Gov Pritzker: Bears new stadium is “non-starter” for state

RiDLer80

First time, long time.
Joined:
Feb 16, 2014
Posts:
3,869
Liked Posts:
3,268
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Miami Hurricanes
  2. Northern Illinois Huskies
This is the most important part to me:

"As the Governor has said, the current proposal is a non-starter for the state," press secretary Alex Gough said in a statement. "In order to subsidize a brand new stadium for a privately owned sports team, the Governor would need to see a demonstrable and tangible benefit to the taxpayers of Illinois.

There needs to be a benefit to the state in order to get state funds for this. Throw a Sportsbook in that bitch and watch the tax revenue flow. Also, all the additional tax revenue from additional events year-round would benefit the state.
 

bamainatlanta

You wake him up, you keep him up
Staff member
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Aug 10, 2013
Posts:
35,298
Liked Posts:
29,455
Location:
Cumming
@Toast88 sorry to pry you away from the enthralling punter debate, but what’s the latest with stadium shitshow in KC?
 

BaBaBlacksheep

Moderator
Staff member
CCS Hall of Fame '21
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
40,333
Liked Posts:
46,300
This is more on Warren than the politicians, imo.

He never met with the state before last week's live proposal. We know that because JB said his team never met with Bears officials, and even during the presentation during the Q&A session when Warren was asked about his thoughts on JB "throwing cold water on the plan", Warren responded with, "How could he throw cold water on it if we just shared what the plan is?" Basically saying that JB and the state never saw the proposal.

Warren was also asked if the Bears were ready to spend months to years enduring legal battles from environmental groups, (i.e., Friends of the Parks), and he said that they will have those conversations.

If the Bears were hoping to get approval by this May, why the fuck would you not have conversations with those who could block you from proceeding? Warren's plan seems to have been to gain public support by wowing them with pretty pictures, and having Chicago/Illinois residents pressure their politicians into approving the plan. That seems to have backfired pretty badly. Residents don't want to help pay for a new stadium, and they seem annoyed that it was painted like it won't be that much for taxpayers.

I'm not a fan of politicians, but I think JB is getting this right. There are more important things to pay for than a new stadium for the Bears and Sox.


He’s telling the voters what they want to hear. See where this goes down the road.
 

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
15,043
Liked Posts:
7,612
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
This is the most important part to me:



There needs to be a benefit to the state in order to get state funds for this. Throw a Sportsbook in that bitch and watch the tax revenue flow. Also, all the additional tax revenue from additional events year-round would benefit the state.

Which I think is fair. If the public is going to front billions for a new stadium, we should she a return on that investment. Unfortunately, time after time, it's been shown that stadiums do a poor job of returning that investment.
 

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
15,043
Liked Posts:
7,612
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
He’s telling the voters what they want to hear. See where this goes down the road.

Maybe, but he's been pretty blunt about this. He'd be in support if the Bears could prove how building a new stadium would benefit taxpayers. If they can't, it's a no go.

There seem to be some conspiracies about JB waiting for the Bears to give him a backdoor deal... but I don't buy that either. JB is worth 3 times more than than the McCaskeys. I'm sure he has more powerful people in his pockets. The Bears can't really offer him much.

Not supporting this deal is a no brainer for anyone, especially someone who wants to win another election.
 

Gustavus Adolphus

?‍♂️?
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
45,034
Liked Posts:
33,066
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
Maybe, but he's been pretty blunt about this. He'd be in support if the Bears could prove how building a new stadium would benefit taxpayers. If they can't, it's a no go.

There seem to be some conspiracies about JB waiting for the Bears to give him a backdoor deal... but I don't buy that either. JB is worth 3 times more than than the McCaskeys. I'm sure he has more powerful people in his pockets. The Bears can't really offer him much.

Not supporting this deal is a no brainer for anyone, especially someone who wants to win another election.
So this is going to be hard to understand for a lot of people, but by the standards of franchise owners the McCaskey family is poor. They simply don't have the cash to fund this on their own. Their entire wealth is tied to the team, outside of that I'm not sure they really have much. Someone can help me out with this, but I'm pretty sure why guys like Ryan and McKenna have interest in the team was to help the family not lose the team by going broke.

The new stadium - which I'm in favor of them getting - was never going to get done by the Lake. Their only hope now is Arlington Heights.
 

didshereallysaythat

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2011
Posts:
20,571
Liked Posts:
9,188
So this is going to be hard to understand for a lot of people, but by the standards of franchise owners the McCaskey family is poor. They simply don't have the cash to fund this on their own. Their entire wealth is tied to the team, outside of that I'm not sure they really have much. Someone can help me out with this, but I'm pretty sure why guys like Ryan and McKenna have interest in the team was to help the family not lose the team by going broke.

The new stadium - which I'm in favor of them getting - was never going to get done by the Lake. Their only hope now is Arlington Heights.
Maybe they should sell then to someone who has the money.

Technically, they don't have to do anything. They can just stay at the current Soldier Field and keep paying rent.
 

BigTom

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
1,090
Liked Posts:
935
Time to bring out that old threat of moving to nw Indiana and Illinois losing all Bears related tax revenue. If it's in the right spot they could still see the lake and the Chicago skyline too which is apparently really important to some people. And selfishly it's a much closer drive for me.
 

ijustposthere

Message Board Hero
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
33,425
Liked Posts:
24,952
Location:
Any-Town, USA
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Purdue Boilermakers
Munster Bears
 

Rustysurf83

Active member
Joined:
Dec 22, 2010
Posts:
967
Liked Posts:
392
Location:
PNW
If the Bears moved to AH, wouldn't the city then have to foot the entire bill of maintaining the Soldier Field campus and redeveloping it so it doesn't just become some decrepit stadium on a plot of unsustainable land? Having no NFL revenue going toward the upkeep doesn't seem like a good option for Chicagoans either.
You think Lakefront property in Chicago is a “plot of unsustainable land”? You aren’t very intelligent. No one wants to admit…it’s 100% better for taxpayers if the City doesn’t have to maintain Soldier field so the Bears can play 9 weeks a year there…
 

Bearcub13

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 22, 2020
Posts:
1,094
Liked Posts:
524

I thought the Bears laid out their plans last week like it was a done deal? So the team announced a new stadium but never had approval from the state?
I don't believe the Bears need state approval....
 

Top