WBWSF Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 A few years ago Rosemont wanted to build a new stadium for the Cubs. The Bears don't want the White Sox in Arlington Heights. If they had wanted the White Sox in Arlington Heights the deal would have happened already. If the 78 site doesn't work out for the White Sox, would Rosemont be a site for a White Sox stadium? I think a Rosemont site would be better for the White Sox fan base than Arlington Heights. The Mayor of Rosemont is a White Sox fan. Wonder if Rosemont might be the answer for a new White Sox stadium. The CTA blue line, expressway and tollway are right there in Rosemont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highland Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 I don't know if it will happen in Rosemont, but I am convinced the Sox will be getting a new stadium in the near future. How this will come down, I don't know. But the days of GRF are numbered. The franchise is in a weird position. Meanwhile, at least in the short term, the losing will continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 I've been more than fine going to 1-2 Chicago Dogs games over the last few summers with the kids. Enjoyable experience, cheap, kids enjoy it. And it's super easy to get to living on the north shore. Sox would be barking up the wrong tree in Rosemont Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Mite Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 3 hours ago, WBWSF said: A few years ago Rosemont wanted to build a new stadium for the Cubs. The Bears don't want the White Sox in Arlington Heights. If they had wanted the White Sox in Arlington Heights the deal would have happened already. If the 78 site doesn't work out for the White Sox, would Rosemont be a site for a White Sox stadium? I think a Rosemont site would be better for the White Sox fan base than Arlington Heights. The Mayor of Rosemont is a White Sox fan. Wonder if Rosemont might be the answer for a new White Sox stadium. The CTA blue line, expressway and tollway are right there in Rosemont. Why would the Bears have such big say-so having 8 home games a year with a few of them being in damn cold weather. If it would be an entertainment center like the Braves have you probably would do most of your business in the summer so why the Bears don’t want the Sox is a mystery to me. The Bears left Wrigley Field almost 50 years ago and for decades were bosom buddies with the Cubs, I wonder if it were the Cubs that were going to be their partners at Arlington it would be a different story with the Northsiders being welcomed with open arms. As far as Rosemont, it would OK with it being easier to get to but fans would have put up with aircraft noise. My son and I attended the first event ever held at the Rosemont Horizon, IIRC it was 1981 and was for an indoor soccer game, that place is right smack dab in the middle in one of the runway approaches and we thought the planes were landing on the roof, that is why the arena has seating that is just about the opposite of the upper deck at the Rate, very shallow with not the greatest sightlines. I’m sorry but I’m not sure what the name is now, I think it’s the Allstate Arena but I haven’t been back to Chicago since 2015. Edited June 19 by The Mighty Mite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 3 hours ago, WBWSF said: A few years ago Rosemont wanted to build a new stadium for the Cubs. The Bears don't want the White Sox in Arlington Heights. If they had wanted the White Sox in Arlington Heights the deal would have happened already. If the 78 site doesn't work out for the White Sox, would Rosemont be a site for a White Sox stadium? I think a Rosemont site would be better for the White Sox fan base than Arlington Heights. The Mayor of Rosemont is a White Sox fan. Wonder if Rosemont might be the answer for a new White Sox stadium. The CTA blue line, expressway and tollway are right there in Rosemont. What is your basis for this conclusion? Do you have a link to an article that says the Bears don't want the Sox at AH? Why would a deal have happened already if they did want the Sox there? Are the McCaskeys going to give Jerry Reinsdorf $1B to build a baseball stadium? Because the state sure ain't. Heck, the Bears don't even have a deal for their own stadium at AH yet. The reason why there is no deal anywhere for a Sox stadium is that JR is only willing to commit something like $200M in private money to a new ballpark and it's crystal clear that this is a non-starter. So, it'll be up to the Ishbias to decide if they want to bankroll a new stadium for the team they are (eventually) buying. IMO, if the 78 doesn't work out for the Sox then their best option is to remain at 35th and Shields and massively renovate The Rate and do a major redevelopment of much of the parking lots around the park in an attempt to create some sort of entertainment district there. Edited June 19 by 77 Hitmen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Mite Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 9 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: What is your basis for this conclusion? Do you have a link to an article that says the Bears don't want the Sox at AH? Why would a deal have happened already if they did? Are the McCaskeys going to give Jerry Reinsdorf $1B to build a baseball stadium? Because the state sure ain't. Heck, the Bears don't even have a deal for their own stadium at AH yet. The reason why there is no deal anywhere for a Sox stadium is that JR is only willing to commit something like $200M in private money to a new ballpark and it's crystal clear that this is a non-starter. IMO, if the 78 doesn't work out for the Sox then their best option is to remain at 35th and Shields and either massively renovate The Rate and do a major redevelopment of much of the parking lots around the park. If they would consider a massive rebuild at 35th and Shields they would be better off with a modern version of old Comiskey on the site of the old one making sure it faced the same way with views of the skyline over the left field wall, that means no upper deck in left field much like Progressive Field but I wouldn’t erect a massive scoreboard in LF like Progressive has. Thinking about it, no upper deck in RF either, they could use PNC or Comerica as models but making it look more like old Comiskey. Both of those parks have huge scoreboards in left field, at a new Comiskey the board would be in right field. