Bears Stadium news

[BigSlick]

oh totally agreed. they've done it in the most annoying way possible and this is very likely not the end of it. this drama fest may continue for years

[Bobson Dugnutt]

55 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

The Hammond Bears just doesn't have the same ring to it. They are following the money like all good late-stage capitalists. 

We are in for so much pain. I feel so bad for my kids. 

I saw a thing about millennials

Born after 9/11

Enter college when expenses are out of the middle class ability to pay

enter the job market during COVID

Enter the housing market during a housing crisis

By mid career their jobs will be taken by AI

By retiremient there will be no Social Security

All so millionaires and billionaires can have it all. 

Millennials were not born after 9/11. Gen  Z was. 

[minnesotacubsfan]

1 hour ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

I think they need to change the fight song though. 

 

"You're the pride and joy of... Chicagoland" ? 

"We lost our joy to Warren's ploy"  ?

[Irrelevant Dude]

1 hour ago, CubinNY said:

By retiremient there will be no Social Security

I mean, there will be no retirement, so that problem kind of fixes itself.

[WrigleyField 22]

1 hour ago, Outshined_One said:

Imagine if, back in 2023 (or earlier), the Bears announced an exploratory committee regarding the stadium, be it extending the Soldier Field lease or finding a location suitable for the new stadium, where this committee would have met with various officials around the Chicagoland area (including Indiana) to scope out stadium sites and see what sorts of deals could be made in advance of a new lease or site purchase or whatever.  After multiple meetings, site visits, etc., they announce a deal with Hammond and Indiana to move to the Wolf Lake site.  I feel like that would have been a much easier pill to swallow than the horsefeathers clown show we've seen since the AH purchase.

What bothers me isn't that they're moving to Indiana, but instead the entitlement they've shown and tantrums they've thrown because they bought a site and didn't get the Hochul Special within a week of the purchase,  What also bothers me is they tried to feed Chicagoans a massive load of horsefeathers about a new lakefront stadium that we all knew was make believe, and our horsefeathers mayor swallowed it whole like some dipshit fanboy.

And what bothers me even more is you just know they're going to continue playing these games until they finally get everything they want.

They're a poorly run business. Have been for a very long time. They've had several good offers in Chicago since Soldier Field's was thier "temporary home" in 1971. And turned them down for suspect reasons. We got the worst of the options eventually with a SF reno and now theyre solely focused on it being this multi-use entertainment district. Something they never really ever brought up until AH became available... 

 

Even today if they just wanted a nice football stadium, it could probably happen in the city. But they want to socialize even more cost to create a playground they are the sole benefactor of. Socialize cost. Privatize profit. 

[Hot Sauce]

Embarrassing ahh franchise. 

[Soul]

Damn them to hell if they drag us across the border because I can’t not be a Bears fan and I don’t want anything but Bears football in Chicago.  To be frank, AH was already stretching it for me but I was willing to be OK with it because the museum campus isn’t ideal for several reasons.  But Hammond / Gary is out of bounds, literally and figuratively. It’s a nightmare if it happens.  I won’t forgive them.

[WrigleyField 22]

37 minutes ago, Soul said:

Damn them to hell if they drag us across the border because I can’t not be a Bears fan and I don’t want anything but Bears football in Chicago.  To be frank, AH was already stretching it for me but I was willing to be OK with it because the museum campus isn’t ideal for several reasons.  But Hammond / Gary is out of bounds, literally and figuratively. It’s a nightmare if it happens.  I won’t forgive them.

I rarely go to games as is. It would probably become a Meadowlands type dump, and I'd go even less. 

 

So I'll move on, but I bet they'll see their franchise value grow more slowly than it could I bet. They'll still end up on the hook for a decent amount of the cost of trying to make Hammond a destination and when that fails they won't have made that much more to their name. Or at least less than if they prioritized a good location. 

[WrigleyField 22]

It's just so hard seeing this ending up anything other than a Meadowlands type stadium

ABC 7 Chicago | This is the area where the Bears stadium would be...

WWW.INSTAGRAM.COM

---

1,713 likes, 696 comments - abc7chicago on February 19, 2026: "This is the area where the...

 

[Bobson Dugnutt]

1 hour ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

It's just so hard seeing this ending up anything other than a Meadowlands type stadium

ABC 7 Chicago | This is the area where the Bears stadium would be...

WWW.INSTAGRAM.COM

---

1,713 likes, 696 comments - abc7chicago on February 19, 2026: "This is the area where the...

 

I can’t stop laughing. What an absolute dump. 

