PDA

View Full Version : Here's a "fantasy" scenario to think about...


hsnterprize
11-29-2004, 07:09 AM
This thought has been in my mind for a while, and I thought I'd ask you about it. This is one of those "if you were the owner of the team, what would you do" type of situations, so use your imagination here.

You're the Sox owner, and you've been able to put adequate money into the team's payroll and make a legitimate effort to clean up the negative local and national image of the White Sox. The team is actually winning, and more people are paying attention to the Sox than ever before. Now, you're thinking about a new ballpark for the team. And...money is there to pay for the place, so it's privately financed. For me personally, I'd put the place near the McCormick Place development. It would combine elements of Safeco Field, old Comiskey Park, the current U.S. Cellular Field (the fan decks), and other new/old places. It would be a 3-tiered stadium with a capacity of just over 40,000. It would be designed so that fans can see downtown Chicago from their seats (preferrably from home plate), and it would be built with part of the lower tier underground so it's not so big from the outside. In short...it would be built WAY better than the current ballpark with respect to recent renovations and such.

Now, here's the dilemma...building the new ballpark near the south Loop would mean taking the Sox out of the Bridgeport/Bronzeville area. Both neighborhoods have gone through building booms with the Sox partially a reason why. I'm thinking taking the Sox out of that area would almost nullify any efforts to improve those areas (not that they're bad...don't misunderstand me). New homes are being built in Bridgeport that are worth over $1 million, and Bronzeville is home to the new Harold Washington Center on 47th Street, with an annex opening near U.S. Cellular Field. However, if moving the team closer to downtown on top of all the other improvements done to that team would make the Sox more appealing to the masses in spite of community improvements in Bridgeport and Bronzeville, I'd consider it. This may seem like a "common sense question", but would you do it? Granted, many people within those areas would be disappointed, but would that disappointment be worth it?

I'm interested in your opinions on this "situation". Feel free to comment.

jabrch
11-29-2004, 07:59 AM
I'm interested in your opinions on this "situation". Feel free to comment.

If I were the owner, why bother spending my own money, taking on debt, or incurring tons of financing costs when I have a perfectly good, brand new stadium to play in now?

SoxFanTillDeath
11-29-2004, 08:52 AM
Granted, many people within those areas would be disappointed, but would that disappointment be worth it?

The White Sox are not obligated to the area in any way. The people in that are should be thankful that they got the improvements that they did.

Heck, if the new owner is that rich, give all the people in that area vouchers for 5-10 games free at the new USCF if that will make them happy.


"No one is ever happy with anything, so don't waste your time trying to make everyone happy." -- Me

jake27
11-29-2004, 12:19 PM
nice thinking, but it would never work. think about all the traffic in lake shore drive after the game :o: it would also make no sense to move to a new park after they have been in this one for 13ish years. this ballpark is not bad at all, i like this park actually. all the renevations and all they have made in the past few years would b pointless. just too much of a mess and pointless... at least for me.

Rush20
11-29-2004, 12:55 PM
I have often wondered about the same situation. "What If"...

If I had my choice, I would rather have a new park built closer to the southwest side of the loop near Sears Tower, etc., so there would be a little more expressway access. Any park close to McCormick Place (although that IS a great location) would have the same effect as a Bears Game on LSD/I55.

Privately financed or sponsored is the only way to build these days. I agree that a ballpark similar to Jacob's Field that was built below street level would only make the ballpark more appealing. Add a year-round bar/restaurant in centerfield (batter's eye area) combined with a Hall-Of-Fame baseball theme, etc. and it would be a step in the right direction.

Too bad that this town still feels the Shrine up north is a national landmark. I have to go to Wrigley at least once per season for business reasons and I laughed at the netting they installed last year. The SOX missed a golden opportunity in the early 90's to build a ballpark that could have showcased the great city of Chicago. Imagine a ballpark "nestled" in among the great skyscrapers of the city.

