CHICAGO | Da Bears | Now these shitheads wanna drive their clown car over to Indiana?

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Supposedly the Bears have soil testing rigs out at a site in Hammond near Wolf Lake and the Toll Road/Cline Ave interchange.

LOL now that is a cursed location. I would not want to increase my risk of cancer in order to watch a game

[Crawford]

Would Indiana taxpayers be stupid enough to give $2 billion in taxpayer dollars for a state borderline stadium with near-zero tax or economic growth benefits? They'll still be the Chicago Bears. I still feel it's long-term nonsensical from the Bears perspective when your entire market is on the opposite side and no exec or player wants to live anywhere near here.

[Steely Dan]

^ Indiana is 100% stupid enough to give away billions of taxpayer dollars to a 1/4 trillion dollar sports league.

And the 3rd/4th gen McFuckskeys are 100% greedy enough to piss on Papa Bear's grave and take it.

Unchecked greed courting unchecked stupidity; what could possibly go wrong???


🞵🞵🞵🞵 all these fucks.

[left of center]

If Indiana is stupid enough to actually pay for this, and if the Bears are stupid enough to actually move there, then yeah sure I'm okay with it.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Would Indiana taxpayers be stupid enough to give $2 billion in taxpayer dollars for a state borderline stadium with near-zero tax or economic growth benefits? They'll still be the Chicago Bears. I still feel it's long-term nonsensical from the Bears perspective when your entire market is on the opposite side and no exec or player wants to live anywhere near here.

The "ask" on the Illinois side was $800M for infrastructure, not the full cost of the stadium. That amount may be even less on the Indiana side with cheaper labor. The Bears would also likely request property tax relief and a cut of any sales taxes generated on the premises.

Sadly, I'm fairly confident that NWI can swing it fiscally and while the Bears do face some tradeoffs, I don't think any are dealbreakers. Football fans will drive hours to see their team play (esp in the Midwest) and the Hammond site is just 25 minutes south of the Loop. Players and execs may be able to stay in place if the Bears keep their head office and training facility at Halas Hall. Then you're only driving to Indiana 8x a year.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The "ask" on the Illinois side was $800M for infrastructure, not the full cost of the stadium. That amount may be even less on the Indiana side with cheaper labor. The Bears would also likely request property tax relief and a cut of any sales taxes generated on the premises.

I'm fairly confident that NWI can swing it, fiscally. For them the stadium is genuinely new economic activity. To the extent they're cannibalizing, it's from the Illinois side. And they already have a local taxing district set up, so they don't necessarily need to deal with the state government.

For the Bears - yeah I see some downsides. But the Toll Road/Skyway is rarely crowded due to the high tolls. It's only about 20-30 minutes from the Loop, so if players or execs want to live in a downtown condo they can do that. But if you want a big mansion, there's not many posh areas in either state that are accessible from Hammond.

My thought to the idea that the Bears won't eventually ask for money for the stadium is "Sure, Jan."

The negotiations with Illinois started with "It will be all privately funded" to "We need tax breaks forever" to "We need $855 million for undefined *infrastructure*"

Let's keep in mind that the Bears have yet to put together a financing plan or even a proper site plan for Arlington Heights at this point. Personally I think it's iffy if they can even pay for a basic stadium much less a dome.

At this point, I think it's much more likely that they are seeking a government to promise them a Football Fiefdom, and the moment they get it, the team will go up for sale with construction left to the next owner.

[ardecila]

Yeah they seem to be using the stadium thing as a way to juice the value of the team before they sell it, or a piece of it, to private equity.

It's kind of a chicken and egg problem because without the new owners on board or even identified, they don't know what they can afford to spend on the stadium. The McCaskeys have very little ability to finance a new stadium themselves. But going to Indiana is a creative option since (construction) money goes further on that side of the border.

[nomarandlee]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The "ask" on the Illinois side was $800M for infrastructure, not the full cost of the stadium. That amount may be even less on the Indiana side with cheaper labor. The Bears would also likely request property tax relief and a cut of any sales taxes generated on the premises.

Sadly, I'm fairly confident that NWI can swing it fiscally and while the Bears do face some tradeoffs, I don't think any are dealbreakers. Football fans will drive hours to see their team play (esp in the Midwest) and the Hammond site is just 25 minutes south of the Loop. Players and execs may be able to stay in place if the Bears keep their head office and training facility at Halas Hall. Then you're only driving to Indiana 8x a year.

Not to slam on NW Indiana, but I think the wider perception of it is still that of a moribund region, despite all the anti-Chicago advocates who love to sing its praises. This isn't tech-rich Santa Clara, upscale Foxboro, or just over-the-river Meadowlands, etc.

I could see many fans still staying committed if in AH, Aurora, or Waukegan. Most Chicagolanders still think of those towns as being firmly in Chicago's orbit, while Kenosha or Hammond intuitively stretch that definition. Mileage from the Loop only has a part in it; it is as much psychological and perception as anything.

