CHICAGO | Lincoln Yards - Page 8

moorhosj · #**141** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Also, average attendence per league for 2017/18

NFL 67,405
MLB 30,023
MLS 22,106
NBA 17,830
NHL 17,446

Definitely a large and growing market for soccer.

MLS teams only play 34 games a year. MLB has 162, NBA and NHL have 82, and the NFL has 16. This stadium will need lots of alternative programming to make it profitable to build. Chicago Red Stars, the local women's soccer team, would be an option. Maybe they are angling for an eventual second MLS team in Chicago as LA and NYC each have two.

Kumdogmillionaire · #**142** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by left of center

Is this nationally or just the Chicago market? If the latter, I'd expect the NHL numbers to be significantly higher... which leads me to believe its the former.

Definitely national numbers, the Bulls average 21k a game(best in the NBA, and yes even while tanking)

Kumdogmillionaire · #**143** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by moorhosj

MLS teams only play 34 games a year. MLB has 162, NBA and NHL have 82, and the NFL has 16. This stadium will need lots of alternative programming to make it profitable to build. Chicago Red Stars, the local women's soccer team, would be an option. Maybe they are angling for an eventual second MLS team in Chicago as LA and NYC each have two.

The original design looks like it would be amazing for the mid-tier concert market, so that could help somewhat, but obviously only for the warm weather months

Vlajos · #**144** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:22 PM**

Those are national numbers.

maru2501 · #**145** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:27 PM**

I have been waiting for Rahm to make a play to bring the Fire into the city limits. That could still happen at some point I bet.. Rezkoland or something

BorisMolotov · #**146** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:48 PM**

Quote:

MLS teams only play 34 games a year. MLB has 162, NBA and NHL have 82, and the NFL has 16. This stadium will need lots of alternative programming to make it profitable to build. Chicago Red Stars, the local women's soccer team, would be an option. Maybe they are angling for an eventual second MLS team in Chicago as LA and NYC each have two.

Don't forget that there are other soccer competitions going on all the time which could fill up spots (World Cup qualifying, CONCACAF Gold Cup, international friendlies, etc.) With the rate of growth of the sport in this country there could soon be other tournaments set up for North American/South American teams ala the Champions league, etc.

IrishIllini · #**147** Posted **May 9, 2018, 7:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Considering the average value of a MLS team has more than doubled from 100 million to 220 million in 3 years, I'd say it's more about the money than the sport itself. Granted this is a USL team not MLS... but $5 million seems pretty cheap. Many of the most successful USL teams eventually become MLS teams.

Also, average attendence per league for 2017/18

NFL 67,405
MLB 30,023
MLS 22,106
NBA 17,830
NHL 17,446

Definitely a large and growing market for soccer.

Enough for two MLS teams in Chicago? I know this team would be in the USL, but if it did transition to MLS, can Chicago support two soccer teams? The Fire have the history and existing fan base, but this stadium's location could very easily undermine all of that...especially if the Fire are tied up at Toyota Park for another 15-20 years. It'll be interesting to see what happens here.

Busy Bee · #**148** Posted **May 9, 2018, 8:23 PM**

My conservative comment was pure jest, but some of you never disappoint in your ability to misread, over-analyze and otherwise smother nuanced satire.

Kumdogmillionaire · #**149** Posted **May 9, 2018, 8:53 PM**

It was hardly "nuanced", but nice job at patting yourself on the back.

Busy Bee · #**150** Posted **May 9, 2018, 9:56 PM**

That makes me feel appreciated. Thank you

ardecila · #**151** Posted **May 10, 2018, 4:05 AM**

If the Fire ever leaves Toyota Park, Bridgeview is absolutely, utterly screwed. They will fight tooth and nail to keep the team.

It’s honestly not a bad location, it’s pretty centrally located for Chicago’s Mexican and Central American populations. I assume that was much of the rationale for the location. Unfortunately it does nothing for urbane, educated white soccer fans who mostly live on the North Side and north suburbs.

