Toggle sidebar

OT: Bears & NFL Talk 98

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
From my understanding it seems as though the city would have ownership of the standout, what percent- I’m not sure. But wouldn’t that mean they would get ticket/concession revenue from non Bear events? And have something to sell and recoup their investment if needed?

As a expat Chicagoan, I think it could be good. I’ve experienced the massive influx of consumer spending from the 2022 Super Bowl and 2023 National Championship games at Sofi.

I’m quite positive none of us debating this topic have anywhere near enough numerical data to truly determine whether this is a good move from the city.

I also now live ‘near’ a city that spends $1billion a year on homelessness only to have the problem continue to get worse. Talk about a waste of taxpayer dollars.
 
Romang67 said:
Gotta be planning for underground parking, no? Preferable to me, but obviously also much more expensive.

Both Schrager and McShay tweeted about moves from the teams in the latter half of the top 10.

Then again, according to Belichik a few weeks back, leaks don't actually start happening until 12 hours before the draft, so they could just be speculating.
Click to expand...
For tens of thousands of cars that would be prohibitively expensive, without even factoring in the water issue being right there on the lake.

Paul Allen said:
From my understanding it seems as though the city would have ownership of the standout, what percent- I’m not sure. But wouldn’t that mean they would get ticket/concession revenue from non Bear events? And have something to sell and recoup their investment if needed?

As a expat Chicagoan, I think it could be good. I’ve experienced the massive influx of consumer spending from the 2022 Super Bowl and 2023 National Championship games at Sofi.

I’m quite positive none of us debating this topic have anywhere near enough numerical data to truly determine whether this is a good move from the city.

I also now live ‘near’ a city that spends $1billion a year on homelessness only to have the problem continue to get worse. Talk about a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Click to expand...
Plenty of studies have been done on the roi of stadium funding. Take a guess whether it’s lucrative for taxpayers. And damn the politicians in your city for trying to put a roof over people’s heads.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pez68, Giovi, Idionym and 2 others
hawksrule said:
For tens of thousands of cars that would be prohibitively expensive, without even factoring in the water issue being right there on the lake.


Plenty of studies have been done on the roi of stadium funding. Take a guess whether it’s lucrative for taxpayers. And damn the politicians in your city for trying to put a roof over people’s heads.
Click to expand...
Tell me you’ve never been to LA without telling me you’ve never been. It’s call corruption my guy.


Hey, only 81 more years until the city gets Skyway revenue again, and 60 years for parking meters!
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU Hawks fan
Also, games in the elements are great... when you're watching on TV. Putting a roof over the thing is the one thing I agree with the Bears on this front. Gimme creature comforts for games I attend, darn it.
 
Paul Allen said:
From my understanding it seems as though the city would have ownership of the standout, what percent- I’m not sure. But wouldn’t that mean they would get ticket/concession revenue from non Bear events? And have something to sell and recoup their investment if needed?

As a expat Chicagoan, I think it could be good. I’ve experienced the massive influx of consumer spending from the 2022 Super Bowl and 2023 National Championship games at Sofi.

I’m quite positive none of us debating this topic have anywhere near enough numerical data to truly determine whether this is a good move from the city.

I also now live ‘near’ a city that spends $1billion a year on homelessness only to have the problem continue to get worse. Talk about a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Click to expand...
The data isn't as important as the optics to most politicians and the optics are awful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pez68 and Idionym
Paul Allen said:
From my understanding it seems as though the city would have ownership of the standout, what percent- I’m not sure. But wouldn’t that mean they would get ticket/concession revenue from non Bear events? And have something to sell and recoup their investment if needed?

As a expat Chicagoan, I think it could be good. I’ve experienced the massive influx of consumer spending from the 2022 Super Bowl and 2023 National Championship games at Sofi.

I’m quite positive none of us debating this topic have anywhere near enough numerical data to truly determine whether this is a good move from the city.

I also now live ‘near’ a city that spends $1billion a year on homelessness only to have the problem continue to get worse. Talk about a waste of taxpayer dollars.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t matter if it’s good for the city or not because it seems like most of the money will be coming from the State.

The plan calls for $1.5bil in capital funding, which would mostly come from the state. The Bears then project that the State would gain an additional $15mil a year in tax revenue. So 1.5bil for $15mil a year, a whopping 1% return per year.

Perhaps I’m a huge idiot who cannot comprehend the amazing data that the Bears have presented, but it’s not looking too hot to me.
 
Idionym said:
Doesn’t matter if it’s good for the city or not because it seems like most of the money will be coming from the State.

The plan calls for $1.5bil in capital funding, which would mostly come from the state. The Bears then project that the State would gain an additional $15mil a year in tax revenue. So 1.5bil for $15mil a year, a whopping 1% return per year.

Perhaps I’m a huge idiot who cannot comprehend the amazing data that the Bears have presented, but it’s not looking too hot to me.
Click to expand...
How many years will this stadium last? In light of the Browns looking for a new one and who knows about the other open air Northern ones that are 25 years old. If the timeline is like 30 years, for $1.5 billion that's $50 mill a year, without the time value of money.
 
StreetHawk said:
How many years will this stadium last? In light of the Browns looking for a new one and who knows about the other open air Northern ones that are 25 years old. If the timeline is like 30 years, for $1.5 billion that's $50 mill a year, without the time value of money.
Click to expand...
1.5bil up front for the initial infrastructure. That number will probably increase, as it always does with projects this big. In addition, infrastructure doesn't last 30 years without significant repairs, so it's not like this won't be sucking in more and more money over the next 30 years.

This is a bad deal. Luckily, the 3 most important people for this proposal agree with me. Without the Speaker, Senate President, and Governor, no shot that this will ever get close to becoming a reality.
 
Romang67 said:
I feel like the Bears' pick is the most in flux of any pick in the top 9. The Chargers' have been mocked with Latham or Nabers, the Falcons with Turner or a trade-down, the Giants with Nabers or McCarthy. I've seen people in the know say Fautanu, Fashanu, Nabers, Odunze and Murphy.

In the last 24 hours.
Click to expand...
At this point, any of the WRs or linemen wouldn't surprise me.

At this point I think everything hinges on Murphy. If the Bears think he can be a great 3-tech, then they probably just stand pat at #9 and take him, even over a top-3 WR. If they think he's good, but on the same level as a couple of the tackles, I think they trade down a bit, maybe to the early to mid teens. If they don't love any of the linemen, I think they trade down with one of the playoff contenders looking to grab Odunze and get a 2025 1st round pick.

I've been so convinced they'd take a WR up until like the past 2 weeks. It'd be funny if when all's said and done they just go ahead and take Odunze at #9 and call it a night.
 
I've parked in an underground garage next to the arena here in DC for hockey games and it is brutal getting out. I can't imagine what it would be like for a 65,000 seat stadium. I'm most certain they will say that it's not safe to tailgate in one due to the lack of space and the risk of carbon monoxide/fires from grills and cars running. They want to limit parking and tailgating so you have to buy food and alcohol inside the stadium
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mrfenn92 and Pez68
This is a unusually good draft for LT's. The Bears should look at Fashanu at 9. Good LT's are hard to get compared to WR's. Y'all could probably still get really good WR later in the draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Idionym
Acquire Hendrickson with their 3rd and 4th, select 3-tech Murphy and have a helluva d-line - OR - take Rome at #9 and have a helluva WR room and a pretty good d-line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom