Harold's Leg Lift Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 16 minutes ago, fathom said: Big time in the red It literally says the money will be used to pay their god damn bills. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 9 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said: Yeah the whole moving thing makes no sense with the sliding timeline on ownership we have. Obviously I would have been more nervous if he sold the team to the Dave Stewart-led group. With that said, the sooner they announce the future stadium location, the better. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 8 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said: It literally says the money will be used to pay their god damn bills. Future stadium at the 78 in your opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 13 minutes ago, nrockway said: I just wanted to point out that your two responses have been awesome The Jerry regime has been an unmitigated disaster. To jump into the discussion and crap on every one who feels that is an insult to everyone who has experienced the last 45 years. Sure It CoUlD bE wOrSe, but the odds of that are near zero that we are going to be worse than literally the worst team in the history of MLB. Almost all of us will take our chances here. Give a serious discussion and you will get a more serious reply 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold's Leg Lift Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 11 minutes ago, fathom said: Future stadium at the 78 in your opinion? I have absolutely no idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
champagne030 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 28 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: That should have had no bearing on a transaction as he would have been buying the team on a cash-free, debt-free basis. The problem is the Pohlad's were baking in a significant portion of their $.5B debt into the asking price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 https://chicago.suntimes.com/white-sox/2025/06/05/jerry-reinsdorf-justin-ishbia-reach-long-term-agreement-that-establishes-a-framework-for-transition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 2 hours ago, Harold's Leg Lift said: If that's the reason then why did he buy a piece of the White Sox? Because the Twins weren't worth $1.6 billion with $450 million in debt to also pay off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrittBurnsFan Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 8 minutes ago, caulfield12 said: Because the Twins weren't worth $1.6 billion with $450 million in debt to also pay off. Honest question...why are the Twins in debt so much? Did they finance their newer ballpark? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcq Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 This is not even news really. More like estate planning. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 White Sox debt in the $125-150 million range... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 11 minutes ago, BrittBurnsFan said: Honest question...why are the Twins in debt so much? Did they finance their newer ballpark? Combination of payroll, attendance and lowered RSN fees. Covid year, etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Look at Ray Ray Run Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 32 minutes ago, fathom said: Big time in the red Relative to typical baseball debt, I'd say it's marginal at most. Running in the red from a year to year cash flow perspective just isnt going to accrue the type of debt that stadium financing, as an example, does. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nrockway Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Just now, southsider2k5 said: The Jerry regime has been an unmitigated disaster. To jump into the discussion and crap on every one who feels that is an insult to everyone who has experienced the last 45 years. Sure It CoUlD bE wOrSe, but the odds of that are near zero that we are going to be worse than literally the worst team in the history of MLB. Almost all of us will take our chances here. Give a serious discussion and you will get a more serious reply I'm not being serious? I thought your smartass responses were genuinely funny, but I'm clearly writing thoughtful posts on this matter. You don't agree, which is fine, but you're also a jerk to anyone you disagree with. Everyone else is being respectful. Unbecoming behavior of an administrator, I think. Set an example, be above the fray. I think you should be kinder to people and I'm probably not going to reply to your posts anymore, they are never polite. I'm not "crapping" on people by having a different point of view, it's called a discussion. My point of view is that we should thoughtfully consider what might become of the Chicago White Sox in light of this inevitable ownership change. It shouldn't be considered good news, it's simply news. I don't know why you think Jerry Reinsdorf is specifically more evil than any other rich idiot, but I think after his death, his kids have an interest in keeping the Sox in town only insofar as it affects the Bulls and their reputation. I frankly care more about the team being the "Chicago" White Sox than I do about their record. I literally wouldn't be a fan anymore, and I make this point because, simply, "why wouldn't he move the team?" at this point, it seems like the only way they stay put is if a new stadium gets built, and I think for non-baseball reasons they shouldn't build a new park. I'm also thinking emotionally on this like everyone else, I don't have a right to "jump into the discussion" and share my feelings? You're a dick, dude. 1 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxmb35 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) 2 hours ago, nrockway said: he's moving the team, bro No he's not, bro. Edited June 5 by Chisoxmb35 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Nashville has zero public money for the Sox as well. That's not happening. Who wants a team this bad when expansion is the cleaner pathway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 38 minutes ago, PaleAleSox said: The Chicago