(Honestly I’d be lobbying for an Orange Line extension if I was Bridgeview’s mayor... It could be done on the cheap, with at-grade tracks along the north side of Clearing Yard.)

jpIllInoIs · #**152** Posted **May 10, 2018, 12:52 PM**

^ I always thought The Fire should have located next to Sox park or United Center. Of course no one was offering a free stadium there. United Center location would have accelerated westward recovery. Both sites have ample transit.

Unfortunately The Fire are stuck on a long term in Bridgeview and Bridgeview is up to its hat brim in bond dept.

Kngkyle · #**153** Posted **May 10, 2018, 2:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

^ I always thought The Fire should have located next to Sox park or United Center. Of course no one was offering a free stadium there. United Center location would have accelerated westward recovery. Both sites have ample transit.

Unfortunately The Fire are stuck on a long term in Bridgeview and Bridgeview is up to its hat brim in bond dept.

The only way the Fire can leave Bridgeview before 2036 (when the lease is up, iirc) is if both parties mutually agree to end the agreement. The only way that will happen is if Bridgeview is paid off. As the value of MLS teams continue to increase that payoff becomes increasingly plausible.

As an example, Orlando City, a relatively new team to the league who have a brand new stadium in downtown Orlando, was recently valued at $490 million. An increase of $250 million since their 2016 valuation of $240 million.

Surely the value of Chicago Fire would grow considerably with a well located stadium that could be marketed appropriately. At some point it'll be worth it to pay off Bridgeview.

I'm hoping that this deal with USL and Ricketts is just a motivating tool to get the Chicago Fire owner to sell the team at a reasonable price to Ricketts, who would then buyout Bridgeview and move the team to Lincoln Yards.

Vlajos · #**154** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:14 PM**

^ While I love the thought of the Fire playing in Lincoln Yards, the truth is that traffic will be a complete and total disaster.

Via Chicago · #**155** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:28 PM**

this could have all been solved with just letting the Fire continue to play at Soldier Field. its a public facility after all, but pretty sure the Bears were the ones who were crying about them tearing up "their" field

we dont need so many silly single use facilities

Kngkyle · #**156** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos

^ While I love the thought of the Fire playing in Lincoln Yards, the truth is that traffic will be a complete and total disaster.

Traffic around every sporting venue is a complete and total disaster when its game day. If its THAT bad then maybe those people should use alternative modes of transport to get to the stadium? Unlike at Toyota Park, there actually are alternatives. The traffic wouldn't impact me in the slightest because I would never in a million years drive to a stadium that is a less than a 15 minute walk from multiple rail lines. Even if you don't live near one of those rail lines, park somewhere along the line and ride it in.

Vlajos · #**157** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Traffic around every sporting venue is a complete and total disaster when its game day. If its THAT bad then maybe those people should use alternative modes of transport to get to the stadium? Unlike at Toyota Park, there actually are alternatives. The traffic wouldn't impact me in the slightest because I would never in a million years drive to a stadium that is a less than a 15 minute walk from multiple rail lines. Even if you don't live near one of those rail lines, park somewhere along the line and ride it in.

For you and me sure, for the vast majority of Americans? Not gonna happen. It will be a complete traffic shit show.

Kngkyle · #**158** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos

For you an me sure, for the vast majority of Americans? Not gonna happen. It will be a complete traffic shit show.

Again, who cares? Fuck them.

Should Wrigley Field be demolished because it's not easy to get to by car?

It's strange to me that someone is arguing in favor of auto-centric development here.

k1052 · #**159** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:44 PM**

Sounds like a good argument to not build much, if any, parking for the stadium.

If you don't want people to drive don't build facilities that enable them do it.

Living in the city I'd never consider driving to this just like I wouldn't Wrigley or the United Center. People will figure it out.

Vlajos · #**160** Posted **May 10, 2018, 3:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kngkyle

Again, who cares? Fuck them.

Should Wrigley Field be demolished because it's not easy to get to by car?

It's strange to me that someone is arguing in favor of auto-centric development here.

I'm not arguing for auto centric development at all. I'm saying it's a bad location because transit is not convenient.