Friday roundup: Bears owner bids to buy Arlington Park, plus do you really need anything else?

Happy Friday, everyone! Unless you’re in the American West and currently melting from the heat, in which case, umm, try to stay indoors and hydrated, and don’t think about how in coming years it’s only likely to get worse. (This is maybe another reason why the Oakland A’s aren’t likely to move to Las Vegas, though building a new stadium right on San Francisco Bay is an equally bad idea in climate-proofing terms.)

Lots of news this week, so let’s get down to business:

Other Recent Posts:

Share this post:

33 comments on “Friday roundup: Bears owner bids to buy Arlington Park, plus do you really need anything else?

  1. “This is maybe another reason why the Oakland A’s aren’t likely to move to Las Vegas,”

    Show me the evidence Howard Terminal gets done and I’ll be in complete agreement with you

    1. I could be wrong but it seems
      like MLB is building fake neighborhoods around the new stadiums.

      1. Yup, Ancillary development opportunities around either Cashmen field or Henderson is why I think its the 4 inning of the A’s ballpark quest and Vegas is up by 2 runs

        1. I’m betting the A’s team up with the Raiders on their proposed, massive Stadium District just west of The Strip with shops, restaurants, bars, retail and residential development.

    2. There are many multiverses where the A’s neither get a Howard Terminal stadium nor move to Las Vegas.

      1. Hard to argue against a sports metaphor. It’s an intellectual checkmate (see I just did it).

      2. 7:05 PDT. 111 degrees. Game time at Las Vegas Ballpark. Nothing else to see or do in Vegas. Got me an Aviators game to go to.

          1. If HT fails and the A’s lose 1/2 of development right of the Coliseum site to another group, Oakland has as much chance as Waco

          2. In my yearning for a “multiverse” to become a reality NdM, I see a scenario where MLB finally wakes up, becomes rational, and FINALLY! works out a deal with the Giants for the A’s relocation down here to $an Jo$e. For Giants compensation on making Santa Clara County/entire Bay Area a SHARED territory (like the other two-team markets), I’d propose John Fisher deed a 50% stake in the MLS Quakes to the Giants; which is probably worth north of $200 million based a recent sales of MLS franchises. The Bay Area’s MLS franchise thus becomes a joint venture of both ballclubs, the A’s are allowed to explore(again)/relocate 35 miles south and MLB has two, financially healthy franchises in the Bay. A win, win all around!!! Dammit!…back to this irrational universe NdM. :(

          3. It’s a nice enough dream, Tony, but the entire history of MLB ownership and territorial right says it isn’t going to happen.

            And I wasn’t joking about Brooklyn – arguably the best move for MLB as a whole would be to add another team or three to the NYC area. But owners are more concerned about their individual franchise rights, so territories are considered sacrosanct.

          4. Fair enough NdM,
            I’d argue that territories aren’t that “sacrosanct” when It comes to the betterment of MLB and it’s teams. How many territories have been altered/changed over the years to accomodate expansions/relocations? Way back in the day, new teams in LA, NYC or Chicago; someones territory was altered or shared.
            Heck, while not a true territorial rights issue, the Expos/Nationals were allowed to relocate to DC, CLOSER to the Orioles than the Giants and hypothetical $J A’s franchise. And Santa Clara County was once a shared territory (or no one’s territory at all) prior to 1992; changed only because the Giants were supposed to relocate from SF to $J. BTW, any known reason why the Bay Area is a split territory between Giants/A’s, while the other two-team markets (LA, NYC, Chi) are shared?

          5. DC wasn’t part of Baltimore’s territorial rights. It was part of the Orioles’ TV territory, which is why the MASN mess still persists.

            As for why the Bay Area isn’t considered shared territory, that was likely just bad negotiating by the A’s owners at the time, who were hoping to see Bob Lurie move the Giants south and leave SF and the East Bay to them. But now that it’s established, none of the other owners want to undo it, for fear that they could be next.

          6. I’d argue NdM that the “fear” in your last sentence is unfounded, as the 1) Bay Area is unique in that you have 2 MLB franchises and gerrymandered territories/not shared and 3) one franchise would hypothetically be moving further from the other in the metro (i.e..the A’s are already here!). Allowing Santa Clara County to revert back to shared status (or the entire Bay Area for that matter) would not open the floodgates to franchise relocations/territorial invasions. MLB can/would approach every future relocation/expansion individually and whether or not it would harm existing franchises/be good for the league as a whole.

            Alas, I know NdM in my heart $J will never be home to MLB, but at the very least acknowledge the situation in the Bay Area as it exists today re territorial rights; ridiculous and completely irrational! Thanks.

          7. It’s arbitrary, certainly. But so are all territorial rights. When you’re a cartel, you can make any rules you want.

          8. I know, I know…. Belson.

            But still…

            https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/sports/baseball/as-and-giants-in-tug-of-war-over-rights-to-san-jose.html

            Also, re: San Jose’s chances…

            https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2015/02/04/last-swing-in-court-by-san-jose-to-get-oakland-as-to-city/22881417/

            So, probably lower than Brooklyn’s chances I would think.

  2. The Bears get the city of Chicago/state of Illinois to finance the UFO placed atop Soldier Field that the Bears now claim isn’t adequate to their needs?! For a city that NOW prides itself on its architecture and saving historic architecture (thanks to Richard Nickel) to butcher the classic look of Soldier Field for the Bears, and now have the Bears claim they need a new stadium?!? Chicago should show the Bears the door to the NW suburbs AND force them to finance the removal of the UFO!

