ADVERTISEMENT

Bears

Pay for play (using tax dollars for new stadiums) is for middle market teams that would prefer to pay to keep their teams. Think Jacksonville Jags or Oakland As type of teams that are probably better off being relocated. The Bears aren’t leaving Chicagoland under any circumstances.

Because there is no chance the Bears leave Chicagoland, there is absolutely zero incentive for any local govt in Chicagoland to throw tax dollars or subsidies at the Bears. As Broncoman alluded it’s the stupidest thing ever - not to mention the great taxpayers in Chicago will be paying for Soldier Fields botched surgery from 20 freaking years ago long past when the new stadium is built.

The elected leaders in Nashville and Buffalo, etc. are a disgrace to their citizens if you ask me. Maybe Buffalo wanted to pay to play but Nashville bent over for the Titans without even getting dinner bought for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bronco man
stl705 said:
Pay for play (using tax dollars for new stadiums) is for middle market teams that would prefer to pay to keep their teams. Think Jacksonville Jags or Oakland As type of teams that are probably better off being relocated. The Bears aren’t leaving Chicagoland under any circumstances.

Because there is no chance the Bears leave Chicagoland, there is absolutely zero incentive for any local govt in Chicagoland to throw tax dollars or subsidies at the Bears. As Broncoman alluded it’s the stupidest thing ever - not to mention the great taxpayers in Chicago will be paying for Soldier Fields botched surgery from 20 freaking years ago long past when the new stadium is built.

The elected leaders in Nashville and Buffalo, etc. are a disgrace to their citizens if you ask me. Maybe Buffalo wanted to pay to play but Nashville bent over for the Titans without even getting dinner bought for them.
Click to expand...
In Minnesota, the Vikings made their payment 23 years early. Saved taxpayers $226 million
 
PowerI66 said:
In Minnesota, the Vikings made their payment 23 years early. Saved taxpayers $226 million
Click to expand...
Minnesota elected leaders have failed their taxpayers stupendously on the stadium. $500M out of taxpayers pockets for the stadium, and now they are looking at anothet $300M in maintenance less than 10 years later.


HARD PASS on giving the McCaskey’s a damn dime. They have the $$$, if they don’t want to build it then stay at Soldier or sell the team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whitesox05 and bronco man
stl705 said:
if they don’t want to build it then stay at Soldier or sell the team.
Click to expand...
I think that the plan all along is to get the legislative issues, tax issues, infrastructure etc in place and sell the team in order to get the maximum amount of dollars.
 
stl705 said:
Minnesota elected leaders have failed their taxpayers stupendously on the stadium. $500M out of taxpayers pockets for the stadium, and now they are looking at anothet $300M in maintenance less than 10 years later.


HARD PASS on giving the McCaskey’s a damn dime. They have the $$$, if they don’t want to build it then stay at Soldier or sell the team.
Click to expand...
Do you have something on that with more information? That's an extremely short article with little information.
 
PowerI66 said:
Do you have something on that with more information? That's an extremely short article with little information.
Click to expand...
Here’s a few other articles with a bit more info, Power.


Vikings' 7-year-old U.S. Bank Stadium needs $280M in maintenance in next decade, $48M in next year, per report

www.cbssports.com

www.kare11.com

Report: $231 million needed to maintain U.S. Bank Stadium for next decade

The figure jumps to $279 million if accounting for the new "secured perimeter."
www.kare11.com

From 2nd link:
  • $80,574,375 for architecture and interiors
  • $55,401,857 for A/V systems
  • $27,325,272 for electrical and lighting systems
  • $25,137,887 for technology systems
  • $21,390,351 for structural systems
  • $9,606,478 for the landscape and hardscape of the site
  • $6,459,307 for mechanical, plumbing and fire protections
  • $5,094,976 for graphics and wayfinding (building signage and site signage)
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: PowerI66 and Gene K.
To me this is all a joke.
The Bears are not going anywhere in Illinois, as long as the McCaskeys own them. If they don’t stay at Soldier Field I see them moving to another state that will pay for everything to have a team. Illinois is broke and the McCaskeys are cheap, not a good recipe to make a this happen.
 
corey90 said:
To me this is all a joke.
The Bears are not going anywhere in Illinois, as long as the McCaskeys own them. If they don’t stay at Soldier Field I see them moving to another state that will pay for everything to have a team. Illinois is broke and the McCaskeys are cheap, not a good recipe to make a this happen.
Click to expand...
Corey, I couldn’t disagree more on Bears leaving IL. It won’t happen. There isn’t a city in the world that makes the Bears more $$ than Chicagoland, taxpayer built stadium or not. Whether thats McCaskeys or Bezos or Joe Schmoe, nobody is going to throw away the chance at being “Chicago’s” football team and the money it brings.