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 24 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: What is your basis for this conclusion? Do you have a link to an article that says the Bears don't want the Sox at AH? Why would a deal have happened already if they did want the Sox there? Are the McCaskeys going to give Jerry Reinsdorf $1B to build a baseball stadium? Because the state sure ain't. Heck, the Bears don't even have a deal for their own stadium at AH yet. The reason why there is no deal anywhere for a Sox stadium is that JR is only willing to commit something like $200M in private money to a new ballpark and it's crystal clear that this is a non-starter. So, it'll be up to the Ishbias to decide if they want to bankroll a new stadium for the team they are (eventually) buying. IMO, if the 78 doesn't work out for the Sox then their best option is to remain at 35th and Shields and massively renovate The Rate and do a major redevelopment of much of the parking lots around the park in an attempt to create some sort of entertainment district there. Very true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted June 19 Author Share Posted June 19 24 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: What is your basis for this conclusion? Do you have a link to an article that says the Bears don't want the Sox at AH? Why would a deal have happened already if they did want the Sox there? Are the McCaskeys going to give Jerry Reinsdorf $1B to build a baseball stadium? Because the state sure ain't. Heck, the Bears don't even have a deal for their own stadium at AH yet. The reason why there is no deal anywhere for a Sox stadium is that JR is only willing to commit something like $200M in private money to a new ballpark and it's crystal clear that this is a non-starter. So, it'll be up to the Ishbias to decide if they want to bankroll a new stadium for the team they are (eventually) buying. IMO, if the 78 doesn't work out for the Sox then their best option is to remain at 35th and Shields and massively renovate The Rate and do a major redevelopment of much of the parking lots around the park in an attempt to create some sort of entertainment district there. The Bears ownership don't get along with JR. This goes back to the mid 1980s when JR tried to buy a percentage of the Bears. From what I know the Bears have $2 billion to pay towards a new dome stadium in Arlington Heights. They are $3 billion short. Their new stadium is projected to cost $5 billion dollars. I don't know whats going to happen in terms of new stadiums for the Bears and White Sox. It looks to me a new White Sox stadium depends on how much money Ishbia wants to spend. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 3 hours ago, Highland said: I don't know if it will happen in Rosemont, but I am convinced the Sox will be getting a new stadium in the near future. How this will come down, I don't know. But the days of GRF are numbered. The franchise is in a weird position. Meanwhile, at least in the short term, the losing will continue. This would be my guess, too. I try to imagine what the Ishbias (it's not just Justin, but his brother and father are part of the Sox ownership bid) think is the best way to assure success of a team they are spending something close to $2B to purchase. Over the last 35 years, this team has had trouble consistently drawing fans to the current park. A lot of that is due to JR's series of PR blunders (including terrible decisions in designing the stadium) and, of course, the lack of winning. IMHO, aside from that fleeting moment of success in 2005, Reinsdorf has sucked the life out of this franchise and has handed more and more market share to the Cubs. Of course, they can just decide to keep the park and surrounding area as is and they'll fill the park if they win a bunch of pennants, but easier said than done and it's really tough to keep a successful core going as you're going up against all the other wealthy owners who have the exact same game plan. And yeah, the franchise is in a very weird position. They have an owner who is insular and out of touch with how to field a competitive team in today's MLB. They're being buried by the Cubs in the market as Ricketts poured money into successfully upgrading Wrigley and is again fielding a team that looks like a pennant contender that is capturing the city's hearts and minds. The new owners really need to do something dramatic to change the dynamics of this team's market share. The Sox have a fiercely loyal fan base who has a huge chip on their shoulders about how people disrespect their team and their ballpark, but that won't be enough to drive this team forward for the next 3 or 4 decades. Edited June 19 by 77 Hitmen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitekrazy Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 15 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: This would be my guess, too. I try to imagine what the Ishbias (it's not just Justin, but his brother and father are part of the Sox ownership bid) think is the best way to assure success of a team they are spending something close to $2B to purchase. Over the last 35 