old Comiskey.  Maybe that alternative isn't likely, but it's more plausible than just keeping the same status quo for the next 30 years.  

If they ever build a retro style park in the footprint of Old Comiskey, the immediate reaction of pretty much everyone will be “retro parks are dead. The White Sox goof it up once again. Why did they abandon a perfectly good and serviceable park across the street for this outdated white elephant?”

Edited July 31, 2025Jul 31 by NO!!MARY!!!

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

If they ever build a retro style park in the footprint of Old Comiskey, the immediate reaction of pretty much everyone will be “retro parks are dead. The White Sox goof it up once again. Why did they abandon a perfectly good and serviceable park across the street for this outdated white elephant?”

Maybe one person.