Here is an article from yesterday that puts the Bears basically tied for 6th in profit with Redskins in NFL and 15th most profitable team in all sports. All without their own stadium.

sports.yahoo.com

13 NFL teams made Forbes’ top-25 list of most profitable sports teams in the world

Here is a look at the 13 NFL teams that cracked Forbes' top-25 list of most profitable sports teams across the world.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gene K.
stl705 said:
Pay for play (using tax dollars for new stadiums) is for middle market teams that would prefer to pay to keep their teams. Think Jacksonville Jags or Oakland As type of teams that are probably better off being relocated. The Bears aren’t leaving Chicagoland under any circumstances.

Because there is no chance the Bears leave Chicagoland, there is absolutely zero incentive for any local govt in Chicagoland to throw tax dollars or subsidies at the Bears. As Broncoman alluded it’s the stupidest thing ever - not to mention the great taxpayers in Chicago will be paying for Soldier Fields botched surgery from 20 freaking years ago long past when the new stadium is built.

The elected leaders in Nashville and Buffalo, etc. are a disgrace to their citizens if you ask me. Maybe Buffalo wanted to pay to play but Nashville bent over for the Titans without even getting dinner bought for them.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree with Nashville, residents of Nashville end up in a pretty good spot with the new stadium anchoring a massive east bank development
 
  • Like
Reactions: stl705
stl705 said:
Here’s a few other articles with a bit more info, Power.


Vikings' 7-year-old U.S. Bank Stadium needs $280M in maintenance in next decade, $48M in next year, per report

www.cbssports.com

www.kare11.com

Report: $231 million needed to maintain U.S. Bank Stadium for next decade

The figure jumps to $279 million if accounting for the new "secured perimeter."
www.kare11.com

From 2nd link:
  • $80,574,375 for architecture and interiors
  • $55,401,857 for A/V systems
  • $27,325,272 for electrical and lighting systems
  • $25,137,887 for technology systems
  • $21,390,351 for structural systems
  • $9,606,478 for the landscape and hardscape of the site
  • $6,459,307 for mechanical, plumbing and fire protections
  • $5,094,976 for graphics and wayfinding (building signage and site signage)
Click to expand...
Thanks. The one part of this though is that the stadium is owned by the state and not the Vikings. I agree though, ridiculous upkeep prices
 
stl705 said:
Corey, I couldn’t disagree more on Bears leaving IL. It won’t happen. There isn’t a city in the world that makes the Bears more $$ than Chicagoland, taxpayer built stadium or not. Whether thats McCaskeys or Bezos or Joe Schmoe, nobody is going to throw away the chance at being “Chicago’s” football team and the money it brings.

Here is an article from yesterday that puts the Bears basically tied for 6th in profit with Redskins in NFL and 15th most profitable team in all sports. All without their own stadium.

sports.yahoo.com

13 NFL teams made Forbes’ top-25 list of most profitable sports teams in the world

Here is a look at the 13 NFL teams that cracked Forbes' top-25 list of most profitable sports teams across the world.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
Agree,
This why I said they will probably stay put at Soldier Field. I don’t see the Bears ownership paying for a new stadium. I would think that there is a city or state without a team might build them a stadium to get a team.
 
SiuCubFan8 said:
The “Bears are cheap” narrative is just not true. It’s 2023 btw, the league is totally different.
Click to expand...
I looked this up and of the Bears' 22 starters on the Super Bowl championship team, 20 of them were back for the 1986 season in which they didn't even make the NFC Championship Game.
The two that didn't play were WR Dennis McKinnon who missed the year with a knee injury, and DB Leslie Frazier whose career was ended when he injured himself with a non-contact injury fielding a punt in the Super Bowl victory.
The 1986 season, if you recall, was played without Buddy Ryan who was then coaching the Eagles. The offense was stymied by injuries to QB Jim McMahon who started less than half of the team's games.
So clearly, the team was NOT dismantled after the Super Bowl victory.
As for 1987, the offensive changes. included Neal Anderson playing fullback instead of Matt Suhey and Ron Morris at WR instead of Dennis McKinnon,
The defensive changes were in the backfield, with Vestee Jackson and Todd Bell replacing Gary Fencik and Leslie Frazier.
So, while this is just one opinion, I would say that the Bears won. the Super Bowl in the 1985 season and then did NOT dismantle their team for either the 1986 season or the 1987 season as they attempted to return to glory. Both those years were playoff years in which the team went bust in the postseason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gene K.
UlbKA91 said:
If Vallas had won, the Bears would be talking to the City again
Click to expand...
I am not sure where that would go even if he did win. I haven't been to all of the stadiums in the NFL. But Soldier Field is the worst in pretty much everyone's mind. It is a terrible venue and I have never liked it. It is awful getting in and out of that place too.

