tray

So the balance of political power in the State makes Chicago a better option ?

Dude, stop posting false and erroneous quotes and ascribing arguments that neither I nor anyone else made. IMO, a salary cap in MLB probably would work better than the current system but obviously it would not, in itself "make the White Sox more competitive." I don't carry water for anyone but I do suggest that if people are that miserable with the WSox they stop joining Cub trolls who have gotten way too much joy out of the Sox record loss season. Give it a fvking break already.

The basics of the argument with relevant facts in this article: https://www.jackcentral.org/sports/the-mlb-luxury-tax-does-not-work/article_39840d86-a568-11ef-a5ee-a3b4e7ddb2cb.html

LOL.

You can't compete with Yankees , Dodgers , San Diego etc. by signing one guy at $15 mil/year. The salary cap is the issue, not the alleged frugality of Jerry Reinsdorf. You can't lay the blame for a broken system at the feet of one owner.

Without a salary cap even the off-season is not very interesting. The high salaries and payrolls ruin the game. Why even try to add significant payroll if other teams are just going to blow that amount away and make it a farce. You want Jerry to sell? OK, but that doesn't mean a new owner is going to play a losing game by trying to compete with the big boys. Reportedly there are only 4 teams in on Soto.

Keep Crochet. Our rotation could be incredible with him and Noah Schultz at the top. They both have the ability to dominate line-ups.

Not weird. IMO opinion, the timing and selection of the Ramova venue was a fantastic decision. The renovated theatre/restaurant/ brewery near 35th and Halsted is beautiful. Support from private investors and the cooperation of National Historic landmarks (new roof), TIF financing, and the dedication of Emily and Tyler Nevius makes a statement about the revival of that area and surrounding businesses ... including the WSox. If someone would prefer going to a downtown hotel, OK, but for me, I think this venue and location will be wonderful. If anyone here is going, please post a pic or two.

The WSox could have a decent rotation with current staff including Crochet, Canon, Thorpe et. al.. Add possible future starters Noah Schultz and Hagen Smith and that rotation (and the entire team) takes another step toward competing with the best teams. Yes, WSox need some hitters/position players so add them through FA ...but don't rob from Peter to pay Paul so to speak. Spend some damn money on FA instead of trying to go on the cheap by trying to outsmart other teams with trades and "developing" prospects while we watch another painful rebuild. Fvk that.

I'm out where you are and the picture quality I get with an attic mounted antenna is indistinguishable from cable TV. It was fun mounting mine and aiming it toward the Hancock with my iphone app. This was a blast from the past having grown up during a time where almost everyone had outdoor ot attic mounted antennas for analog signals with flat 300 ohm cable, boosters, splitters etc. I have a three way splitter serving three TV locations throughout the house including one that is 50 feet from the antenna. This is the way TV should be. No subscription fee.

Not sure what your question for Melody Hobson is. GRate field will not need to be replaced for 20 years or more. There are millions of baseball fans in and around Chicago. Retirees often relocate to warmer climates but the Chicago area will always be a great place to raise a family and watch our sports teams. When is the last time you attended a game in Chicago?

I think I agree.

Oh well, U of I Discovery Partners (another in a long list of proposed anchor tenants for the 78 ) is out. Related is now suggesting that the Chicago Fire could build a soccer stadium there (no doubt, look for more impressive architectural renderings to follow). https://www.connectcre.com/stories/university-of-illinois-pivots-from-plans-at-the-78/ Dead in the water.

Jerry went downstate at the request of Related to see if Gov. Pritzker and the legislature were at all interested in public funding for Related's plan. None of the Related 78 plan or that substandard location were ever Jerry's or anyone else in the WSox organization or the ISFA.

It appears that you have an obsession with one-upmanship, name calling and targeting. I'll let you have the last word here as I have in the past, but in the future, try to resist the temptation to try to prove that you are any wiser than any other poster here.

