Bears Stadium news

[Outshined_One]

1 hour ago, Wilson A2000 said:

How do you lose money owning an NFL team? Sell the team then.

I'm sure they're losing $144m a year for tax purposes only.

[Soul]

My thought is we won’t see the Bears actually leave for a new stadium until the 2030’s regardless where it is.  Took sofi 6 1/2 years from the time of site selection to opening game.  That puts us 2033 season, best case.

[Wilson A2000]

1 hour ago, Tryptamine said:

So maybe fire Kevin Warren the guy who put you in this position

They probably want to, but that would absolutely destroy any last remaining leverage they have

[mul21]

12 hours ago, Wilson A2000 said:

They probably want to, but that would absolutely destroy any last remaining leverage they have

Disagree.  I think that would actually help them save some face by completely throwing him under the bus.  There's enough out there in the media to make the case that he led them down this path and they disagreed with it all along and now they've had enough.

[Soul]

15 hours ago, mul21 said:

Disagree.  I think that would actually help them save some face by completely throwing him under the bus.  There's enough out there in the media to make the case that he led them down this path and they disagreed with it all along and now they've had enough.

If they are ever going to take control back and remove Warren, now’s the time.  Think of how weak it looks if they let themselves be led all the way down this path, disagreeing the whole time, but just letting it happen anyway.

[Brian707]

This is the same family that let Flus do a press conference an hour before he was canned. They won't fire Warren, if anything he is taking the blame in the media when the whole ownership is to blame 

Edited 11 hours ago by Brian707

[champaignchris]

On 6/8/2026 at 6:30 PM, Wilson A2000 said:

How do you lose money owning an NFL team? Sell the team then.

You don’t. Never believe a team owner who says he’s losing money. 

[Wilson A2000]

On 6/9/2026 at 8:23 AM, mul21 said:

Disagree.  I think that would actually help them save some face by completely throwing him under the bus.  There's enough out there in the media to make the case that he led them down this path and they disagreed with it all along and now they've had enough.

They would get a worse deal for them with Kevin Warren gone because you only fire him if you want Arlington Heights and the state isn’t budging on that

[mul21]

23 minutes ago, Wilson A2000 said:

They would get a worse deal for them with Kevin Warren gone because you only fire him if you want Arlington Heights and the state isn’t budging on that

I'm not so sure that's true.  Based on everything being reported, Warren straight up ignored the advice of the consultants he hired and the Bears didn't have anyone in Springfield trying to get votes for whatever proposal they were going to need passed for the funding to happen.  You dump Warren, listen to the consultants and get in front of the people you need votes from, and things might change quite a bit.

[Outshined_One]

1 hour ago, Wilson A2000 said:

They would get a worse deal for them with Kevin Warren gone because you only fire him if you want Arlington Heights and the state isn’t budging on that

The problem the Bears have is they've already horsefeathers the bed with Pritzker and a good chunk of the General Assembly for the reasons @mul21 mentioned.  The grumbling come out of this last session was less "screw the Bears!" and more "how does a Bears deal benefit Peoria, or Rockford, or Carbondale?"  The Chicago contingent of the general assembly was fully on board for *something* (especially since they were under the impression the Bears could stay in Chicago), but the PILOT bill was only going to benefit mega-projects in and around Chicago, the Bears relied on lobbyists in Springfield without actually going down to stump and court votes, and no one had a backup bill ready if the PILOT bill failed.

I'm unsure how this ultimately plays out, though, because the Bears have Indiana over a barrel at the moment.  Firing Warren would show they mean business about Illinois, yes, but if Illinois' best bill falls short of what Indiana is offering, would the Bears stay regardless?  I'm unsure about that.

[Tryptamine]

9 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

The problem the Bears have is they've already horsefeathers the bed with Pritzker and a good chunk of the General Assembly for the reasons @mul21 mentioned.  The grumbling come out of this last session was less "screw the Bears!" and more "how does a Bears deal benefit Peoria, or Rockford, or Carbondale?"  The Chicago contingent of the general assembly was fully on board for *something* (especially since they were under the impression the Bears could stay in Chicago), but the PILOT bill was only going to benefit mega-projects in and around Chicago, the Bears relied on lobbyists in Springfield without actually going down to stump and court votes, and no one had a backup bill ready if the PILOT bill failed.

I'm unsure how this ultimately plays out, though, because the Bears have Indiana over a barrel at the moment.  Firing Warren would show they mean business about Illinois, yes, but if Illinois' best bill falls short of what Indiana is offering, would the Bears stay regardless?  I'm unsure about that.

It doesn't have to be as good as Indiana's bill. You think they'd take the hugely negative press and resentment of their fan base if they left the state for comparable deals? Let's not forget the quality of the proposed site in Indiana. I'm not even sure it has to be all that close to Indiana's offer to get them to stay in Illinois. 

[mul21]

6 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

I'm unsure how this ultimately plays out, though, because the Bears have Indiana over a barrel at the moment.  Firing Warren would show they mean business about Illinois, yes, but if Illinois' best bill falls short of what Indiana is offering, would the Bears stay regardless?  I'm unsure about that.

I think anything Illinois gives them will fall short of what Indiana has offered, but the prospect of building a stadium on a toxic waste dump is probably a bigger pitfall than a little less help from Illinois.  I also keep going back to the fact that they don't even have a site to build on in Hammond, let alone all of the pre-construction work that has to be done before you move a single piece of dirt and every day they delay makes a stadium more expensive, so building in Indiana, even with the extra kickbacks, may not be as viable as AH is.

[Outshined_One]

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of issues in play here that could tank an Indiana deal, but the Idiot Ball is being passed around at a rapid clip, and I don't think it's a safe assumption the Bears stay with AH.