Jump to content
North Side Baseball

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,006

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by WrigleyField 22

  1. WrigleyField 22
    Also, Chicago already has top 10 grossing concert venues for both stadiums and arenas, that mostly is only being beat out by much larger metros or one mega tourism one (and one exception - Boston) https://www.billboard.com/top-stadiums/ https://www.billboard.com/top-venues-15001-capacity/ Also the small venues bring in way more revenue because there's so few acts selling 50k seat shows. There just isn't that much econ activity for 60k seat stadiums and SF already does pretty dang good with those and generating economic activity off it. It's just Super Bowls and Final Fours they can't host (and they'd probably get exactly 1 SB. Final Fours would be pretty rare too.) The payoff potential sucks.
  2. WrigleyField 22
    Look there is absolutely a potential boom for AH schools and other local tax jurisdictions with a finished AH park because they're starting at near zero now and would be taking it from another city. Unfortunately for ole Georgey boy that econ activity aint buying a stadium and development. And at both the county and state level they're negotiating against themselves on the move.
  3. WrigleyField 22
    I mean the main taxing authorities are local jurisdictions and their property tax. They all seem pretty willing to negotiate mutually beneficial tax payments but I think team wants state to override the local ability a bit to ensure low tax bills in perpetuity. When it comes to Infrastructure, the state absolutely needs to have a suspicious eye on what the number is. The initial infrastructure ask was pretty big which means one of two things (probably both) 1. The team is sneaking in actual site development as public infrastructure 2. The Bears chose a ****** site that needs tons of infrastructure to become viable. Needless to say the state shouldn't be jumping at making bad business investments investable if there isn't a clear payoff in terms of economic activity. The oft-empty stadium has shown time and time again there is no payoff. At best it's mostly displacing SF economic activity. If it's a broader entertainment district it's also just pilfering off any other nearby entertainment venues like Rosemont or whatever. Maybe there's like 2 extra concerts and events the state/area is missing out on annually that are served by a venue of that size.
  4. WrigleyField 22
    I don't think it carried any sort of protected landmark status. It was just a designation. They could have torn that down full stop.
  5. WrigleyField 22
    Even a well designed stadium at the same site would gave issues. I think McDome was the actual missed opportunity.
  6. WrigleyField 22
    Nah Stafford isn't built for the cold. Bears W. God willing not Cardiac Bears.
  7. WrigleyField 22
    Hell of a run. Yea I know they failed to reach high level success in past decade, but it's still impressive how long he kept them competetive without ever bottoming out. That in itself is a feat.
  8. WrigleyField 22
    Yea but even if it's hosting 156 events (3× a week fully booked), it's less consistent use, and higher max volume need than something like a business or retail development. People will trash on politicians who are doing what appears to be absolute bare minimum due diligence on spending.
  9. WrigleyField 22
    They want to find out more about "Be You"
  10. WrigleyField 22
    Although some reports this week have tried to downplay the rumors, there's been rumors nonetheless that there was a bit of a Lamar / coaching spat that was hitting a head. Now maybe they could have forced through that spat, but I'm picking the QB almost every time, but certainly for a 63 year old coach. If it was like McVay type I'd say hold on, but easy to chose Lamar over Harbaugh (and staff) if that was at all part of decision. But yes, could still end up much worse than they were.
  11. WrigleyField 22
    Pete Carroll out in Las Vegas
  12. WrigleyField 22
    Okay and apparently they expect Matt Ryan to be that president of football ops for Atlanta.
  13. WrigleyField 22
    More Atlanta updates. They are hiring a President of Football to oversee GM and Head Coach. Their longtime President/CEO, Rich McKay (who previously held GM title with both Buccs and Falcons) is moving onto other endeavors within Blank's business/sports portfolio, and some other guy will be their business President. We just saw Tennessee abandon the "Football president above GM" structure a year after they out it into place. We'll see if Atlanta'S last longer, but with 2 presidents, the old president still with the family, and 2 search firms it certainly seems like too many cooks in the kitchen.