Oh, well US Cellular is better than New Comiskey so hopefully the surrounding area will continue to develop.

hsnterprize
11-30-2004, 07:30 AM
I have often wondered about the same situation. "What If"...

If I had my choice, I would rather have a new park built closer to the southwest side of the loop near Sears Tower, etc., so there would be a little more expressway access. Any park close to McCormick Place (although that IS a great location) would have the same effect as a Bears Game on LSD/I55.

Privately financed or sponsored is the only way to build these days. I agree that a ballpark similar to Jacob's Field that was built below street level would only make the ballpark more appealing. Add a year-round bar/restaurant in centerfield (batter's eye area) combined with a Hall-Of-Fame baseball theme, etc. and it would be a step in the right direction.

Too bad that this town still feels the Shrine up north is a national landmark. I have to go to Wrigley at least once per season for business reasons and I laughed at the netting they installed last year. The SOX missed a golden opportunity in the early 90's to build a ballpark that could have showcased the great city of Chicago. Imagine a ballpark "nestled" in among the great skyscrapers of the city.

Oh, well US Cellular is better than New Comiskey so hopefully the surrounding area will continue to develop.

I can see where you're coming from as far as a ballpark near the Sears Tower. I agree...the Sox had a golden opportunity to set the latest ballpark building trend, and seriously dropped the ball. However, I remember the Mayor telling me that the cities that do have downtown ballparks needed some kind of revival there, whereas Chicago didn't need such a "revival". Take that however you wish.

I don't think a McCormick Place ballpark would be treated like a Bears' game on LSD or I-55. Granted, traffic would be a pain, but new ballpark construction allows some kind of street improvements outside the stadium if so desired, isn't it? Not to mention, views of downtown Chicago would make that place more appealing to the eye than the Sox' current location.

There's a lot to debate about why a McCormick Place ballpark would be good for the Sox, with plenty of pro/con points. My whole point is if the money is available to build a new place, why not try and buy out the ISFA lease, and go for it? Granted, we all know big league baseball teams like to use the "other people's money" angle in building new facilities (like our own squad), but I think this would be a precedent...a privately-financed stadium in a more-attractive part of town that would attract die-hard and casual fans alike. Not to mention, the team, as I said in my first post, would already be in a position to be a legitimate contender. That would not only garner more respect from a local aspect, but the...forgive me for saying this..."tourist attraction" factor would also make people from all across the county willing to come to Chicago and see the White Sox, or at least our ballpark. Hey...we can rip on the Cubs for doing the same thing, but at least the Sox' reputation wasn't built on tourism and hype. At least in my situation, the foundation of having a good team is already laid, so the rest is just gravy.

I can think of a TON of attractions both in and outside the ballpark to make this place one of the best in baseball. I'm thinking of everything from restaurants outside the ballpark, a Chicago-based microbrewery inside, sports bars, and even a large, LED color scoreboard built to look like the original exploding scored from the old Comiskey Park. But regardless of all the bells and whistles, it would be privately paid for, and there would be more than enough money to put into the team's payroll to keep them competitive in an attractive ballpark.

As far as the "Shrine" is concerned, I figure if our place is built right, sooner or later, the "Shrine" will lose its romanticized flair. There will always be people who will be in love with Wrigley no matter what happens. I'm just imagining a park that put Wrigley in its place.

SouthSide_HitMen
11-30-2004, 02:03 PM
I can see where you're coming from as far as a ballpark near the Sears Tower. I agree...the Sox had a golden opportunity to set the latest ballpark building trend, and seriously dropped the ball. However, I remember the Mayor telling me that the cities that do have downtown ballparks needed some kind of revival there, whereas Chicago didn't need such a "revival". Take that however you wish.

I don't think a McCormick Place ballpark would be treated like a Bears' game on LSD or I-55. Granted, traffic would be a pain, but new ballpark construction allows some kind of street improvements outside the stadium if so desired, isn't it? Not to mention, views of downtown Chicago would make that place more appealing to the eye than the Sox' current location.
Daley has already ordered his Daley / Mafia owned / run casino in the McCormick North building. He has also planned Maggie Daley Park on the site confiscated (Meigs Field) during the darkness of night.

