Well, maybe. The Bears simply announced that they are moving to the next step with Indiana. They haven’t finalized an actual site, nor a stadium design, and they certainly haven’t made an absolute commitment yet.
Given how long and torturous the Bears’s quest for a new stadium has been, and how many times they have changed course already, I have no doubt that more changes could happen before anything is finalized.
Presuming yes Indiana, speaking as a Chicago area Illinoisan … yea!!!
I guess it could be worse.
Tampa Bay Rays set for new $2.3B stadium project after county and city approve financing plan
The Hillsborough County Commission voted 5-2 on Friday to approve its $796 million share of the mixed-use entertainment district that includes a new 31,000-seat stadium that will be near Raymond James Stadium, home of the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The Rays’ new stadium is expected to open in 2029. The Tampa City Council city voted 4-3 on Thursday to approve $80 million.
https://apnews.com/article/tampa-bay-rays-ballpark-9be9d61b6bfad45b64a8e88cae1b6eb0
Why oh why do cities keep wasting Taxpayer money on this?
Because a lot of voters get upset when the local team isn’t treated properly. You should see city meetings where the public have an opportunity to speak, some of those folks are really, really into their team.
There is a quote from 1960s football manager Bill Shankley “Football isn’t a matter of life and death it is far more important than that”
In the US taxpayer money is used to build football stadia (even if it is a different type of football) rather than health care. They obviously have their priorities right where other countries have got them all wrong.
There’s no doubt in my mind that owners should pay for their own stadiums. It’'s a private business for profit, and it’s absurd to expect the public to finance it. If they want to move, fine, but they’ll have to rent it out for concerts, etc, if they expect to get any income from it.
As part of a class activity many, many years ago when I was in high school, we were working on a scenario that involved budgeting for a public school as a group project. One of the many problems with the school was the athletic field was in much needed repair as its sorry state was leading to athletes being injured. I don’t remember all the problems with the school, but one of them was an educational issues and funding was needed to fix it.
I received a lot of hostility from my group for arguing we needed to fix the educational issues before anything else. A surprising amount of hostility for an imaginary scenario. My reasoning that education was our primary mission was lost on deaf ears. I capitulated and we prioritized the athletic fields.
I grew up in Green Bay, which is, by far, the smallest city to host a major professional sports team in the U.S. The Packers are deeply ingrained in the local culture there, as the team is, by far, the single thing that the city and the area are known for, and there is a tremendous amount of pride in the Packers among residents.
The team doesn’t have a billionaire owner: the team is “publicly owned,” with half a million people owning shares of stock in the team: many in Green Bay, and Wisconsin, but owners are spread throughout the world.
And, even so, in 2000, when the Packers had proposed a major renovation of Lambeau Field (to help the team keep up with newer stadiums being built), and a 0.5% sales tax increase in Brown County to help fund the renovation was put into a referendum, it barely passed (54% in favor).
So, even in a sports-mad, team-loving place like Green Bay, with a team that doesn’t have a rich owner, a lot of residents don’t want to be asked to pay to help build/renovate the stadium.
But, other than the Packers, no Pro team is “local”= they move around as the owners get better brides from foolish cities.
You’re making a sound, logical argument that won’t do much damage to the emotional bonds many people have with their team. I don’t like watching football as much as I used to, but I’ll be damned if I want my taxes to go up so a franchise worth billions stays in my city. You need a stadium? That’s just the cost of doing business. Pay up.
City and community leaders get to brag about being in a professional sports city.
Supportive politicians usually get hefty election funding.
Teams usually present a well funded PR campaign, and promise very rosy finance returns
Some very vocal citizens aka the fans, believe it is worth any cost to keep the team; and local news typically covers it that way
And often - free tickets.
Which are always fiction and lies.
The good tickets - not among the common fans
Yes and no.
Yes, any other team could move, but most haven’t. The NFL, for example, certainly has a few teams which have repeatedly chased greener pastures (e.g., Rams, Raiders, Cardinals), but you have teams like the Bears, Steelers, Giants, etc., which have been owned by the same family, and located in the same market, for a century (or close to it). Even teams which have repeatedly changed owners (like the Vikings) typically haven’t actually moved cities.
Even the Bears, which have been in Chicago since 1921, but are now looking at moving away from the city, aren’t planning to move very far – though it is absolutely all tied up on which suburb (and state) where they will get a sweet deal.
The NY Giants have moved six times and are now in East Rutherford, NJ.
An even dozen Pro FB teams have moved to a different state. 13 for Baseball. 14 for basketball.
They have always been in the general NYC area which is the main point. It’s irrelevant that they’ve changed venues a few miles away.
New Jersey is another STATE. Yes, the two stadiums are close, but NY- neither the city or the State no longer gets the taxes, etc.
It’s ten miles away. For the second time, this is not relevant to the original comment that they remained in the same market.