Fire are about to do it it without the city or state paying for it. Ishbia can do exactly the same, and he will do it at the 78. Soccer is different. Soccer owners are different. Baseball and football are not building IMO unless the city or state pays a huge portion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 41 minutes ago, nrockway said: Wonderful, what have they done in the last 20 years? You see the trend, right? Meanwhile the Bulls lead the NBA in attendance every year while putting out an even worse product (in my opinion, I don't watch them anymore). There's a $7billion building project going on around the UC, it's a happening place. Is 35th and Shields a happening place? I think it could be but it's predicated on the Sox staying put. Everything you wrote is exactly the same with Oakland. The point is: fans won't show up when they're bad and that's a problem. Fans from around the world show up at Wrigley for a multitude of reasons, when people think of Chicago baseball, they think of the Cubs. Meanwhile they think they'll get shot if they go south of Cermak. I guess you might at a Sox game. You just get your car stolen in Lakeview. I just don't think this is good news. It's certainly expected and it'll be a long time before anything happens, but I think we need to think seriously that this guy is more likely to move the team than the Reinsdorf brats would be. We need to advocate for our team! This is objectively false, so I'm starting to understand why we don't see eye to eye on this...you're working with information that just isn't accurate. The A's made the playoffs in 2012, 2013, 2014. Three consecutive trips to the playoffs, something the White Sox have never done in their franchise history. In 2012, the A's went 94-68. They drew 1.6 million fans. The same year, the White Sox went 85-77, missed the playoffs, and drew 1.9 million fans. In 2018, the A's went 97-65. They drew 1.5 million fans. The same year, the White Sox went 62-100, missed the playoffs, and drew 1.6 million fans. In 2019, after going 97-65 the year before, the A's posted the EXACT same record, and once again went to the playoffs. They drew 97,118 more fans in 2019 than in 2018. In 2005, the White Sox drew 2,342,833 fans in their World Series year. In 2006, they saw an increase of 614,581 fans. In the last 10 years, Oakland has never been higher than 10th out of 15 teams in the AL in attendance. The White Sox were 5th in the AL in attendance in 2021, and wouldn't you know it...they made the playoffs. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 19 minutes ago, nrockway said: I'm not being serious? I thought your smartass responses were genuinely funny, but I'm clearly writing thoughtful posts on this matter. You don't agree, which is fine, but you're also a jerk to anyone you disagree with. Everyone else is being respectful. Unbecoming behavior of an administrator, I think. Set an example, be above the fray. I think you should be kinder to people and I'm probably not going to reply to your posts anymore, they are never polite. I'm not "crapping" on people by having a different point of view, it's called a discussion. My point of view is that we should thoughtfully consider what might become of the Chicago White Sox in light of this inevitable ownership change. It shouldn't be considered good news, it's simply news. I don't know why you think Jerry Reinsdorf is specifically more evil than any other rich idiot, but I think after his death, his kids have an interest in keeping the Sox in town only insofar as it affects the Bulls and their reputation. I frankly care more about the team being the "Chicago" White Sox than I do about their record. I literally wouldn't be a fan anymore, and I make this point because, simply, "why wouldn't he move the team?" at this point, it seems like the only way they stay put is if a new stadium gets built, and I think for non-baseball reasons they shouldn't build a new park. I'm also thinking emotionally on this like everyone else, I don't have a right to "jump into the discussion" and share my feelings? You're a dick, dude. Cool. Quit talking down to people and you probably won't get posts like that in response. I do always get a kick of people talking about their "rights" on a privately owned message board, as if that is a shield against others being able to provide their own opinions in response. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 45 minutes ago, fathom said: Wouldn’t they have to start building their stadium relatively soon if that’s the case? Doesn’t seem at all likely given the timeline presented. Wouldn't other cities also have the same timeline? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 9 minutes ago, JoeC said: Wouldn't other cities also have the same timeline? Lot easier to get an extension with the state of Illinois it would seem 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 32 minutes ago, caulfield12 said: Nashville has zero public money for the Sox as well. That's not happening. Who wants a team this bad when expansion is the cleaner pathway? The quality of the team doesn't matter with a move. That is short term thinking. If a city is trying to attract a team its for long term economic investment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) 12 minutes ago, ptatc said: The quality of the team doesn't matter with a move. That is short term thinking. If a city is trying to attract a team its for long term economic investment. It's certainly not helping with the State of Illinois when you run the 29th highest payroll and consistently lose 100+ games without fail. Edited June 5 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Line Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 8 minutes ago, caulfield12 said: It's certainly not helping with the State of Illinois when you run the 29th highest payroll and consistently lose 100+ games without fail. The State of Illinois truly does not care... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Line Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Nothing about this move suggests Nashville or anywhere else aside from Chicago. Only a troll would suggest otherwise. 6 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.