JR will not get a new free park for at least 2020. Hopefully he will be long gone before then.

Rush20
12-01-2004, 10:54 AM
I can see where you're coming from as far as a ballpark near the Sears Tower. I agree...the Sox had a golden opportunity to set the latest ballpark building trend, and seriously dropped the ball. However, I remember the Mayor telling me that the cities that do have downtown ballparks needed some kind of revival there, whereas Chicago didn't need such a "revival". Take that however you wish.

I don't think a McCormick Place ballpark would be treated like a Bears' game on LSD or I-55. Granted, traffic would be a pain, but new ballpark construction allows some kind of street improvements outside the stadium if so desired, isn't it? Not to mention, views of downtown Chicago would make that place more appealing to the eye than the Sox' current location.

There's a lot to debate about why a McCormick Place ballpark would be good for the Sox, with plenty of pro/con points. My whole point is if the money is available to build a new place, why not try and buy out the ISFA lease, and go for it? Granted, we all know big league baseball teams like to use the "other people's money" angle in building new facilities (like our own squad), but I think this would be a precedent...a privately-financed stadium in a more-attractive part of town that would attract die-hard and casual fans alike. Not to mention, the team, as I said in my first post, would already be in a position to be a legitimate contender. That would not only garner more respect from a local aspect, but the...forgive me for saying this..."tourist attraction" factor would also make people from all across the county willing to come to Chicago and see the White Sox, or at least our ballpark. Hey...we can rip on the Cubs for doing the same thing, but at least the Sox' reputation wasn't built on tourism and hype. At least in my situation, the foundation of having a good team is already laid, so the rest is just gravy.

I can think of a TON of attractions both in and outside the ballpark to make this place one of the best in baseball. I'm thinking of everything from restaurants outside the ballpark, a Chicago-based microbrewery inside, sports bars, and even a large, LED color scoreboard built to look like the original exploding scored from the old Comiskey Park. But regardless of all the bells and whistles, it would be privately paid for, and there would be more than enough money to put into the team's payroll to keep them competitive in an attractive ballpark.

As far as the "Shrine" is concerned, I figure if our place is built right, sooner or later, the "Shrine" will lose its romanticized flair. There will always be people who will be in love with Wrigley no matter what happens. I'm just imagining a park that put Wrigley in its place.
I was surprised when the SOX negotiated the deal with US Cellular. Although the work done so far has has a positive effect on the poor original design, I don't think it's enough to build a fan base beyond the existing core and certainly not enough to draw tourists visiting Chicago. I personally think they're throwing good money after bad. I was hoping once the ISA lease was paid off, the SOX could consider pursuing a privately held financing package.

As a member of the Chicago "corporate community" - love that term :rolleyes: , I am consistently approached by visiting clients about seeing "Wrigley". Note - they never say I want to see the Cubs, just, they want to go watch a game at Wrigley.

When I have brought clients to Comiskey/US Cellular, they enjoy the food and the seats (season tix near Sox dugout) :bandance: , they immediately want to leave the park after the game and head back "downtown". It's amazing, because if your idea is feasible, by physically moving less than 3 miles north, the SOX would then be considered downtown. Their current location is somewhere between the city and the suburbs. It's unique in that respect, but doesn't help build an expanded fan base.

I have always preferred a downtown loop ballpark idea over any notion of moving the team to the suburbs. Chicago is a great market and beautiful city. The Cubs/Tribune has done an excellent job in marketing their ballpark and environment and should be recognized for that. I'm not buying the product, just recognizing it. Jimmy Buffet Concert - A great idea for that neighborhood!

The SOX, with significantly less to work with, have not been as successful, however considering they are working within the boundaries of their own pre-cast concrete, they have done as well as can be expected.