Would most Bears fans still identify and drive to NWI year after year, even during losing seasons? I think many would effectively bail within a few decades. The Bears would be rolling the dice to expect a critical mass of fans not to become cynical and disillusioned with a team "over there" in another state, especially if they fall on hard times.

The brand would take a hit, but maybe they wouldn't care, given they'd still be worth many billions? The NFL is mostly about TV contracts anyway, and a slight "brand hit", along with less fervent local fan loyalty, may not be that important these days. Only that conclusion by the Bears (and NFL more broadly) would have them taking up Indiana's offer IMO.

Still, as arrogant and invincible as the NFL feels, I bet they are pleading with the Bears to only use Indiana strictly as leverage. As much as the NFL loves to rip off municipalities for the shiniest news toys, I think the NFL would see NWI as a somewhat embarrassing dilution of the shield and Bears brand to relocate to Indiana.

[ardecila]

I really don't think it's that big a deal. Other fanbases have endured similar moves. NWI is not economically like Santa Clara or the Meadowlands but it's psychically a similar divide from the core city, and practically the trip to Hammond is just not a big deal. Bears fans would get over it once they attend a game there, just like they've gotten over years of disappointing QBs. Soldier Field is one of the smallest venues in the league too, so I think a big increase in seating will make up for any lost revenue from rich fans flaking out. Personally I'd welcome a more accessible, blue collar stadium where tickets are a bit more affordable to average fans.

If the Bears can properly clean up any pollution on the site and put forward a compelling architectural vision for a stadium district like they already did for AH and South Lakefront, I think fans will get on board.

Not to mention that NWI deserves to be seen as more than a bad joke. Real people live there, and as a region it just keeps getting screwed over. Chicago's got big issues too, but at least we have many healthy areas and we're able to maintain some level of investment in the poorest neighborhoods. Hammond, Whiting, East Chicago and especially Gary have none of that. Will a Bears stadium be a windfall for the Region? Certainly not, but at least it might help to break down the mental barrier that Illinoisans have and lead to a more integrated regional economy in the long run. My biggest concern is that NWI politicians will be too generous with the subsidies and it'll be one step forward, two steps back.

[dewbs]

If the state of Indiana is willing to subsidize a stadium primarily for the benefit of Illinois residents, isn't that a good thing? Having lived in Boston, New York, and San Francisco, it never felt in those cities like there was a big loss from the football team playing -- as has been pointed out, eight times a year -- somewhere far away.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

Would most Bears fans still identify.

I can only speak for myself, but given the extremely antagonistic relationship between IL and IN, if the McCaskeys really go through with the threat and 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 their family legacy out to 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 IN, then I'll be done with them for good.


And this ain't no casual thing for me. My superbowl-shuffling 🞵🞵🞵 was 9 years old when the Bears last went the distance. I watched the big game at my grandparent's house surrounded by my dad, my grandfather, and great-grandfather.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I really don't think it's that big a deal. Other fanbases have endured similar moves. NWI is not economically like Santa Clara or the Meadowlands but it's psychically a similar divide from the core city, and practically the trip to Hammond is just not a big deal. Bears fans would get over it once they attend a game there, just like they've gotten over years of disappointing QBs.

If the Bears can properly clean up any pollution on the site and put forward a compelling architectural vision for a stadium district like they already did for AH and South Lakefront, I think fans will get on board.

Not to mention that NWI deserves to be seen as more than a bad joke. Real people live there, and as a region it just keeps getting screwed over. Chicago's got big issues too, but at least we have many healthy areas. Will a Bears stadium be a windfall for the Region? Certainly not, but at least it might help to break down the mental barrier that Illinoisans have and lead to a more integrated regional economy in the long run. My biggest concern is that NWI politicians will be too generous with the subsidies and it'll be one step forward, two steps back.

I guess it's mostly the Bears' behavior that makes everything questionable.

If the Bears had said,

"Hey, we're looking to build a private stadium and entertainment center when our lease is up, but there's not much available land in Chicagoland that doesn't require large government subsidies to make it work. We're looking at some sites in Indiana that look good with some clean up, and we think our brand is strong enough to warrant the extra minutes travel."

They would have been more positively recieved.

Instead they threw a temper tantrum over some minor property taxes, and tried to gaslight legislators and voters. It's hard to see that behavior leading to the conscientious development that NWI would require.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

The NFL is mostly about TV contracts anyway, and a slight "brand hit", along with less fervent local fan loyalty, may not be that important these days. Only that conclusion by the Bears (and NFL more broadly) would have them taking up Indiana's offer IMO.

Not entirely. The primary reason they are moving from Soldier is because they want to fully own and monetize their stadium and immediate surroundings, like many other NFL teams have already done. TV contracts are big of course, but so are real estate invstments, especially ones that allow the team to keep making money all year from rents, sport books, etc. instead of just during game days.

The irony is that moving to Indiana threatens that entire business model. People will be hard pressed to go to this new Bears stadium during the regular season as it is (due to their impression of the area and the distance compared to their current location in Soldier Field), let alone in the off season to spend an afternoon or weekend night. Add in the fact that most of the deep-pocketed fans live in the exact opposite end of the metro than NWI (north burbs, west burbs, North Side of the city, etc.) and it exacerbates the problem.

