1 hour ago, tray said:

77 Hitmen:

1. You said that the first thing Ishbia should do is to fire everyone in the White Sox organization (your words) when he gets majority ownership. Do you still feel that way? Everyone??...Getz, Venable, all coaches, scouts, minor league personnel.,,,how about Gene Honda, Sod father, lol?

2. JR went down to Springfield with and at the behest of Related Development (developers of Auchi's 78 parcel). He did not go down on his own accord to actively seek a new stadium for the obvious reason that he will no longer be Chairman in 10-20 years when the White Sox might need a new stadium. A possible new stadium in the distant future is Ishbia's business, not Reinsdorfs. Instead, JR is all about running the organization now and winning while he is still the Chair. Oh yea, and making big money because he is "greedy" unlike Ishbia (rotflmfao). Naw, Ishbia is more like Warren Buffet ...uh no.

3. Once a realistic, sensible plan is proposed by Ishbia (and we have not seen one yet) , Sox fans should be able to chime in. After all this is their team in their City. Until then Ramble on

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGNRFX62Ujc&list=RDGGNRFX62Ujc&start_radio=1

This is 100% demonstrably false. He 100% went down there and asked for money for a new stadium at the 78. You have zero evidence to back up anything you are saying here, in fact the reporting all centers around Jerry asking for stadium money.

2 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

It is obvious to anyone who isn't an ostrich that this is GOING to happen. If they are already this deep into landswaps and projects, they have a plan.

Most likely, yes. I'm not ready to say it's definitely going to happen. Obviously Ishbia is lining things up to make this happen, but there's still some hurdles to overcome. The Amtrak yard purchase needs to be finalized and Amtrak needs to move their maintenance yard before it can happen. Amtrak has said they've wanted to move their maintenance yard, but that plan sounds complicated and could still fall through.

There's also the question of financing of a new ballpark, but everyone involved surely knows at this point that a publicly financed stadium is a non-starter. Given the Ishbias wealth and moves to secure RRIF loans for this project, it's becoming clear that their intent is for a privately-financed ballpark as opposed to waiting for a handout to ISFA (which ain't gonna happen).

4 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Most likely, yes. I'm not ready to say it's definitely going to happen. Obviously Ishbia is lining things up to make this happen, but there's still some hurdles to overcome. The Amtrak yard purchase needs to be finalized and Amtrak needs to move their maintenance yard before it can happen. Amtrak has said they've wanted to move their maintenance yard, but that plan sounds complicated and could still fall through.

There's also the question of financing of a new ballpark, but everyone involved surely knows at this point that a publicly financed stadium is a non-starter. Given the Ishbias wealth and moves to secure RRIF loans for this project, it's becoming clear that their intent is for a privately-financed ballpark as opposed to waiting for a handout to ISFA (which ain't gonna happen).

The Sox are somewhere around a 2nd to 3rd standard deviation around leaving 35th and Shields. They do not want to be there, and are making moves behind the scenes to get out. Even this specific project doesn't happen, the White Sox have a vision, and are looking to leave.

22 hours ago, BrittBurnsFan said:

Dallas Mavericks and Dallas Stars leaving American Airlines Center to build their own (separate) arenas so each can build entertainment complexes on the land around the new arenas! Ishbia knows this is a path toward greater profit! It is going to happen on the Southside...just wish we knew more details. I get why we don't...but doesn't stop me from wanting more info!

https://therealdeal.com/texas/2026/06/15/stars-ceo-says-tear-down-american-airlines-center/

This is the new economic reality in pro sports and something that all professional male sports teams in Chicago except for the Sox are in various stages of getting done. Cubs (done), Bulls/Blackhawks (underway), Fire (underway) and yes eventually the Bears somewhere.

Ishbia is still in his 40s and he and his brother are immensely wealthy. He isn't buying the Sox only to keep them at a stadium surrounded by parking lots for the next 30 years. I just hope he hires the best and brightest architects and engineers (people who will closely study what has worked and what hasn't at other MLB parks) to make sure they get the design of any new ballpark right this time.

Mayor Johnson proposes a $425M TIF subsidy for the 78.

Chicago Sun-Times

Mayor Johnson proposes $425M TIF subsidy for The 78

Chicago Fire FC owner Joe Mansueto has been widely praised for bankrolling his own $750 million soccer stadium on the South Loop parcel known as The 78. But taxpayers would be subsidizing that develop

"The roster of TIF-eligible infrastructure projects includes construction of a 1,200-space underground parking garage that would be used for soccer games, concerts and other stadium-related events, and as a platform for an open-air plaza and future high-rise development on the site.

The breakdown includes $199 million for public structures, plazas and open space; $104 million for road infrastructure along LaSalle, 13th, 14th and 15th Streets; $11 million for Clark Street improvements; $30 million for river wall improvements along the south branch of the Chicago River; $8 million for Roosevelt Road and $34 million for Metra improvements."