I think you meant North rather than South. Throwing money at a complicated substandard site with all of the financial and practical entanglements with a self-serving developer would be insane, IMO. The view of the railroad boneyard to the East is awful and as you indicated, there are complicated ingress/egress issues. Maybe explore other alternatives. As a comparison, look at that rendering of the proposed Bears stadium adjacent to Soldier Field. Anything with a view of the lakefront such as on the former Michael Reese site would be great...if the Sox and ISFA are even interested in relocating from 35th St.

I suspect that Venable agreed to a long term rebuild plan similar to Getz' concept of a rebuild plan, i.e., exploring all low cost in-house options for talent, "developing" those players for a few years and meanwhile, abstaining from spending on free agents.

After seeing 35 year old Freddy Freeman in this years playoffs, Vaughn no longer meets the eye test.

Sox need several players including a DH that hits 30+ HR. I suggested Santander as one possibility. Spend some money and the team could conceivably get back to .500.

IMO....Local TV stations broadcasting over the air makes spending $50 on a good antenna well worth it. No cable interruptions and the quality of digital broadcasts for free. I love watching Channel 9 news in the morning and some of their other content like Larry Potash' Back Story. Several WTTW based channels as well.

As long as CSHN has over-the-air broadcasts I will happily tune in. I'm 35 miles away and the reception is great.

The 78 is Futuristic? How so. It's just a piece of low lying vacant land. The largely unrealistic not to scale artistic rendering is a joke. Perhaps you have have been had like many others by a developer looking to cash in and avoid having to pay real estate taxes on a vacant parcel they have failed to develop. Digital over the air broadcasts ? The quality of the picture is as good as cable and light years beyond what we watched back in the old days. But go ahead.

Yes Kyle, I think the 78 plan is a joke and I don't mind explaining and advancing my opinion, even in the face of opposing views. Meanwhile...Don't assume MOST Sox fans from SW suburbs will put their families on mass transit. Some will, many others probably won't based on security and other practical concerns. That is going to potentially decrease attendance....substantially. If you are young and single, or have not attended many games, you may not understand that. IMO, the rendering of the 78 stadium is an architectural/ballpark design joke. And who designed it? Related employees? That mainly metal and glass stadium is supposed to compete for revenue with the historic Wrigley field? LOL. The garish 4 story lit up Sox logo? LOL. The gratuitous pinwheels? The scoreboard obstructing views of downtown? The 78 plan to build commercial hi rises surrounding that park diminishes the opportunity to even consider incompatible architecture. That is why the 78 stadium rendering looks like an office building. 78 is only a bit more than 2 miles from Armor Park (and has similar views of downtown) so what is the major reason one would consider abandoning the White Sox home for over 100 years? I'm asking. Is it worth abandoning Armour Park, all the surrounding land, the infrastructure, and indeed all the history the White Sox have had with their fans on 35th street? Never forget, the 78 started as an idea by a developer who experienced multiple failed attempts at reaching some agreement to get an anchor tenant (including Amazon). Now, the ISFA, Chicago and Illinois taxpayers, and Sox ownership (current or future), should tell Related to stick it. Sox fans should not allow themselves to be sold down the river by some greedy real estate people...and we know their type.

I wish Reinsdorf and/or the ISFA would fund an architectural study for a new Comiskey near the site of the original park. Many of the errors made at GRate could be avoided. Red brick, arched windows and other elements from the original architecture could be employed. Home plate facing North. Beachers in LF (only without without a scoreboard behind them obstructing the view of downtown like the rendering of the 78). An upper deck in RF that would be lower and closer to the playing field. And of course, developing the adjacent area with some commercial and residential. No issues with parking or public transit. It's already there. Same goes for all the utilities - sanitary and public sewer. 3 phase power, etc. Soil is good - not part of a former river bed. Why try to pursue Related 78....a project that is far more expensive, entails much more financial risk and risk to the fan base? Why? Related keeps pushing and pushing. They just duked the sodfather to put a sand lot there and dragged Reinsdorf down to Springfield to look for free money. At the end of the day, there could be other options for a new stadium than the one (the 78) being shoved at us. And no, I am not talking about moving the team. I am talking about keeping them where they have been for over 100 years.

I sense some anger here. Not sure why some people want to question my experiences and my memories but whatever.