    1. Soldier Field was already a mess before the renovation. The colonnades had been filled in with glass skyboxes, the sightlines were terrible and the south end zone seats were far from the field. The UFO is unsightly, but the colonnade area is now fully open. With the Bears gone, the UFO deck could be torn down resulting in a sweet 40,000 seat MLS stadium.

      1. The renovation of Soldier Field cost $690 million, and you want to spend how much more to turn it into a soccer field for a teams whose previous attempt at a publicly financed stadium bankrupted Bridgeview?

    2. I was always curious about how that renovation went down. Other stadiums in built in big markets around (Philly, Seattle, etc) that time were in the $400-500 million range. They were bigger and new from the ground up. Why did they wind up with this deal that made no one happy?

      Also, if the Bears were to leave could the stadium be sold and the site redeveloped. According to this article there is $430 million of debt remaining on the stadium. If the site was sold for development and the proceeds used to retire the debt how much would it be worth?

      https://chicago.suntimes.com/city-hall/2021/6/3/22516812/soldier-field-renovations-21-4-million-bonds-refinanced-hotel-tax-revenue-coronavirus

  3. “Avoiding income tax like his fellow richies.” Well duh. We don’t try to tax wealth, but income is taxed, according to the laws created by our beloved representatives and enforced by the IRS. And thank heavens that cherished institution is so hyper-diligent about privacy and security!

    In the linked article, ProPublica notes that they “compared how much in taxes the 25 richest Americans paid each year [apples] to how much Forbes estimated their wealth grew [avocados].”

    Maybe the value of Neil’s website went up, according to some well-researched metric which I will not disclose. Pay up.

    1. Wealth (or more accurately, wealth increase) taxes might work more fairly on the ultra rich (who have the ability to either hide income or simply offset actual income with constructs that make them appear to have earned very little). Though, I am not convinced that they won’t just find a new way to avoid/evade paying taxes under any new system as well.

      The real problem with wealth increase taxes is that they can force the middle class into poverty. Everyone likes the idea of taxing Buffett or Bezos on wealth increases. Nobody ever thinks that the same tax scheme imposed upon them could result in them getting a $50,000 tax bill in a year where they only made $18,000 net (because their house or landscaping business or assets increased in value significantly).

      There may be ways to exempt small business owners etc, but there will always be someone who is “just over” the exemption limit and has to pay while their friend who earned $3,000 less gets the exemption.

      1. The key would be marginal wealth tax rates then. Exempt $X in annual growth, to protect homeowners and small businessmen,. Use marginal rates so that the guy making $3000 more than the minimum only pays on that three grand. Not everything.

  4. The weather is right where it always is in the west sorry to disappoint the programming. Heat waves are normal and the temps they’re talking about are in deserts, coastal areas are also where they always are no difference. As to the rest Las Vegas is comfortably air conditioned and sucks water out of the evap pools along the colorado river dam system which is a gov/speculator created ecological disaster. Places like Vegas, Phoenix area and Socal should not be so large and are totally supported by this disaster because money. The same schemes reported here take place in many other places as well.

    1. The ‘weather’ is not right where it always is.

      https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/06/11/climate/california-western-drought-map.html

      I certainly agree that various gov’t agencies and businesses have helped to create (or at least dramatically worsened) the situation in the west, but it would be incorrect to say that temps, rainfall, snowpack and other factors have not changed. They have.

  5. This seems like the perfect moment for Don Garber to hold a presser where he announces that the NFL is actively seeking to abandon Soldier field because it is struggling to compete with MLS in “their” stadium.

    Line up for your franchise licenses to the left, folks. Not you, Burkle…

    1. Third time is a charm.

      https://www.sportspromedia.com/news/nwsl-san-diego-expansion-franchise-2022-ron-burkle-jill-ellis

  6. Boy is it hot out there!

    Just walked from my air conditioned house to my un-air conditioned garage, got into my Ford F-150 (SuperCrew Cab, of course), drove 2 miles down the street to Starbucks to get an iced latte. Oh man, was that line at the drive thru long. Took me 10 minutes to get my drink. Thankfully, my F-150 has great air conditioning. Finished my latte on the 10 minute drive back home. Rushed back in from the garage to the air conditioned house. Was Glad to toss the empty plastic cup and straw into a very Hefty garbage bag. Kirkland!

    Now, what were you saying about rapidly expanding suburbs in the semi-arid regions of the west and southwestern parts of this nation effecting our climate.

  7. “There were at least three separate articles this week about the color pattern of seats at the new St. Louis S.C. stadium, which can best be described as “red and blue, kind of speckled.” Remember journalism? Those were some good times.”

    https://news.google.com/search?q=kroenke+rams+lawsuit

    Whether news or not I leave to the interpretation of the beholder, but over the past week (speaking of St. Louis stadia) Missouri’s favorite son and his legal issues did get some ink.

    1. That’s our Stan!

      So, the STL journalinfluencers can’t even say there was no actual news this week in defending the articles on seat colours.

      Sigh.

    2. Ah John. Hello! If I don’t “make nice” on the sports page, how’ll I ever get access to the locker room to interview coaches and players. I’m a sports reporter, not an investigative journalist. Sheesh!

Comments are closed.