If you are talking about a new stadium in the city, where would it go? I don't think building another stadium there is the right thing to do. It should be moved out of the city.

I don't see the McCaskeys paying more freight than they have to in order to get this done. I trust them as much as I trust Jerry Reinsdorf... which is not at all.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Gene K.
olderbytheminute said:
I looked this up and of the Bears' 22 starters on the Super Bowl championship team, 20 of them were back for the 1986 season in which they didn't even make the NFC Championship Game.
The two that didn't play were WR Dennis McKinnon who missed the year with a knee injury, and DB Leslie Frazier whose career was ended when he injured himself with a non-contact injury fielding a punt in the Super Bowl victory.
The 1986 season, if you recall, was played without Buddy Ryan who was then coaching the Eagles. The offense was stymied by injuries to QB Jim McMahon who started less than half of the team's games.
So clearly, the team was NOT dismantled after the Super Bowl victory.
As for 1987, the offensive changes. included Neal Anderson playing fullback instead of Matt Suhey and Ron Morris at WR instead of Dennis McKinnon,
The defensive changes were in the backfield, with Vestee Jackson and Todd Bell replacing Gary Fencik and Leslie Frazier.
So, while this is just one opinion, I would say that the Bears won. the Super Bowl in the 1985 season and then did NOT dismantle their team for either the 1986 season or the 1987 season as they attempted to return to glory. Both those years were playoff years in which the team went bust in the postseason.
Click to expand...

Was Wilbur Marshall on the 86 team? To me he was the guy I could not take my eyes off on defense. Such a great player in 85.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gene K. and 35Blackhawk42Spartan
The real reason the Bears got bounced in the '86, '87 and '88 playoffs came down to Jim McMahon not playing in '86. You will remember Doug Flutie and what a disaster that was. In the 1987 playoffs against the Redskins, McMahon threw three second half interceprions...one in the Washington end zone and in general he sucked. And in the 1988 Championship game against San Francisco, McMahon was hobbled and it wouldn't have mattered. SF kicked their asses...period.

That was the season the Bears beat the 49ers on a Monday night, 10-9. What few people remember, however, is that Jerry Rice had a bad ankle in that game and was ineffective. He caught the first SF TD pass in the Championship game. When he caught the pass, early in the game, he escaped a tackle and raced for a long run. Rice caught 2 TD passes in that game.

SF TE John Frank was out with an injury when SF played the Bears on Monday night too. He played in the Championship game and caught a TD pass. He was also a good blocking TE. The 49ers pounded their way through the playoffs that year and were a better team than the Bears.

Dan Hampton has said more than once the Bears failed to win in those years because McMahon couldn't keep himself healthy. I agree totally.

I was a McMahon fan at first but I really grew tired of him. Especially after 1987. I remember rumors of the Bears trying to put a deal together to get Dan Marino before the 1987 season. I don't know if that was really true. But when I heard it I was praying for a deal to get that guy. Man, what a difference he may have made. But it's all history now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: corey90, Gene K. and stl705
LTHSALUM76 said:
Looks like the Bears are in 12 place. Not where they want to be. So, let's look at the records for the last 10 years. Now the Bears have shot up to 5th place with a record of 64-98. Definitely not where they want to be.
Click to expand...
Average record of 6.9-9.1 for 20 years…yuck
 
  • Haha
Reactions: LTHSALUM76
Thought I heard on ESPN Chicago radio a half hour ago that Fields, Moore, Kmet and Mooney were at Maine South HS today working out and throwing the ball around.

Did anyone else hear this?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ChiTown Chuggers and Gene K.
Wassup13 said:
Thought I heard on ESPN Chicago radio a half hour ago that Fielda, Moore, Kmet and Mooney were at Maine South HS today working out and throwing the ball around.