8 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Mayor Johnson proposes a $425M TIF subsidy for the 78.

Chicago Sun-Times

Mayor Johnson proposes $425M TIF subsidy for The 78

Chicago Fire FC owner Joe Mansueto has been widely praised for bankrolling his own $750 million soccer stadium on the South Loop parcel known as The 78. But taxpayers would be subsidizing that develop

"The roster of TIF-eligible infrastructure projects includes construction of a 1,200-space underground parking garage that would be used for soccer games, concerts and other stadium-related events, and as a platform for an open-air plaza and future high-rise development on the site.

The breakdown includes $199 million for public structures, plazas and open space; $104 million for road infrastructure along LaSalle, 13th, 14th and 15th Streets; $11 million for Clark Street improvements; $30 million for river wall improvements along the south branch of the Chicago River; $8 million for Roosevelt Road and $34 million for Metra improvements."

All of which would be useful to the White Sox project in the area, or on this site.

archive.ph

Related Midwest eyes $425M TIF subsidy for the 78 - Crain...

The developer’s vision still includes a new stadium for the Chicago White Sox on the southern portion of the 78, though Bailey declined to comment on any active pursuit to lure the Major League Baseball team to the site. The Sox have said they are interested in building a new ballpark on that parcel as they stare down a 2029 lease expiration at Rate Field in Bridgeport.

Interesting that Related still prefers a dual-stadium development.

Mansueto has said publicly in recent months that he likes the idea of a multi-stadium hub at the 78 that makes the entire site more active year-round and that he remains open to discussions with the Sox about sharing the campus.

Is this new? I thought the sentiment from Mansueto was that he wanted the 78 all for himself.

For now, the prospect of a two-stadium development doesn’t have support from Ald. Pat Dowell, whose 3rd Ward includes the 78.

Expectations of traffic congestion at the site are “a real reason not to consider a second stadium there,” Dowell said during a Crain’s event in April about the Fire stadium plan.

Still, Dowell left the door open in September when the Fire stadium won approval from the Chicago Plan Commission. She told the panel at the time that the rezoning amendment for the stadium includes language ensuring only one stadium can be constructed at the 78 “without coming back to (the Plan Commission) and the community.”

Overall, this is still good news for the Sox. Having options for both the 78 proper and Amtrak’s 14th St. yard is a good place to be in.

5 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

The Sox are somewhere around a 2nd to 3rd standard deviation around leaving 35th and Shields. They do not want to be there, and are making moves behind the scenes to get out. Even this specific project doesn't happen, the White Sox have a vision, and are looking to leave.

Timely comment just before the Crain's article about the 78 TIF suggesting the developer's plan still envisions two stadiums at the site. If the Amtrak land falls through, the 78 could very well still be the backup plan. The map in the Crain's article shows nothing but surface lots south of the Fire stadium on the 78. That sounds like a placeholder until the Sox stadium question gets settled as there's no way they're going to keep all that prime land as surface lots permanently - even if the Sox end up staying at Rate Field.

5 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

All of which would be useful to the White Sox project in the area, or on this site.

No doubt the $425M expenditure is much more sellable if you add 81 dates that could bring 25-30k people per game to the site.

Edited 10 hours ago10 hr by 77 Hitmen

5 hours ago, Mouthsider said:

archive.ph

Related Midwest eyes $425M TIF subsidy for the 78 - Crain...

Interesting that Related still prefers a dual-stadium development.

Is this new? I thought the sentiment from Mansueto was that he wanted the 78 all for himself.

Overall, this is still good news for the Sox. Having options for both the 78 proper and Amtrak’s 14th St. yard is a good place to be in.

Welcome to Soxtalk!

The only people who I've heard say that Mansueto doesn't want the Sox at the 78 were Jon Greenberg at the Athletic and Josh Nelson at Sox Machine. They must be making their own presumptions that weren't based on any actual intel. I have never seen an actual quote from Mansueto that said anything of the sort. Why wouldn't Mansueto want the Sox there to help jump start the stadium district he wants to create around his stadium? The Fire only play something like 20 home games a year and MLS's offseason will be all of June to mid July. Bring in a partner that can draw another 2 to 3 million visitors to the site every year. Uh yeah, Mansueto wouldn't mind that. The Fire only play 2-3 home games a month meaning it'll be relatively easy to avoid any scheduling conflicts between the two teams if the Sox build in the South Loop.

And yeah, this is likely good news for the Sox since, if approved, it gets the infrastructure hurdles to the 78 site addressed even before the Sox make a final decision on their stadium plans.