I like the McCormick place approach. Tie into the casino Daly wants to build and the natural convention atmosphere and the concept might take off. Throw Comcast money into the deal and perhaps we have a winner to take on the Tribune for market share.

Dolanski
12-01-2004, 10:56 AM
Just one question I have to ask...what is with the red text?

rdivaldi
12-01-2004, 11:05 AM
The dreams of a South Loop ballpark are just that, dreams. Being a resident of that area, I can tell you guys that there is no room to build a ballpark.

I think some of you guys who don't live in the city are going to be surprised at how nice the Bridgeport area and the old Robert Taylor homes row is going to be. The city is pumping millions into the State Street Corridor to make it a viable area for all to live. Just take a quick drive from 25th to 40th street on State and you'll see change is occurring quickly. Go west on 35th to Racine and you'll notice that $800,000 homes are starting to pop up all over the place.

Times are a changin'...

Rush20
12-01-2004, 12:01 PM
The dreams of a South Loop ballpark are just that, dreams. Being a resident of that area, I can tell you guys that there is no room to build a ballpark.

I think some of you guys who don't live in the city are going to be surprised at how nice the Bridgeport area and the old Robert Taylor homes row is going to be. The city is pumping millions into the State Street Corridor to make it a viable area for all to live. Just take a quick drive from 25th to 40th street on State and you'll see change is occurring quickly. Go west on 35th to Racine and you'll notice that $800,000 homes are starting to pop up all over the place.

Times are a changin'...
Good to hear. Ever since the no parking signs went up in Bridgeport forcing me to pay JR to park, I don't get the chance to walk the neighborhood like I used to and haven't seen much of the development you mention. Any artist renditions on what the Robert Taylor Home re-development plan looks like? Are the high-rises still occupied? I know they knocked down most of them, however some still look inhabited.

rdivaldi
12-01-2004, 12:52 PM
Good to hear. Ever since the no parking signs went up in Bridgeport forcing me to pay JR to park, I don't get the chance to walk the neighborhood like I used to and haven't seen much of the development you mention. Any artist renditions on what the Robert Taylor Home re-development plan looks like? Are the high-rises still occupied? I know they knocked down most of them, however some still look inhabited.
This is the major development going over where the Robert Taylor and Stateway Gardens Homes used to be. I love it, so much nicer than those awful high rise slums.

http://parkboulevardchicago.com/about.html

This development is only the beginning...

DumpJerry
12-01-2004, 02:32 PM
Ok, the location by McCormick place is horrible. Street improvement will not alleviate the traffic problems, draining Lake Michigan will. The reason why traffic is so horrendous with Bears' games is that the traffic comes from three directions instead of four. This adds over 25% traffic load in each direction. The stadium needs to be in a place where there is north, south, east and west approaches. We have this now.

If I owned the team, a new park would be low on my priority list, even after a favorable media image is created and player personnel are at the point I want them to be. You always needs to bring in new blood since those players have a nasty habit of growing old or getting in injured which means replacements.

Also, why red text? It's hard on the eyes.

hsnterprize
12-11-2004, 10:08 AM
OK...first, I use the "red text" because I've always posted in red text. I like how it looks, but I don't mean for it to bother people's eyes. These are the first complaints I've read about the red text on WSI. If more do so, I'll change the color.

Secondly, I've been thinking about this "McCormick Place" ballpark for a couple of days, and even though some of you don't think it's a good idea, I thought I'd outline some of the details about what's in my brain. Once again, this is all fiction, so just try to imagine this scenario, and its potential.