Did anyone else hear this?
Click to expand...
Yes, saw pictures of that on twitter. Takeaway, Mooney looks to have put in work this offseason. Meanwhile Claypool is modeling this week in France..........
 
Not a single post after the 1st pre-season game yesterday. Although having nothing to say personally either, it is still somewhat surprising. Dog days of summer, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gene K.
johnndoe said:
Not a single post after the 1st pre-season game yesterday. Although having nothing to say personally either, it is still somewhat surprising. Dog days of summer, I guess.
Click to expand...
YAC yards were the dominant factor in the TD passes Fields threw. I watched some of the 1st quarter on the replay later on.
 
SiuCubFan8 said:
Yup, get the ball to your playmakers on easy stuff. Not everything is a Mahomes 59 yard dime.
Click to expand...
I’ve been thoroughly amused by those that have criticized him on those two throws. Last I checked it’s still 6 points.

Pretty hard to evaluate after a scrimmage. Defense was ok but with a bunch of guys not playing hard to say.

Do like the Stevenson kid a bunch. And the Wright kid looked solid and a bit nasty.
 
I, for one, am not criticizing Fields. Yeah, it's six points and we will take it. My point is this. We can't judge Fields based on Saturday's game. He didn't play much and the Bears won't score a lot of TDs that way. But, I have read he isn't doing well in the preseason practices. I haven't paid close enough attention to know of that is true.

I was simply stating a fact. What do you think was more impressive on those TDs, the throw or the catch and run? That's what I thought. Hell, every QB in the league who has a contract can make those throws. Again, not being critical to the QB, just stating a fact.

I do agree you can't judge much in preseason. After Fields left the game I watched maybe three or four plays.
 
Last edited:
Who are the playmakers on the Bears? Meaning they have the ability to take it to the house anytime they touch the ball.

Fields, Moore, our RB

Ronshon?? Others??
 
Last edited:
Wassup13 said:
Who are the playmakers on the Bears? Meaning they have the ability to take it to the house anytime the touch the ball.

Fields, Moore, our RB

Ronshon?? Others??
Click to expand...
I think you hit the 3. Not sure it’s realistic to count on anyone else to punch above their weight. This team and offense will revolve around how many big plays Fields can make game after game imo.
 
Big update, saw article online that CEO Kevin Warren spoke with Peter King. Said new stadium will have a dome and they expect a location decision within 12 months.

Sounds like there are discussions happening behind the scenes between AH and Da Bears that we are not privy too??
 
stl705 said:
Big update, saw article online that CEO Kevin Warren spoke with Peter King. Said new stadium will have a dome and they expect a location decision within 12 months.

Sounds like there are discussions happening behind the scenes between AH and Da Bears that we are not privy too??
Click to expand...
AH was always the front runner no matter what’s been leaked/said. That’s the first bit of actual news on the stadium front is a time line. Also said 3 year once shovel hits ground, I found that aggressive.
 
SiuCubFan8 said:
AH was always the front runner no matter what’s been leaked/said. That’s the first bit of actual news on the stadium front is a time line. Also said 3 year once shovel hits ground, I found that aggressive.
Click to expand...
Agree. It may be 3 yrs for stadium to be built, but seems like 5 yrs is more realistic with some infrastructure. It’s such a big property that my guess is it would be done in different project stages similar to what the Ricketts did (first upgraded wrigley, then updated the surrounding area with gallagher way, etc.). BTW I have nothing but positive things to say on the “new Wrigley”, Ricketts did a fantastic job!! Hopefully Warren has the same advisors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

EdgyTim

Making A Case: Unranked 2026 Best of the Best

Replies
0
Views
1K
The EDGY Nation
EdgyTim
EdgyTim
RD_Watcher

WSC Semifinal Pick 'Em

Replies
2
Views
274
Edgy's Lost His Mind Free Football Board
brucealmighy
B
EdgyTim

Making A Case: Unranked 2025 Offensive Linemen

Replies
0
Views
749
The EDGY Nation
EdgyTim
EdgyTim
EdgyTim

New: 2024 Team Preview: Chicago Morgan Park Mustangs

Replies
2
Views
765
The EDGY Nation
EdgyTim
EdgyTim
crusader_of_90

IHSA Alums - College and Pro

Replies
45
Views
1K
Edgy's Lost His Mind Free Football Board
mchsalumni
mchsalumni
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back