Edited 10 hours ago10 hr by 77 Hitmen

Excellent posts about JR & Ishbia and potential stadium sites. With the Crain's article about the 78 possible dual stadium do you think the railyard property Ishiba bought could be used for parking lot? I have seen the posts about shoehorning a stadium in on the railyard but to me it doesn't look practical. Also, what happens to Soldier Field if the Bears end up in AH or the slag heap in Indiana?

3 hours ago, Falstaff said:

Excellent posts about JR & Ishbia and potential stadium sites. With the Crain's article about the 78 possible dual stadium do you think the railyard property Ishiba bought could be used for parking lot? I have seen the posts about shoehorning a stadium in on the railyard but to me it doesn't look practical. Also, what happens to Soldier Field if the Bears end up in AH or the slag heap in Indiana?

A large portion of the TIF funds directed to the Fire stadium are going towards building a city-owned parking garage. I would imagine something similar may be done with the Amtrak parcel in order to maximize parking spots in a single space. This would leave more room for a baseball village development :) but unfortunately mean the end of tailgating :(

As for your question about Soldier Field, I have no idea. It probably just switches to being a full-time concert/event venue. The Bears only play 8 games there per year anyways, so the city will surely find ways to fill its schedule.

Since the lease at Rate expires in 2029, does that necessarily mean that they would need to have their new stadium fully built before 2030?

7 minutes ago, joejoesox said:

Since the lease at Rate expires in 2029, does that necessarily mean that they would need to have their new stadium fully built before 2030?

For some reason I thought it was like 2034 when it expired and 29 was the “s%*# or get off the pot” moment from JR to Ishbia

20 minutes ago, joejoesox said:

Since the lease at Rate expires in 2029, does that necessarily mean that they would need to have their new stadium fully built before 2030?

They will almost certainly extend the lease by a number of years. There is no way without a plan in hand and moving forward TODAY that they could be ready to move by the end of this decade. Guessing that number is somewhere between 3-5 years, depending on the depth of the railroad work that needs to happen.

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

They will almost certainly extend the lease by a number of years. There is no way without a plan in hand and moving forward TODAY that they could be ready to move by the end of this decade. Guessing that number is somewhere between 3-5 years, depending on the depth of the railroad work that needs to happen.

My question is at the new location wherever it may be will White Sox fans support the Sox when they are losing as the history of the franchise is they don’t. The Sox draw fine when there’s a winning product on the field but the fans stay at home when not. For me It’s going to be hard visualizing them at a different location since I’ve been a Sox fan since 1952. Where they are at right now has never been a problem for me, it’s right next door to the Dan Ryan, one CTA line is at the door step with the other 3 blocks away and the Metra is on the other side of the Ryan. One other thing, what surrounds the ballpark has never mattered, I sort of like driving to a game and know there is plenty of parking.

I’m saying all this as someone who moved to Florida 33 years ago and I’m not sure what the traffic and mass transit is like these days, my last game was on visit in 2012. We have seen many Sox games at Tropicana Field and will take in the Sox-Rays game on Sunday August 2.

Edited 7 hours ago7 hr by The Mighty Mite

20 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said:

My question is at the new location wherever it may be will White Sox fans support the Sox when they are losing as the history of the franchise is they don’t. The Sox draw fine when there’s a winning product on the field but the fans stay at home when not. For me It’s going to be hard visualizing them at a different location since I’ve been a Sox fan since 1952. Where they are at right now has never been a problem for me, it’s right next door to the Dan Ryan, one CTA line is at the door step with the other 3 blocks away and the Metra is on the other side of the Ryan. One other thing, what surrounds the ballpark has never mattered, I sort of like driving to a game and know there is plenty of parking.

I’m saying all this as someone who moved to Florida 33 years ago and I’m not sure what the traffic and mass transit is like these days, my last game was on visit in 2012. We have seen many Sox games at Tropicana Field and will take in the Sox-Rays game on Sunday August 2.

The idea is to capture the "experience" audience, that they have never been able to capture. The people who work in the area (not too far south of the financial district) plus a huge boom in residential living in that area over the last couple of decades, plus make it easily accessible by multiple lines as described a few posts ago. Not only could they capture game revenue, but much like the Cubs, capture a share of all of the game day revenue through their own clubs, bars, restaurants, casino, etc. The Sox offer nothing but the game when it comes to revenue capture, and they sit dead last in MLB for total revenues for a reason. As I have mentioned before, there will be plenty of parking in the area for those who still partake, but it will be more integrated with other entertainment. It won't just be miles of parking lots.

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

The idea is to capture the "experience" audience, that they have never been able to capture. The people who work in the area (not too far south of the financial district) plus a huge boom in residential living in that area over the last couple of decades, plus make it easily accessible by multiple lines as described a few posts ago. Not only could they capture game revenue, but much like the Cubs, capture a share of all of the game day revenue through their own clubs, bars, restaurants, casino, etc. The Sox offer nothing but the game when it comes to revenue capture, and they sit dead last in MLB for total revenues for a reason. As I have mentioned before, there will be plenty of parking in the area for those who still partake, but it will be more integrated with other entertainment. It won't just be miles of parking lots.

