dll2000 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 4 minutes ago, JibjeResearch said: Chicagoans voted for the Mayor. They got all the things associated with neo liberal policies. Sorry again if I offended anyone... god bless... Don't go there. You will get a good topic locked. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JibjeResearch Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 minute ago, dll2000 said: Don't go there. You will get a good topic locked. Yes... sorry.... sorry sorry.... I just feel bad for the Chicagoans... I wish them all the very best... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JibjeResearch Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 4 minutes ago, dll2000 said: https://www.gobankingrates.com/net-worth/sports/richest-nfl-teams/ Current Value: $6.3 billion Revenue: $556 million Operating Income: $203 million I am pretty sure McCaskey's and McCaskey's on Board take salaries. So there is still $353 million. They CAN finance a multibillion dollar stadium on their own. They just don't want to. And I don't blame them. Other NFL teams have gotten sweat heart deals. I think Cook County should give them a sweat heart tax deal for investing so much in IL. But I don't think Arlington or Chicago or IL, any of them, should take a big loan, pay interest only for 40 years and stick the principal to our grand kids (like Fed Govt. does and keeps doing). Exactly! Do so would damage Chicago! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBears019 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 9 minutes ago, BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW said: Happy people in parks of all races and creeds, joining together in friendship and inclusion to absolutely bend over for George McCaskey. Odd timing but my construction guy called on a non Bears matter, hethinks this would be 4B easy and that it will never ever ever get done by 2028. He brought it up not me! He does a ton of projects in the city and was literally laughing about the timeline. Every press conference should begin and end asking if they are going to pay off the LAST taxpayer funded stadium project before they begin a new one. It is a very pretty stadium, I still think it never gets built here and I hope McCaskey is the first domino to fall in a trend of owners paying for their own playgrounds. They expect to get this project approved, clear all legal hurdles, decide on their architect/construction company (they may have already done this), put shovels in the ground, and finish this all in roughly three and a half years?!? Please. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 I WANT the stadium in Arlington. But I am okay with it in Chicago. It really wouldn't change anything for me if they built a new stadium in same place. That's how it is now. But I do love Chicago, I lived there for like 7 years. I live in the state and how Chicago goes, so goes the State. I don't want Chicago to go more bankrupt doing stupid things like this. I know politicians. If you okay them to handle a whole bunch of money they will steal a bunch of it. They always do. That's why they love big projects so much. The project will cost so much more than what they are saying. And Chicago services and schools will suffer for it while the politicians get rich and build big homes outside of IL and go retire laughing at us. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBears019 Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 When I take my personal feelings about the funding, politics, and horrendous dog and pony show presentation of this out, the renderings of this stadium look pretty awesome. I like how they kept the columns from the original soldier field. It would be cool to hang out there knowing that was the same spot where so much Bears history took place. I love the all glass wall on the north end. I've been to exactly one Bears game in my life, and I've attended an Iowa football game there, and a Kenny Chesney concert there. In almost 32 years I've been there three times. So the difficulty of getting there, lack of immediate bars/restaurants, etc. isn't a huge deal to me. It would be awesome if there was a Wrigley Field atmostphere to it like the AH property could provide, but its far from necessary. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 13 minutes ago, CBears019 said: When I take my personal feelings about the funding, politics, and horrendous dog and pony show presentation of this out, the renderings of this stadium look pretty awesome. I like how they kept the columns from the original soldier field. It would be cool to hang out there knowing that was the same spot where so much Bears history took place. I love the all glass wall on the north end. I've been to exactly one Bears game in my life, and I've attended an Iowa football game there, and a Kenny Chesney concert there. In almost 32 years I've been there three times. So the difficulty of getting there, lack of immediate bars/restaurants, etc. isn't a huge deal to me. It would be awesome if there was a Wrigley Field atmostphere to it like the AH property could provide, but its far from necessary. I've been to a handful of them, but honestly find the experience better on TV at home with friends or family. I've actually tailgated at more games than I've actually been to. Never been to a game at any of the "good" stadiums so don't really have a frame of reference, but I can't imagine that a new stadium