Bears are building a domed stadium no matter what but why can’t they just build it here? Much better than Arlington heights or NW Indiana.

50 comments

  1. Because the bears want to own the stadium and the Bears can’t own it if it sits on Park District land.

    This site means no in stadium casino.

    No on site hotel

    No knockoff wrigleyville

    Basically it gives them none of what they want

  2. Well considering they don’t own that land it’s kind of hard to build a stadium there lol

  6. The Bears did propose a new stadium there a couple years ago – they released that video of what the new stadium and park area would look like. It was basically that same Alligient-looking stadium we’ve seen in the AH renders, and the park area kept the colonnades from Soldier.

    Looked cool, but I believe it was proposed at a much higher cost than the AH site, so it’s unknown to me how serious the proposal was vs more negotiating tactics with AH/the state.

  7. Outside of ownership issues, they want a bunch of stuff around it as well. There’s no room for that there. All that other stuff is critical to financially justifying the stadium expenditure. Also, most of the wealthy fans are up closer to AH.

  8. Friends of the parks would block that instantly. Just like those idiots did to the Lucas museum we were supposed to have.

  9. It’s a horrible location and they need to get away from there. Bears need to be free all this Chicago Park District and even all things Chicago politics

  11. The footprint of the site is only about nine acres.
    The footprint of the Arlington site is about 325 acres. Just no room left on the lake front. Can build “Bears land” on the Arlington site and host everything.

  13. Pretty sure the Bears proposed exactly this, it got shot down, and this sub clowned them for it.

  16. I’ll get downvoted to hell, but I don’t give a fuck. Friends of the Park would block it and rightfully so. If it weren’t for them there would probably be a lakefront casino/resort controlling beach access like you see in much of Florida and many forest preserves probably wouldn’t been auctioned off or turned into private hunting clubs. The current Soldier Field agreement with the Park District is fine but there is a zero percent chance that a $6 billion dollar organization should, in the future, be allowed to build a domed facility on taxpayer property to further enrich themselves. The McCaskeys seem like pretty good people, but they shouldn’t be able to leverage a single cent of taxpayer money to increase their own profit. FOTP is right, the Arlington Village board is right, Gov. Pritzker is right. If they want to use taxpayer funds to build an entertainment mega complex, let Indiana pay for it.

  19. The lakefront is front is for the people never to be privatized. Hence leases and rentals all over the place. The land is to remain public in perpetuity, so it must be managed by a public entity. Owning the stadium isnt any more profitable than renting like they already due, hence why most NFL teams don’t own their stadiums. The Arlington site allows them to develop retail, mixed use residential, entertainment districts, hotels etc. The entire site won’t be dedicated to bears games, so they will have numerous income streams year round. That being said a generic modern dome in the suburbs is lame IMO. keep them on lake.

  21. Chicago won’t give them the land so they won’t own the stadium they build, the state isn’t giving money to Billionaires

  24. Shoulda at the 78. Excellent location

    Also idc where it is as long as it’s not domed. That’s stupid.

  25. Anyone ever seen Fan Base Map that Illustrates which areas have the highest concentration of fans that attend games? Curious where the highest concentration of attendees come from.

  28. It’s too damn congested there. Move it 5 miles away in any direction (but East) and you’re doing Chicagoans a huge favor.

  30. If the Bears chose that spot, the city would be on the hook for the cost. The Bears would only be tenants, not owners.

  31. PLLLLEEEAASSSE DONT MOVE FROM THE LAKEFRONT DOWNTOWN. I’d rather stay where we’re at than get some new piece of crap

  34. Where do you think people will park when they build this new stadium? Because they’re not tearing down Soldier.

  35. Better idea is to tear down the old McCormick building. You can then use the existing connections to new McCormick to create a single giant entertainment and convention space.

    But at the end of the day, they don’t want to be in a publicly owned building so it’s moot.

  36. If I remember right the city owns essentially all land to the right of lakeshore drive. And they aren’t going to sell it

  40. dome stadium is lamest shit i ever heard ..they go to dome im a find a new team i dont root for dome teams

  45. They want the public to pay for it. That was the very first proposed site. City and state both said “looks great…it’s not getting publicly funded.” So they pivoted to AH for leverage and to see if AH would give them money. AH said “we’ll give you a little bit of money.” They want a billion. So now they’re pivoting to see if Indiana will give them a billion of taxpayer money.

  47. I want the stadium to stay in downtown so bad

    Living in Bridgeport and Pilsen throughout the last three years I can’t imagine any other place for a Sunday football game

    The folks behind the mvmt to get them out of downtown are clearly suburbanites and I won’t stand for this!!

    The fly by views that every major network shows during Chicago home games SHOULD BE OF A STADIUM ON THE LAKEFRONT NOT SOME SUBURB STADIUM FAR FROM DOWNTOWN

Leave a Reply