• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official 2024 NFL Thread. Draft is done. Which Teams will Find Winng "Lottery Tickets" in Undrafted Free Agents?

Shooshmoo said:
Certainly no Bears fan, but I read that the subsidy will be paid with an existing 2% tax on hotel stays, so not an increase and hits mostly tourists anyway. Who knows if that will actually be the case, but that is at least what they are saying. They just need to figure out parking and making it so you don't have to walk a mile and a half to get into the stadium, like it is now.
Click to expand...
sounds like you read the PR material the Bears wrote

I don't think it goes anywhere because the state has to play ball here and Pritzker has been pretty down on the idea -- the billionaire governor has flexed more progressive muscles than the progressive-backed mayor; Johnson has been a significant disappointment
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
sounds like you read the PR material the Bears wrote

I don't think it goes anywhere because the state has to play ball here and Pritzker has been pretty down on the idea -- the billionaire governor has flexed more progressive muscles than the progressive-backed mayor; Johnson has been a significant disappointment
Click to expand...
Demo Chicago mayor promises commielib agenda then fails to deliver? Holy shit, never saw that one coming.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
sounds like you read the PR material the Bears wrote
Click to expand...
well, yeah, and what the mayor said. And that's why I said, "who knows if that will actually be the case". I was actually pretty pumped about the Arlington Heights plan, because that is much easier for me to get to, but I think it would ultimately be a bad thing for the city.
 
Shooshmoo said:
well, yeah, and what the mayor said. And that's why I said, "who knows if that will actually be the case". I was actually pretty pumped about the Arlington Heights plan, because that is much easier for me to get to, but I think it would ultimately be a bad thing for the city.
Click to expand...
my point was that it was an incomplete read on what is already public -- they've acknowledged they are asking for about $2.5 billion total from the city/state of which the the 2% hotel tax is projected to generate $900 million

$900 million of the stadium's $3.2 billion is supposed to come from an extension of an existing bond deal that the state has in place for funding of the lat round of upgrades to Soldier Field

but that's just the building itself -- they are asking the City to cover $1.5 billion in infrastructure and other costs related to the larger project, with no source identified
 
^^^ Always fun to look at post likes and dislikes and guess which poster did what. Not too hard here...
 
Get over it. You’re going to pay or the Bears are moving to Birmingham, Alabama or Salt Lake City.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
my point was that it was an incomplete read on what is already public -- they've acknowledged they are asking for about $2.5 billion total from the city/state of which the the 2% hotel tax is projected to generate $900 million

$900 million of the stadium's $3.2 billion is supposed to come from an extension of an existing bond deal that the state has in place for funding of the lat round of upgrades to Soldier Field

but that's just the building itself -- they are asking the City to cover $1.5 billion in infrastructure and other costs related to the larger project, with no source identified
Click to expand...
Well, Johnson was pretty clear in saying “What it does not call for are raising existing taxes or implementing any new taxes. I’m going to repeat that one more time to make sure everybody gets that. This project will result in no new taxes on the residents of Chicago.”

He'll probably be gone before he could be held accountable if that ends up not being true -- but he definitely Bushed himself out there. Chicago’s CFO said federal and state grants could cover the infrastructure costs, so not the city if that is accurate.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Well, Johnson was pretty clear in saying “What it does not call for are raising existing taxes or implementing any new taxes. I’m going to repeat that one more time to make sure everybody gets that. This project will result in no new taxes on the residents of Chicago.”

He'll probably be gone before he could be held accountable if that ends up not being true -- but he definitely Bushed himself out there. Chicago’s CFO said federal and state grants could cover the infrastructure costs, so not the city if that is accurate.
Click to expand...
two things:

  • no new taxes is actually worse in my opinion because it would mean cuts elsewhere
  • it assumes big money from the state, which is hopefully DOA
 
WakeFanAdam said:
Im fine with the value. They needed a 3rd and also got another 5th. I just wish I had known ahead of time.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I let my kid stay up for nothing.