All that makes good sense and hope it works out well.

Edited 6 hours ago6 hr by The Mighty Mite

I put odds of a 78 Sox Park at about 1 per cent.

On 6/3/2025 at 9:06 AM, soxfan18 said:

VThe soccer stadium isn't going to have a view of anything outside except the sky. It will be closed on every side with a canopy covering all the seats (at least, based on the rendering). 

1 hour ago, pcintelligence said:

I put odds of a 78 Sox Park at about 1 per cent.

That's about where I put the Sox staying long term at 35th based on the actions of the two ownership interests.

1 hour ago, pcintelligence said:

I put odds of a 78 Sox Park at about 1 per cent.

By "78" to is mean next to the Fire stadium on the east side of the river? I would agree with you there. It will be on the west side if it happens.

11 hours ago, Falstaff said:

Excellent posts about JR & Ishbia and potential stadium sites. With the Crain's article about the 78 possible dual stadium do you think the railyard property Ishiba bought could be used for parking lot? I have seen the posts about shoehorning a stadium in on the railyard but to me it doesn't look practical. Also, what happens to Soldier Field if the Bears end up in AH or the slag heap in Indiana?

7 hours ago, Mouthsider said:

A large portion of the TIF funds directed to the Fire stadium are going towards building a city-owned parking garage. I would imagine something similar may be done with the Amtrak parcel in order to maximize parking spots in a single space. This would leave more room for a baseball village development :) but unfortunately mean the end of tailgating :(

As for your question about Soldier Field, I have no idea. It probably just switches to being a full-time concert/event venue. The Bears only play 8 games there per year anyways, so the city will surely find ways to fill its schedule.

Yeah, the Park District already has a proposal to update Soldier Field to be primarily a concert/events venue. They have said that the Bears account for only about 20% of the revenue they get from Soldier Field. Without the Bears on the schedule, it probably opens up the possibility of more events in late August through whenever it gets too cold to host such events (early October?).

Tailgating is arguably the biggest downside of the Sox moving to the South Loop. I don't know if there's a way to provide some lots in the Amtrak/78 complex that can be used for tailgaters.

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by 77 Hitmen

4 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said:

My question is at the new location wherever it may be will White Sox fans support the Sox when they are losing as the history of the franchise is they don’t. The Sox draw fine when there’s a winning product on the field but the fans stay at home when not. For me It’s going to be hard visualizing them at a different location since I’ve been a Sox fan since 1952. Where they are at right now has never been a problem for me, it’s right next door to the Dan Ryan, one CTA line is at the door step with the other 3 blocks away and the Metra is on the other side of the Ryan. One other thing, what surrounds the ballpark has never mattered, I sort of like driving to a game and know there is plenty of parking.

I’m saying all this as someone who moved to Florida 33 years ago and I’m not sure what the traffic and mass transit is like these days, my last game was on visit in 2012. We have seen many Sox games at Tropicana Field and will take in the Sox-Rays game on Sunday August 2.

4 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

The idea is to capture the "experience" audience, that they have never been able to capture. The people who work in the area (not too far south of the financial district) plus a huge boom in residential living in that area over the last couple of decades, plus make it easily accessible by multiple lines as described a few posts ago. Not only could they capture game revenue, but much like the Cubs, capture a share of all of the game day revenue through their own clubs, bars, restaurants, casino, etc. The Sox offer nothing but the game when it comes to revenue capture, and they sit dead last in MLB for total revenues for a reason. As I have mentioned before, there will be plenty of parking in the area for those who still partake, but it will be more integrated with other entertainment. It won't just be miles of parking lots.

I'd imagine it's a generational thing. Since it sounds like any new ballpark is 8-10 years away (early to mid 2030s), keep in mind that they'll generally be targeting the interests of people born after about 1990 and not what us older Gen X and Boomer fans care (or don't care) about the ballpark surroundings.

The statement that Sox fans show up when the team wins but stay home when they don't is precisely why they're looking for a location that draws more casual fans. Whether that all works out or not will literally be a billion dollar question for this franchise.

Edited 2 hours ago2 hr by 77 Hitmen

26 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

I'd imagine it's a generational thing. Since it sounds like any new ballpark is 8-10 years away (early to mid 2030s), keep in mind that they'll generally be targeting the interests of people born after about 1990 and not what us older Gen X and Boomer fans care (or don't care) about the ballpark surroundings.

The statement that Sox fans show up when the team wins but stay home when they don't is precisely why they're looking for a location that draws more casual fans. Whether that all works out or not will literally be a billion dollar question for this franchise.