[Geographyhater8888]

18 hours ago, Outshined_One said:

Quite the contrary, the state is facing major budget issues due to pension payment obligations and federal funding turning into a game of whac-a-mole. Pritzker was vocal about not using taxpayer funds for anything beyond utilities/transportation upgrades for a new Bears stadium, and offering this sort of deal would have seen him strung up by the short and curlies. It's also why Brandon Johnson was roundly mocked for pushing a new lakefront stadium.

The Bears can horsefeathers off to London for all I care at this point. This whole saga has been mind-numbingly stupid.

I won’t pretend to know horsefeathers. What are the Bears asking for from the state of Illinois out of curiosity?

[Geographyhater8888]

7 hours ago, Bobson Dugnutt said:

I can’t stop laughing. What an absolute dump. 

It looks like an image shot in norilsk Russia.

Edited February 20 by Geographyhater8888

[Brian707]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

I won’t pretend to know horsefeathers. What are the Bears asking for from the state of Illinois out of curiosity?

Handouts. 

They aren't moving to Indiana.  Most of the team/ownership lives in Lake Co. IL They won't own the stadium in Hammond. This is a bargaining ploy. Red state Indiana wants to make Pritzger and the democrats look bad..

 

 

[BigbadB]

It would be kinda crazy to have no Chicago or Illinois football teams, but 1 in a town of a population smaller than Peoria IL (Green Bay) and then 2 in Indiana. 

This same game was played in San Diego. Spanos is a piece of horsefeathers. He didn't just want a downtown football stadium, he wanted the people to pay for the whole thing. That one did not end well, either. But. I believe the people of San Diego made the right choice in not caving to a billionaire's greedy demands.

I guess if they do move to Indiana, they can have a really nice practice facility in Arlington Heights. LOL.

[WrigleyField 22]

2 hours ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

I won’t pretend to know horsefeathers. What are the Bears asking for from the state of Illinois out of curiosity?

$855M for infrastructure was the official ask, publically announced Sept 30, 2025.

Then also tax certainty in the form of a "PILOT" bill which is a mega-project bill that allows mega developments to negotiate a fixed long term payment with local taxing jurisdictions. 

 

On the first point, the Bears have never publically stated with any real specificity what that $855M covers. But reading between lines I don't beleive it is even covering infrastructure for the whole development, just the stadium. But for some context, NY State and Erie counties $850m was a record setting contribution at the time of their agreement (not in % terms or inflation adjusted, but still). We can presume cost has only risen since then and will probably have creep beyond inflationary reasons. Ultimately it's evident to me is that the AH site was a bad investment because of how much infrastructure was needed, and I don't think it's unreasonable to question if the public benefit for infrastructure would be there (let alone being paid back with new tax revenue). 

 

On the second point, I think the Bears have also been really bad at conveying specifics. There's been a lot of bad misinfo out there like "the state asked Bears to pay $200m". The state doesn't set tax rates/assessments, local taxing bodies do, and the $200m was never an ask from any government body but a third party think tank number on what the tax could be if the entire dev cost was the assessed value and taxed at standard commercial rate. And bad apples to apples comparisons are being made to much smaller properties, including Sofi where everyone is quoting as the highest stadium property tax ever at 8.8m, but that is additionally just the stadium and not entire 300 acre development.  So at this point all we really know is Bears want new legislation, but even that wording they're still asking for tweaks on.  And no explanation for why existing tax abatement structures like TIFs aren't suitable. 

[Geographyhater8888]

17 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

$855M for infrastructure was the official ask, publically announced Sept 30, 2025.

Then also tax certainty in the form of a "PILOT" bill which is a mega-project bill that allows mega developments to negotiate a fixed long term payment with local taxing jurisdictions. 

 

On the first point, the Bears have never publically stated with any real specificity what that $855M covers. But reading between lines I don't beleive it is even covering infrastructure for the whole development, just the stadium. But for some context, NY State and Erie counties $850m was a record setting contribution at the time of their agreement (not in % terms or inflation adjusted, but still). We can presume cost has only risen since then and will probably have creep beyond inflationary reasons. Ultimately it's evident to me is that the AH site was a bad investment because of how much infrastructure was needed, and I don't think it's unreasonable to question if the public benefit for infrastructure would be there (let alone being paid back with new tax revenue). 

 

On the second point, I think the Bears have also been really bad at conveying specifics. There's been a lot of bad misinfo out there like "the state asked Bears to pay $200m". The state doesn't set tax rates/assessments, local taxing bodies do, and the $200m was never an ask from any government body but a third party think tank number on what the tax could be if the entire dev cost was the assessed value and taxed at standard commercial rate. And bad apples to apples comparisons are being made to much smaller properties, including Sofi where everyone is quoting as the highest stadium property tax ever at 8.8m, but that is additionally just the stadium and not entire 300 acre development.  So at this point all we really know is Bears want new legislation, but even that wording they're still asking for tweaks on.  And no explanation for why existing tax abatement structures like TIFs aren't suitable. 