Was puzzled at the time, but Beane clearly did not value that group of receivers highly enough to risk losing a few of them, and particularly not Worthy. Fair enough.
 
Just realized that the Raiders drafted a TE in Round 2 last year, Michael Mayer from ND. He had 27 catches last season. Fired the GM and coach, and drafted a TE in Round 1 this year.

 
Shooshmoo said:
Well, Johnson was pretty clear in saying “What it does not call for are raising existing taxes or implementing any new taxes. I’m going to repeat that one more time to make sure everybody gets that. This project will result in no new taxes on the residents of Chicago.”

He'll probably be gone before he could be held accountable if that ends up not being true -- but he definitely Bushed himself out there. Chicago’s CFO said federal and state grants could cover the infrastructure costs, so not the city if that is accurate.
Click to expand...
I guess I just don't understand why these multi-billionaire owners think it is incumbent of the non-billionaire citizens of a city to pay for their mega-stadium projects.

It is an entirely stupid premise. Rich man asks lots of less wealthy people to pay for his new building. Say it out loud. It is nonsensical.
 
I get it - they are putting up $2.25B, though. And it's not like this isn't a major benefit for people who live in the city, and the owners have some leverage to pick up and move if they don't get what they want. Don't see that happening here, though.

If these stadium projects were taxed the way I think it should be taxed and only hit the uber wealthy, I would be all for it.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Well, Johnson was pretty clear in saying “What it does not call for are raising existing taxes or implementing any new taxes. I’m going to repeat that one more time to make sure everybody gets that. This project will result in no new taxes on the residents of Chicago.”
Click to expand...

One would think lessons would have been learned after "If you like your doctor... you can keep your doctor" and "If you like your healthcare plan... you'll be able to keep your healthcare plan".

Obviously not
 
With Caleb Williams going #1, USC now has the most #1 overall picks and the most Heisman trophies of any school.
 
deacvision7 said:
I guess I just don't understand why these multi-billionaire owners think it is incumbent of the non-billionaire citizens of a city to pay for their mega-stadium projects.

It is an entirely stupid premise. Rich man asks lots of less wealthy people to pay for his new building. Say it out loud. It is nonsensical.
Click to expand...
Because the multi-billionaire owners have leverage.

There are fewer franchises than there are cities will to pay the cost to build stadia and related infrastructure. If Chicago tells the McCaskeys to fuck themselves -- pay for all aspects of your own stadium, the Bears would move either to Arlington (Chicago suburb) or some other city. If your stadium is outdated (like Soldier Field), either help pay the cost to upgrade or risk losing the team.

FWIW, there are examples of cities revitalizing around new ballparks which result in lots of both tangible and intangible benefits (Oracle Park, Camden Yards, Nationals Park) of having a major sports franchise in your city -- you are no longer minor league.

Not saying every stadium deal works out, and obviously agree with the principle that it's outrageous that multi-billionaires are getting handouts from cities that are strapped, but cities have often built their identity, at least in part, as being the home of certain sports franchises, and no city government wants to be responsible for losing the hometown team.
 
one thing about the Bears (that also applies somewhat to Reisdorf with the Sox/Bulls) is that the McCaskeys are only rich because they own the Bears, which they bought back in 1920 for $100

all their wealth is tied up in the franchise, so it's not like Steve Balmer or Mark Cuban or any new owner that has a team because they are rich, with a lot more leveraging power to pay for shiny new stadiums (stadia?) out of pocket

but still, no way should professional sports be subsidized at this level by public funds -- a few hundred million going toward improving transportation, parkland, and other infrastructure I can be okay with if it's largely open to the public outside of games and concerts
 
Pilchard said:
Not saying every stadium deal works out, and obviously agree with the principle that it's outrageous that multi-billionaires are getting handouts from cities that are strapped, but cities have often built their identity, at least in part, as being the home of certain sports franchises, and no city government wants to be responsible for losing the hometown team.
Click to expand...
the economic development research on publicly funded stadiums is pretty extensive and clear that the ROI is bad

i hope they go to arlington heights
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top