will change things for me. The render is amazing, really great work, if some of the suggestions made by their choices of people and activities make me roll my eyes a bit. I still think they want AH and are just willing to go all in on bluffing their way into a better tax arrangement. AH would be way cooler although without the setting. I cannot recall enjoying the setting at my last bears game against the Rams when I think it was about 15 degrees, or when we walked up to North ave to avoid the crush of people and Ubers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafreak Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 I do not know what the end game is for the McCaskey's but owning your own stadium and land would seem to be a much wiser business decision then the alternative. The value of the franchise would have to be at least 25-50% higher when/if selling. It doesn't make sense to me that they are serious about moving on from the Arlington Heights land. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafreak Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBears019 Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 The only thing I took away from this is that Brandon Johnson doesn't know what to do with his hands during this interview. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafreak Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 Packer forum putting down the Bears new stadium while trying to convince themselves that they are the greatest city in the country = lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted April 25 Share Posted April 25 (edited) I admit that my view is from afar but you all have to admit that in one way or another and one place or another the Bears will get their new stadium. The lakefront location would be both beautiful and unique and if it does bring a SB and other national events it will contribute to the economy outside of what the Bears produce. On the flipside Arlington is probably a more suitable location for building a stadium with an accompanying entertainment district and I don't doubt that it will cost significantly less to build there than on the Lakefront. We also know that what ever numbers they're handing out now may be as much as 50% more upon completion. I don't have a horse in this race but to me keeping an NFL team attached to downtown seems to be a better move than building in the "burbs". The Broncos went through this in Denver when they built the new stadium virtually on top of the old one and unlike Coors Field it's quite distant from major entertainment too. I have no idea which way it will fall but if the city wants to keep them I don't know of any other locations that would work any better. And if the city is not handling it's debt obligations prudently that not on the Bears. IIRC it's pretty much been that way for half a century or more. At least the team is taking on a major stake in it's costs. Edited April 25 by soulman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 https://www.bleachernation.com/bears/2024/05/01/bears-stadium-update-0501/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epyon Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 On 4/24/2024 at 3:55 PM, dll2000 said: I am pretty sure McCaskey's and McCaskey's on Board take salaries. So there is still $353 million. They CAN finance a multibillion dollar stadium on their own. They just don't want to. And I don't blame them. Other NFL teams have gotten sweat heart deals. Last I'd heard, they not only didn't pay off the share of the money they where supposed to owe from the last stadium upgrade that had them relocating to Champaign for a season, but they actually let the interest accrue and compound on it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Not to delve into a potential political topic/issue but kind of sick of millionaires/billionaires in general socializing their business costs on the people, but privatizing all the wealth generated from the company... Like the entire Walmart business model is paying their employees so little they need to be on welfare, which means the taxpayers are basically on the hook paying for Walmart to function as a business, but the revenue generated by Walmart? Yeah that's all straight to the Walton family.. Or Boeing getting gargantuan tax breaks to locate their HQ in the state, then bailing the second their tax breaks expire so they can go scam another city (and the tax breaks always exceed the actual economic stimulus brought in by the business). Foxconn did the same up in Wisconsin. IMO, if the McCaskys want public funding for their stadium, then the public gets a proportional cut of the revenue relative to their investment, and a corresponding seat or seats on the board. I'm also pretty against them getting any kind of tax breaks for the Arlington Heights location. That doesn't mean the city can just tax them whatever, it needs to be fair on both sides, but the idea that they should get any special treatment is one of the most frustrating things about how our society works. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 8 hours ago, Epyon said: IMO, if the McCaskys want public funding for their stadium, then the public gets a proportional cut of the revenue relative to their investment, and a corresponding seat or seats on the board. That’s how it should work. Or, I dunno, maybe just build a $2.5B stadium instead of a $5B one. 🤷♂️ 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.