years, this team has had trouble consistently drawing fans to the current park. A lot of that is due to JR's series of PR blunders (including terrible decisions in designing the stadium) and, of course, the lack of winning. IMHO, aside from that fleeting moment of success in 2005, Reinsdorf has sucked the life out of this franchise and has handed more and more market share to the Cubs. Of course, they can just decide to keep the park and surrounding area as is and they'll fill the park if they win a bunch of pennants, but easier said than done and it's really tough to keep a successful core going as you're going up against all the other wealthy owners who have the exact same game plan. And yeah, the franchise is in a very weird position. They have an owner who is insular and out of touch with how to field a competitive team in today's MLB. They're being buried by the Cubs in the market as Ricketts poured money into successfully upgrading Wrigley and is again fielding a team that looks like a pennant contender that is capturing the city's hearts and minds. The new owners really need to do something dramatic to change the dynamics of this team's market share. The Sox have a fiercely loyal fan base who has a huge chip on their shoulders about how people disrespect their team and their ballpark, but that isn't enough to drive this team forward for the next 3 or 4 decades. Disrespect the team = Jerry Reinsdorf They will have to win and win consistently to rebuild that fanbase. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcq Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 A new stadium is a huge challenge for a dysfunctional org. Over their heads. Sox Generic Park is their home to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) 6 hours ago, WBWSF said: The Bears ownership don't get along with JR. This goes back to the mid 1980s when JR tried to buy a percentage of the Bears. From what I know the Bears have $2 billion to pay towards a new dome stadium in Arlington Heights. They are $3 billion short. Their new stadium is projected to cost $5 billion dollars. I don't know whats going to happen in terms of new stadiums for the Bears and White Sox. It looks to me a new White Sox stadium depends on how much money Ishbia wants to spend. Part of what the Bears want in AH is a revenue stream from the development around the football stadium. If Justin Ishbia said he wants into build his own stadium with his own money on the land, I'd be shocked if the Bears would say no to a facility that would bring 81 additional events to the property every year just because they don't like the current Sox owner, who won't be the Sox owner going forward. At any rate, take a deep breath everyone and repeat after me, the SOX ARE NOT MOVING TO ARLINGTON HEIGHTS. Neither team has even hinted at such an option. The only official I heard mention it was the incoming mayor of AH who was just dreaming out loud about it. Until I hear someone in a position of power or some reporter say there is serious discussion about this possibility, I see it as nothing more than fan fiction. I just can't imagine that the Ishbias want to sink $1B+ and the future of a franchise they spent something like $2B to purchase into a Sox stadium way out in the NW suburbs, where a large majority of people are Cubs fans and that is far from the die hard Sox fan base of the South Side and S/SW suburbs. Edited June 19 by 77 Hitmen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joejoesox Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 (edited) wrong thread. Edited June 19 by joejoesox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 11 hours ago, The Mighty Mite said: If they would consider a massive rebuild at 35th and Shields they would be better off with a modern version of old Comiskey on the site of the old one making sure it faced the same way with views of the skyline over the left field wall, that means no upper deck in left field much like Progressive Field but I wouldn’t erect a massive scoreboard in LF like Progressive has. Thinking about it, no upper deck in RF either, they could use PNC or Comerica as models but making it look more like old Comiskey. Both of those parks have huge scoreboards in left field, at a new Comiskey the board would be in right field. 100%. So many great ideas like those you mention could result in a great stadium that respects and honors baseball history on the South side, Zachary Taylor Davis' designs of Comiskey and Wrigley, and a park that takes full financial advantage of everything that is already in place. Regarding your point about opening up left field to a view of the neighborhood to the North and a view of downtown, that was the original design before they added the second deck. Likewise, Wrigley was a different park before Ricketts ruined the view with the giant scoreboard in LF and the other large screens blocking out the neighborhood. I recall seeing Dave Kingman hit what I believe was one of his longest, soaring home runs there. It isn't just you and I that think the giant scoreboard in LF at Wrigley is an abomination. Paul Sullivan has complained about the same thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Mite Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 (edited) 14 hours ago, tray said: 100%. So many great ideas like those you mention could result in a great stadium that respects and honors baseball history on the South side, Zachary Taylor Davis' designs of Comiskey and Wrigley, and a park that takes full financial advantage of everything that is already in place. Regarding your point about opening up left field to a view of the neighborhood to the North and a view of downtown, that was the original design before they added the second deck. Likewise, Wrigley was a different park before Ricketts ruined the view with the giant