Imagine shortly before the new McCormick Place West building is completed and open to the public, Mayor Daley says he wants to tear down the Lakeside Center (formerly known as McCormick Place). The city and the MPEA (Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority) come to a deal agreeing on the Lakeside Center's destruction, including a deal to move the Aire Crown Theater to another location. Now, in the midst of the negotiations, I call "hizzoner", and tell him I'd like to build a new ballpark on the vacant land. Now if you'd like to see exactly how big the land would be, click here (http://imageatlas.globexplorer.com/ImageAtlas/view.do?group=ImageAtlas) to go to the "GlobXplorer" website. You should be directed to a picture of the McCormick Place complex, but just in case you're not, type "2301 S. Lake Shore Drive" in the address window, and the city and state in their appropriate windows. Then, you'll see a pic of the place with Northerly Island (pictured as Meigs Field with the infamous "X's" on the runway) next to it. From my initial looks, I see the land is definitely LONG enough to handle a new ballpark, but some of Lake Michigan may have to be filled in to handle the width. The park would fill up a little more than half the land mass of the Lakeside Center, with the remaining land used for above ground parking accompanying the 2,500 space underground parking already there. And let's say there would be more parking built near the new McCormick Place West building to accomodate more cars in a worst-case scenario where the Bears and White Sox are playing home games at the same time.

Some of you may already be skeptical about this idea considering the size of USCF compared to where I'd want to build new. However, use that GlobXplorer site to find pictures of places like SBC Park, Safeco Field, PNC Park, and other recent parks, and you'll find they're tucked in quite well with the areas their built in. If anything, I'd want to have land added to the northern half of the area...but not completely filled in, though. There has to be room for the boats to pass through and dock. Anyway, if you imagine the Lakeside Center cut in half, I'd want the new park to be built where the "northen half" of the building is standing. As I said before, I'd leave the "southern half" open for parking.

This place would also face the skyline...which would be what USCF should've done in the first place. That would mean home plate would be in the southeast corner of the stadium...closest to the lakefront. Not to mention, with the downtown location, there would be close access to all the downtown attractions. Granted, the Sox would lose some of their "south side swagger", but at the same time, the exposure to the downtown area would bring in new fans, and let non-fans see just what they're missing by not going to the Cell. My stadium would combine attributes of Safeco, SBC, Old Comiskey, and the Cell. Some of the highlights would include the lower tier built underground, brick facade on the outside with old Comiskey Park-style arches built into the wall; a 4-tiered stadium with an upper, lower, suite, and club deck; an upper deck bleacher section similar to Safeco Field with an out-of-town scoreboard on top shaped like the current center-field videoboard (complete with spikes and pinwheels), a classic-looking roof WITHOUT the poles, kelly-green seats, and in center, a USCF-style fan deck with a replica of the 1970's style exploding scoreboard nestled behind that featuring a scoreboard and videoscreen. Both the left and center field boards would light up after a Sox home run, but the center field board would shoot the fireworks. The field would be configured like Safeco Field's field, with the USCF bullpens put in left and right. The fences would not have to be symetrical, but I'd want the dimension to fit within the property. If need be, the LF UD would be on top of the lower tiered seats similar to old Comiskey Park. If that's the case, put arches in the wall behind the LF seats. I'd want the LF upper deck to look like the LF bleacher section in Safeco, and the scoreboards would be supported with poles similar to the one in CF at SBC Park.

With the park facing the way it is, I'd make sure the "main gates" would be visible from all around the place. Imagine a square shaped facade with the side along LSD just being the LF decks. There would be 4 main gates (behind home plate, and at the corners of the 3rd base side and LF seats, and the 1st base side and RF seats), with 2 additional gates along the baselines. That way, people would have 6 ways of getting in/out. The main gate behind home plate would be built like the main gate at Safeco Field, with the corner gates having an SBC Park look. The baseline gates would look like those at Coors Field in Denver, but would all include steps going into the ballpark. Outside the corner gates, there would be a video screen designed like the CF scoreboard welcoming fans inside and showing Sox highlights. The lights on the roof would look like SBC's, with toothpick lights above the right field seats. Oh, by the way...the right field seats would be a single-deck configuration only so people can see parts of downtown Chicago from their seats.