  14. WrigleyField 22
    Fontenot out as Atlanta GM too. And they are going to use two different head hunting firms to run the Head Coach and GM searches concurrently
  15. WrigleyField 22
    Supposedly evaluating a site in Hammond that's in an industrial park, right next to a chemical plant.
  16. WrigleyField 22
    I know people keep saying Gary, but I haven't actually seen that get mentioned from anyone involved. I'm sure it will be more like Hammond if it gets that far. Granted, Hammond still isn't Chicago/South Loop, but I'd doubt Gary is in play.
  17. WrigleyField 22
    I didn't say it was wrong... (?) My point was maybe if it happens earlier Bears muesum campus dev looks different.
  18. WrigleyField 22
    I think the combo of LSD and trains is what makes it really difficult. And said trains provide practically no gameday transit utility. Pedestrian/plaza build out over both and turn Metra electric into usable transit leg from Millennium Park and you'd have something pretty salvageable. There was a grand plan private proposal to do something like this on a large scale, but it really never got support (and had questionable transit utility which would have been key as it wanted large public investment) Or my grand fantasy of a Sox/Bears site swap. Easy to move in a couple thousand Sox fans in and out of muesum campus.
  19. WrigleyField 22
    Over wrought concerns about saving thr collanades while still wanting to modernizing the sight lines. They did a great job given the limitations, honestly, but the limitations were self imposed. Timing is also everything. I wonder if Daley had taken the bulldozer to Meigs a decade before he did that a concept like the Bears floated with a new stadium to south and the collanades forming a open plaza couldn't have happened 20 years ago. SF site would still have issues, but they could have spent the subsequent 20 years trying to improve the pedestrian and transit site access. But the current iteration of that said plan SUCKED with it being a massive "public in name only" money grab offer by Bears.
  20. WrigleyField 22
    Thats supposedly the case. So 870M is probably secretly like 2.7B
  21. WrigleyField 22
    Oh it's for sure possible. I mean it was like 55 years ago that Soldier Field was the 5 year plan lmao
  22. WrigleyField 22
    United Center : privately funded and owned. Privately funding multi billion mixed use development. Wrigley Field : privately funded and owned. Privately funded renovations. Privately funded massive mixed use developments. Two massive successes. Meanwhile the private-public partnerships of Soldier Field and GR Field are massive albatrosses. Each of those above examples bring in like 2x as many customers than SF does too. And if Bears left SF, by my estimation they can't be responsible for much more than about half of those annual visitors. It would suck, but let them leave. I may horsefeathers on the state of Indiana, but NWI is still chicagoland and Bears territory. If residents of Indianapolis and Southern Indiana wanna finance my teams playground it is what it is. The thought of 80/94 traffic is horrifying but if they do a good enough job with the stadium maybe I'd go to more games than I do now.
  23. WrigleyField 22
    Yea I'm on team "Warren bungled this". The time he did spend working with politicians was with Johnson anyone, who took the bare minimum time could have quickly seen that Chicago alone was never gonna be in a spot to provide serious funding. It was always gonna take the state and they spent a bunch of wasted time on a salvage SF plan without the right stakeholders on place. There is no good option. They should have done the McDome in mid 90s and it would have been cheaper than SF reno. But Bear weather or whatever. Now they're pretty horsefeathered. Options for staying in the city suck. AH isn't the worst site, but IL rightfully isn't that incentivized for a massive infrastructure project to make it work. It definitely won't be Gary if Indiana happens. Maybe Hammond. AH would be better overall for fan density (especially wealth), but it could be that Indiana is Bears best bet. And I won't really be upset if that's what it comes to. And certainly glad if IL doesn't buck up 1B or more to save it. If they lost them it's been 40-50 years coming. Any save now is a hail mary.
  24. WrigleyField 22
    Define the "threat" from Illinois please.
  25. WrigleyField 22
    If I were a nfl QB I would simply throw to the most open receiver who gave me the most optimal EPA result every time and not take sacks.
×
×
  • Create New...