scoreboard in LF and the other large screens blocking out the neighborhood. I recall seeing Dave Kingman hit what I believe was one of his longest, soaring home runs there. It isn't just you and I that think the giant scoreboard in LF at Wrigley is an abomination. Paul Sullivan has complained about the same thing. So true, Ricketts ruined Wrigley with those scoreboards and also messing up the bleachers as the flow of the rightfield and leftfield seats are off kilter with the centerfield section. I remember that Kingman homer, when last seen it was rolling north down Kenmore Ave.. PS We lived in what is now Wrigleyville in 1950-1952, went to Kindergarten and 1st grade at LeMoyne grammar school which is just east of the Addison L station on Fremont Ave. Edited June 20 by The Mighty Mite 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 On 6/19/2025 at 12:09 PM, The Mighty Mite said: If they would consider a massive rebuild at 35th and Shields they would be better off with a modern version of old Comiskey on the site of the old one making sure it faced the same way with views of the skyline over the left field wall, that means no upper deck in left field much like Progressive Field but I wouldn’t erect a massive scoreboard in LF like Progressive has. Thinking about it, no upper deck in RF either, they could use PNC or Comerica as models but making it look more like old Comiskey. Both of those parks have huge scoreboards in left field, at a new Comiskey the board would be in right field. Nope, not going to happen as long as Reinsdorf is still calling the shots. He wants nothing to do with anything Comiskey-related. If you’ll recall he turned down more naming rights money from Wintrust Bank than what he got from Rate, but turned it down because Wintrust wanted the new name to be “Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park”. He flatly rejected having Comiskey in the name. Perhaps the Ishbias could be intrigued with a nod to the past like you suggest, but not current guy. No way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 14 minutes ago, Thad Bosley said: Nope, not going to happen as long as Reinsdorf is still calling the shots. He wants nothing to do with anything Comiskey-related. If you’ll recall he turned down more naming rights money from Wintrust Bank than what he got from Rate, but turned it down because Wintrust wanted the new name to be “Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park”. He flatly rejected having Comiskey in the name. Perhaps the Ishbias could be intrigued with a nod to the past like you suggest, but not current guy. No way. I thought the story there was he might not have been told the whole truth there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said: I thought the story there was he might not have been told the whole truth there? Both are correct at least from what I have been told Wintrust did supposedly offer more money but did want the Comiskey name associated with it and JR said no. I was also told that an individual (I was given the name but won't repeat it) had a conflict of interest with a relative holding a high ranking position at the Guaranteed Rate Company and the Sox person didn't include all that info to JR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Mite Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 2 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said: Both are correct at least from what I have been told Wintrust did supposedly offer more money but did want the Comiskey name associated with it and JR said no. I was also told that an individual (I was given the name but won't repeat it) had a conflict of interest with a relative holding a high ranking position at the Guaranteed Rate Company and the Sox person didn't include all that info to JR. Wintrust Field at Armour Square would have worked for me but I’m not big on corporate names for Pro Sports venues so any new stadium should be White Sox Park. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 44 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said: Wintrust Field at Armour Square would have worked for me but I’m not big on corporate names for Pro Sports venues so any new stadium should be White Sox Park. I don't think anyone is a fan of corporate named parks, but it is inescapbale at this point. "Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park" or something of the sort is probably the best we can hope for. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thad Bosley Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 5 hours ago, Tnetennba said: I don't think anyone is a fan of corporate named parks, but it is inescapbale at this point. "Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park" or something of the sort is probably the best we can hope for. This was the best we could hope for, given the corporate rights naming era we are in. A corporate name like “Wintrust”, which is better than so many others (and infinitely better than “Guaranteed Rate or Rate” and their upside down, red arrow!), along with the nostalgic nod to Comiskey, would have been so much preferable, given our team’s charter franchise status. In most references the ballpark’s reference would have been to “Wintrust Field”, just to shorten it, just like in Baltimore where it’s usually just called “Camden Yards” versus the full name of “Camden Yards at Orioles Park”. Just another of so many missed opportunities by the current owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 On 6/19/2025 at 11:22 AM, 77 Hitmen said: and they'll fill the park if they win a bunch of pennants, but easier said than done That isn't happening. The Sox are too cheap to win pennants. Isbia could change that but it may take 5-10 years after his taking over to win an ALCS. 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.