Just a couple more details...HOK Sport would be the main architects in this design, and all I've written would be my suggestions. I'd want this place to combine traditional baseball, whatever modern ballpark amenities are going up, and a rich sense of White Sox history. The clubhouses would be much better than the ones the Sox use now...even though the current clubhouses are pretty good. The ballpark would be named Comiskey Park, but in a revenue-streaming move somewhat similar to the Cleveland Browns, I'd sell the naming rights to the concourses. The Browns sold the naming rights their gates for Cleveland Browns Stadium. So it might seem odd, but people would walk through...for example, the U.S. Cellular Main Concourse, or the United Upper Concourse, or the Bank One Outfield Concourse. There would be the typical concessions in the ballpark, but I would invite businesses near USCF to get space in the new place. In other words, Morrie O'Malley's would bave a booth, Connie's Pizza would have a booth...even Grandstand would have a souvenir shop if they wanted one. The "Bullpen Bar" in right field would be a mainstay, but I'd try to get surviving relatives to allow me to name it the "McCuddy's Bullpen Bar". Mayor Daley told me personally when Reinsdorf gave the McCuddy's ownership money to tear the bar down, they took it and ran...and that's why there's no McCuddy's near USCF now.

So that's my idea. I know some of you won't like it, and I know there are legitimate reasons why it can't happen. But just give yourself a shance to dream it...a Lakefront ballpark with a south-side flair. It's possible...at least in my dreams it is.

TommyJohn
12-11-2004, 10:57 AM
a Lakefront ballpark with a south-side flair. It's possible...at least in my dreams it is.
In my dreams, I would buy the White Sox and hire you as part of my "Stadium
Exploration Committee."

hsnterprize
12-11-2004, 04:05 PM
I appreciate the consideration, and I'll accept. A few other things I forgot from the last post.

First, I'd keep the seating capacity under 42,000. I'd prefer 41K to be on the safe side...too many of the "Oriole Park wannabe" parks have outrageous capacities. 41K should be good enough. The 4-tier ballpark is pretty much standard procedure nowadays, so for all of you "upper-deck critics", we'll be in a position much like fans in other cities. The highest seats may not bring intamacy to the field, but there will be a lot more to look at than what's available now. Not to mention, the luxury boxes would be neatly tucked away under the upper deck, so the'd be just another part of the park instead of a painful eyesore. Also...considering the fact this place is being built on a large slab of land, another big challenge is to have it designed to give the perception of "inviting Chicago in" rather than isolation. I read in a book about ballparks one day someone commenting on Comiskey II's arched window design as something that "kept the neighborhood out." Even though my place isn't being built in an urban neighborhood per se, I'd leave it up to the architects to make the place a natural-feeling part of the Lakefront instead of just some building put in its place.

Look at these pictures from HOK-Sport (http://www.hoksve.com/sport/projects/proj_list_type_Ballpark_1.htm). Pay special attention to the ballparks with brick outside facades. Even though many of them are trying to outdo each other, do you see how they really bring a baseball feel to their particular area? Imagine if the Sox were able, or willing, to do something like that. SBC Park and Coors Field really have the nicest facades IMHO. The Cell is okay, but we all know JR wanted to go on the cheap...and we see the results.

Not to mention, the main "scoreboard" would be larger than life. The USCF replica in left would be a good size, but the main CF board would be larger than the original one in old Comiskey. And as I said before, I'd want it to feature an LED dot-matrix color board and a video screen. Preferably, the majority of that board would be of the LED variety, with a good chunk of it being the videoscreen.

I need to correct something, too. I said there would be 4 main gates. I meant to say 3. Those, along with the 2 baseline gates would be the main entrances/exits to the ballpark.

