Originally Posted by doublem23
Uh, the city still accounts for about 1/4 to 1/5 of the area's population (depending on where you draw the line) and guessing the center is in Elmhurst makes me think you are unaware of this thing we call "Indiana." Either way, regardless of where the point is on a map, the bottom line is that doesn't mean anything because for planning purposes, the center of the transporation network is far more important. People don't travel "as the crow flies," so to speak, they're reliant on the infrastructure that is already in place. Looking at the metro area and thinking the Sox could be successful anywhere but the central core of the city makes me think you have not realized the '80s ended.
It's a cute thought, guys, but ultimately it's a terrible idea. As has been pointed out, there's a reason literally nobody has already done it.
I don't get the 1980s reference, I do know that when I was growing up in the 50s the city had 3.6 million people, it's now around 2.7. Are all those people coming back? Chicago is now number 3 in the USA and before long the Dallas and Houston areas will have more people.
When we visit up there we stay with my sister in Arlington Heights and I know it's a lot easier to get to somewhere like Addison or Elmhurst than to 35th and Shields.
I believe you live in the city so you are not going to agree with any talk about suburbia being a better location for the Sox, but based on how the Sox have performed at the box office at USCF since they moved in I believe they would have done better out west. We will never know for sure but if you were to pin down JR, he would say the same thing. The Sox didn't pull Addison out of a hat and say let's go there, they did extensive demographic studies and came up with Addison.