In all seriousness I've been to most of the major crime ridden city propers in the US and I think St. Louis is the biggest ******* dump I've ever seen. Then when you get out of STL City and get into places like Ferguson and stuff in STL County it's like it never ends. I'm not sure there is a city in America more negatively impacted by the Interstate Highway System and white flight than St. Louis. At one time St. Louis City alone had about 800k people and now it's only slightly larger than Des Moines. I realize the metro had about 2.6million in it though. The KC metro will surpass greater Stl by about 2035 with the current population trend.
Chicago Bears bought Arlington Heights track only to build in Indiana?
- Thread starter JP4CY
- Start date
Or they are whoring their new stadium location out to whoever is willing to help fund it with public money.
That too, financially the deal they are getting from Indiana is pretty hard to pass up.
How far from Chicago is the site they are talking about and can you compare that sight milage wise to the one they purchased land from downtown?
From Soldier Field to Hammond, IN about 30 miles.
From Soldier Field to Arlington Heights, IL about 40 miles.
So this is sounding a lot like what the Chiefs went through, wanting to stay in Missouri, but the state and city could not come up with a package good enough to match what Kansas City KS and the state of Kansas was offering to get them to move. So the Chiefs took the money and are moving across the river into Kansas by the speedway
It’s 20 miles to the Wolf Lake site, even closer to south side Chicago
Hammond is arguably much better for Chicago than AH site. Chicago will get some of the milk, without buying the cow.
You have to spend money to make a lot of money, but spending no money to get some money is a decent outcome
Assuming the $190millon purchase of AH is indicative of Bears preference for that location, what a misstep by Warren and the Bears to use IN as leverage to get deal for AH
I feel sorry for Bears fans to be fair...but the Indiana Bears.... lol....what a joke.
Meh, it's no different than the Jets, Giants, and soon to be Chiefs. My unpopular opinion as a Bears fan is that it makes much more sense financially to go to Hammond than Arlington Heights. I don't live in Chicago though so I'm sure most don't feel the same.
Other than those that go to the games don't think most Bears fans care where the stadium is at. Just win f'ing games.
Your distances seem high. I think:
Soldier Field to Hammond is closer to 20 miles.
Soldier Field to Arlington Heights is closer to 30 miles.
Maybe it’s just being born and raised in the Midwest, but the bears in Indiana is just going to be so odd, and still be called the Chicago Bears. Chiefs will still technically be in “Kansas City” so that’s not too odd to me.
I just feel like when your teams name is the name of a city you should actually play in exact city or change name completely.
The league won’t want them to
A bad precedent for future stadium grift if Bears bluff gets called
Tell that to:
Giants
Jets
Bills
Cowboys
Commanders (currently, moving back to D.C.)
Dolphins
49ers
Rams
Chargers
Last edited:
Talk is the other Owners told them they should take the Indiana deal due to how good it is.
Several of those are very large metros with multiple teams
Bears are opening the door for that in Chicago too imo
Something else to consider:
Arlington Heights site to Halas Hall (Forest Park, IL) is 20 miles, while Halas Hall to Hammond is 60 miles.