CHIsoxNation
12-11-2004, 04:17 PM
I think this sounds like a great idea, however highly unlikely. I still believe the Sox should have done what they were thinking about doing years ago and moving the stadium out more into the south suburbs area. As Jay Mariotti once said, "the Orland Park/Oak Lawn area is considered the White Sox stronghold." I know from personal encounters that many people in the south suburbs in the Orland area don't feel comfortable driving out to games because of its location. Not to mention the lack of bars or places for people to hang out. If you go to Wrigley you can hang out in the area and enjoy the game at a bar and not worry about much. What about WHEN the sox WIN the world series, where are we supposed to flock onto the streets? I dunno about all of you, but I don't know how many people feel like running around the Dan Ryan or the areas around there to celebrate.

Don't get me wrong, I like the renovations they have made to the stadium. I just think they should have stuck to the idea of moving it out to the suburbs, where there is a higher average income and less to worry about. I think anything would be better than looking out the stadium and seeing what is on the other side of the Dan Ryan.

FightingBillini
12-11-2004, 05:02 PM
I think this sounds like a great idea, however highly unlikely. I still believe the Sox should have done what they were thinking about doing years ago and moving the stadium out more into the south suburbs area. As Jay Mariotti once said, "the Orland Park/Oak Lawn area is considered the White Sox stronghold." I know from personal encounters that many people in the south suburbs in the Orland area don't feel comfortable driving out to games because of its location. Not to mention the lack of bars or places for people to hang out. If you go to Wrigley you can hang out in the area and enjoy the game at a bar and not worry about much. What about WHEN the sox WIN the world series, where are we supposed to flock onto the streets? I dunno about all of you, but I don't know how many people feel like running around the Dan Ryan or the areas around there to celebrate.

Don't get me wrong, I like the renovations they have made to the stadium. I just think they should have stuck to the idea of moving it out to the suburbs, where there is a higher average income and less to worry about. I think anything would be better than looking out the stadium and seeing what is on the other side of the Dan Ryan.
First of all, Mariotti is a moron and a tool. Orland Park is not a White Sox stranglehold. Not anymore. Many of the people in Orland are fickle morons who now are Cubs "fans". The people who's grandfathers were die-hard Sox fans are now hanging out at Wrigley and wearing Cubs stuff, pretending like they were always Cub fans. I graduated from Sandburg 4 years ago, and it was about 70-30 Sox-Cubs fans, probably a little less. Due to horrible ownership, the team is not as popular as it once was. The baseball games played on 35th and Shields are not nearly as enticing as the Mardi Gras at Clark and Addison. While Orland is predominately Sox fans, it is not close to what it was 10 of 15 years ago.
The more important point is... where would they put it in Orland? There are no huge open spaces right off I-80. Besides that, we wouldn't draw fans from the city. We would draw from New Lennox and Orland, but people from the western suburbs and south side would be reluctant to come out here. We might pick up whatever Cubs fans there are in Orland, but we would lose several Sox fans who live in the city. A park needs to be accessable by public transportation. Several years down the road when a new park is built, it needs to be either in the same neighborhood or in the city. A suburban ballpark would be a huge failure.

CHIsoxNation
12-11-2004, 06:06 PM
I understand that there is no room in Orland Park right now for a ballpark, however...seeing the fact that you are from the Orland area, you could agree that about 10-15 years ago the area wasn't nearly as populated as it is now. Which brings me to your point that Orland doesn't have as many sox fans as it did 10-15 years ago. My point was simply when they were thinking about putting together a new park and considered the suburbs, it should have been given more attention because the city wasn't as Cub dominant as it is now.

I go to Illinois State and it's pathetic how many Band Wagon Cubs fans there are down here. I have been here for 3 years and the numbers have increased every year. I know when I go home for breaks and what not, it's a breath of fresh air to see all the White Sox paraphernalia. I have met a lot of Sox fans while living at ISU who live in the suburbs who also agree that it may have been worth a shot many years ago when it was a consideration. Obviously there is no way anything like that could happen now. Maybe not even in the Orland Park area...just an area a little outside of the the city but next to the a major expressway. Anything is better than the current location. I guess we could always celebrate at the bars on Western when they win it all? :(:

By the way....I graduated from Sandburg 4 years ago also. hmmmm...interesting