NWI is not a real proposal. Either this is a bluff, or the McCaskey's really are that dumb. Either way, if the intent of all this is to simply set up the team for a sale (which is very likely considering the cash poor nature of the ownership), then I think this move dilutes the value of the team substantially enough for them to take pause. I don't think this plan goes through unless Indiana literally foots the bill for the stadium itself, which would be incredibly foolish of them (especially with the stadium surrounded by nothing but industry, and located right on the state line, greatly mitigating any positive economic effects for their state) but that's their prerogative.

[galleyfox]

Originally Posted by dewbs

If the state of Indiana is willing to subsidize a stadium primarily for the benefit of Illinois residents, isn't that a good thing? Having lived in Boston, New York, and San Francisco, it never felt in those cities like there was a big loss from the football team playing -- as has been pointed out, eight times a year -- somewhere far away.

It's not the stadium. It's the rent seeking behavior that's insulting. And Indiana taxpayers also deserve better than paying for the Bears.

Nothing has stopped the Bears from acquiring financing and building on their own.

But writing a passive agressive letter while threatening to move to the first exit off the Skyway next to a chemical factory is the definition of half assed.

Keep in mind that the stadium would be about 15 min from my house (and I don't want it at Steelworkers) so it's not sour grapes over location. I'm truly not seeing the logic beyond a last ditch effort for government subsidies. I don't think this area has the unserved wealth to support a proper entertainment complex.

[moorhosj1]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Soldier Field is one of the smallest venues in the league too, so I think a big increase in seating will make up for any lost revenue from rich fans flaking out. Personally I'd welcome a more accessible, blue collar stadium where tickets are a bit more affordable to average fans.

A new stadium isn’t going to lead to cheaper seats. Has that ever happened?

They want a dome and every additional seat in a dome will increase the cost significantly because it increases the size of the roof. It will be 65-70k seats, with more boxes, not much different than today.

[SIGSEGV]

They could rename it Da Bears Lake

[DCReid]

My guess is that they are bluffing on NW Indiana. I think the Arlington Heights is most plausible given current investment in the site and their fan base.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

A new stadium isn’t going to lead to cheaper seats. Has that ever happened?

They want a dome and every additional seat in a dome will increase the cost significantly because it increases the size of the roof. It will be 65-70k seats, with more boxes, not much different than today.

I don't think the Bears are planning to reduce ticket prices, no, but they may have to in the new location. I would laugh at them for a terrible business decision, but would happily go see a game at a reduced price and I'm sure there are plenty of less well-heeled fans who would show up too.

Also, depending on how much money they get from taxpayers they may be forced to settle for an open air stadium. The Bills are getting $850M from taxpayers and they still couldn't afford a dome, and you can bet labor costs will be higher in Chicago than Buffalo.

[VKChaz]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The "ask" on the Illinois side was $800M for infrastructure, not the full cost of the stadium. That amount may be even less on the Indiana side with cheaper labor. The Bears would also likely request property tax relief and a cut of any sales taxes generated on the premises.

Sadly, I'm fairly confident that NWI can swing it fiscally and while the Bears do face some tradeoffs, I don't think any are dealbreakers. Football fans will drive hours to see their team play (esp in the Midwest) and the Hammond site is just 25 minutes south of the Loop. Players and execs may be able to stay in place if the Bears keep their head office and training facility at Halas Hall. Then you're only driving to Indiana 8x a year.

NFL fans will travel. I don't think there is a question of that. A question is how does the location work for other events. Taylor Swift fans would travel. But for more typical performers or if there is any hope of housing an additional team/sport? I would assume the Bears and Indiana would want to do a study on that.

This might not be a bad thing to happen. Could be an opportunity to broaden perspective on the region, be less insular or provincial

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by moorhosj1

A new stadium isn’t going to lead to cheaper seats. Has that ever happened?

They want a dome and every additional seat in a dome will increase the cost significantly because it increases the size of the roof. It will be 65-70k seats, with more boxes, not much different than today.

It's not really about any of that I don't think. New stadium developments these days are really about a switch from being a sports team to becoming an entertainment and real estate developer. These guys aren't happy with ticket sales and merch they want to own a district that they can profit off from. I should note the NFL does a 60/40 split where they only keep 60% of the ticket revenue the other 40% goes to a league wide pool to be shared. This adds some incentive to seek other revenue streams

Look at SoFi stadium. The owners there built and own Shops and Hollywood Park. I would bet they make more money from that real estate long term than they make from ticket sales.

Look at Little Ceasars arena in Detroit. Different sport but they built office space around the arena and got tenants like Google that they lease space to.

The Bears are in a stadium where it's literally impossible to do any of that because they are in a publicly owned park. They want to move cause they think they can probably more than double their revenue someplace else if you also consider they could host indoor events.

But this also makes their request for tax payer money absolutely disgusting. You're moving so you can make a lot more money and you want the tax payer to pay you to do it.