Thanks. The only thing I have to add is that the McCaskys are Beverly hillbillies whose only source of income comes from owning an NFL team. Of course they want funding from the state in some form. Kronkie is a self made billionaire too, 

I’m also curious why they’d chose a toxic wasteland to build a stadium in Hammond. Unless it’s adjacent to a major highway is it the optics of being in walking distance of the Chicago border? I just imagine Fox coming back from commercial with an Ariel view of wolf lake with a close up of a guy in a hazmat suit collecting water samples from wolf lake outside of the tide detergent done 

Edited February 20 by Geographyhater8888

[WrigleyField 22]

2 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Thanks. The only thing I have to add is that the McCaskys are Beverly hillbillies whose only source of income comes from owning an NFL team. Of course they want funding from the state in some form. Kronkie is a self made billionaire too, 

I’m also curious why they’d chose a toxic wasteland to build a stadium in Hammond. Unless it’s adjacent to a major highway is it the optics of being in walking distance of the Chicago border? 

And that's part of what never made sense from the day they put the bid on Arlington. It was always going to be a Stan Kroeke level investment. If it was just about an upgraded football facility, there is a site in Chicago with political will and is probably viable. Probably 2 actually (I'm sure minor renos to Soldier Field could address issues). 

 

Bears want a multi use facility that they don't have the money or know how to really pull off. 

[Derwood]

Also, the Bills are replacing a stadium first built in 1963. The Bears just fully renovated Soldier Field in 2003

[WrigleyField 22]

12 minutes ago, Derwood said:

Also, the Bills are replacing a stadium first built in 1963. The Bears just fully renovated Soldier Field in 2003

Yea people are desperate to find comparable situations when a 20-25 year stadium run is pathetic. And the Bears had other options for years that they either didn't want or fumbled on. 

The same people who are like "derp derp way to go Illinois" have zero self awareness of the irony of the last time the state made a deal with the same damn business. 

[jersey cubs fan]

Attending NFL football games in person sucks anyway so let the freaking Hoosiers have their tartar sauce. 

[Geographyhater8888]

1 hour ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

And that's part of what never made sense from the day they put the bid on Arlington. It was always going to be a Stan Kroeke level investment. If it was just about an upgraded football facility, there is a site in Chicago with political will and is probably viable. Probably 2 actually (I'm sure minor renos to Soldier Field could address issues). 

 

Bears want a multi use facility that they don't have the money or know how to really pull off. 

They might want to sell some private shares if they want more funding. 

Edited February 20 by Geographyhater8888

[mul21]

49 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Thanks. The only thing I have to add is that the McCaskys are Beverly hillbillies whose only source of income comes from owning an NFL team. Of course they want funding from the state in some form. Kronkie is a self made billionaire too, 

I’m also curious why they’d chose a toxic wasteland to build a stadium in Hammond. Unless it’s adjacent to a major highway is it the optics of being in walking distance of the Chicago border? I just imagine Fox coming back from commercial with an Ariel view of wolf lake with a close up of a guy in a hazmat suit collecting water samples from wolf lake outside of the tide detergent done 

Let's not get carried away here.  He had a successful real estate business but marrying into the Walton family has absolutely allowed him to do all the things he has with regard to sports ownership.

[Geographyhater8888]

1 minute ago, mul21 said:

Let's not get carried away here.  He had a successful real estate business but marrying into the Walton family has absolutely allowed him to do all the things he has with regard to sports ownership.

I didn’t know that. I stand corrected. What matters though is he had $5 billion to finance SoFi stadium with. 

[Banedon]

After being absolutely convinced yesterday that the Bears were heading to Indiana, David Haugh is really backtracking on the radio this morning.  There are a lot of "in the know" types apparently that think this is just another step in the process of negotiation and that they'll still end up in AH.

[Outshined_One]

48 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

Bears want a multi use facility that they don't have the money or know how to really pull off. 

And that's truly what it comes down to with this situation.  The McCaskeys don't have the sort of independent wealth needed to pull off new stadium construction on their own.  The NFL has a financing arm which can help cover various costs, but it's not enough to build a new stadium on its own, and the McCaskeys' ability to find outside financing is hampered by the NFL's rules regarding leveraging ownership interests against loans.  With good reason, too, because imagine what would happen if an ownership group lost a majority stake in their team through going belly-up with JPMorgan Chase.

They can't build a new stadium on their own.  They need someone else to pick up the bill.  In a league of billionaires, they're merely millionaires.