[CrazyF.C.]

We've all heard that the atmosphere, the stadium, and the attendence are all inferior to that of soldier field. BUT, the bottom line is the bottom line. With the fire paying out the nose for rent for soldier field and getting no concessions and no merchandising money at soldier field, the REAL question is whether or not naperville is better money-wise. What kind of rent do they pay? Do they get a percentage of concessions?

The reason I ask is not because I want to see the fire stayin naperville, god knows I hate watching games from there on tv. My reason for asking is will the fire organization be able to use staying at naperville as a gambling chip in negotiations for soldier field when they come back. Could they say, "listen we're losing a lot less money out there in soldier field, and we know you need our dates for your newly renovated place. Either you cut the rent and give us a cut of merchandise and concessions or we stay in naperville."

what do you guys think?

[jmeissen0]

there is already a new lease for soldier field when the fire go back... it provides them a cut of concessions and parking... plus it lowers the rent


at naperville the fire pay for quite a bit of extra things (police, stands being put up, planning for traffic, etc), but they get concessions and possibly parking...

since they can't leave the stands up at ncc, the cost is going to be about the same every year... which would probably be too much for them to make a profit... and they should be making a profit at soldier field when they return... which will slow the process of them getting an sss

[monster]

Naperville did include a cut IIRC, but there's no way the residents would extend that deal, I think.

[kebzach]

old soldier field lease (rumored): $50K per game rent, no parking $$$, no concessions $$$, no merchandising

current situation at NCC (rumored): $10-20K per game rent, Fire sell all the merchandise, Fire control parking revenues, but then you have to factor in:
- security
- costs of building stands that have to come down every year
- and many, many other costs that you encounter when you have your own stadium. Problem is, this isn't the Fire's stadium.

new soldier field lease for 2004 (not signed yet, but it is widely believed that this will be where the Fire go and once again, these figures are accepted rumors only): $20K rent, a percentage of parking, a percentage of concessions.

If all this holds to be true, I would think that the Fire might actually do better in the new SF than at NCC.

[CrazyF.C.]

thanks for the numbers. thats what I was looking for. So despite the lower attendence and the crap field and stadium, in the long term this looks like a pretty decent move on the fire's part if it helps them get the rumoured deal for Soldier Field.

[kenntomasch]

The atmosphere is not crap at Cardinal Stadium. In fact, it's quite good.

In fact, monster, the residents have voiced no concerns about the presence of the team in the downtown area. None. They have regular meetings with the people who live right around the stadium, and for all the doomsaying they did in january and february, they haven't experienced marauding hordes of visigoths trampling their neighborhoods. I went to the last public meeting ---no one had a bad word to say.

Some businesses have said they've benefitted, others have said they haven't. The downtown doesn't seem overrun with people, even after games with 13-14k. The parking situation is far from ideal, but they've made it work.

The biggest problems, then, have been:
(1) The pitch (narrow, grasstroturf, gridlines);
(2) Inaccessibility (for city folks, and the parking situation);
(3) Some supporters being denied their God-given right to act juvenile.

Other than that, as a stopgap measure, it's worked out pretty well.

Financially, it may be a wash. It may be slightly better than the old Soldier Field deal and slightly worse than the new one. They won't have to buy the bleachers again next year, that's one cost they won't have, they'll just have to cart them back in and install them again. But considering it was this or nothing at all, I can't help but think there may not be a lot of second-guessing here.

But in no way would the city of Chicago take Cardinal Stadium seriously as a bargaining chip against Soldier Field. Especially since, as has been pointed out, they already have a deal in principle for the Fire to return to SF in 2004 under much friendlier terms than before.

[Godot22]

Admittedly, I don't get a lot of chances to go to Fire games in person because 1) it's in effing Naperville and I don't have a car to get there from my present location in the far north suburbs and 2) I'm a dirt-poor Starving College Student (tm) who can't regularly afford tickets.

But I must respectfully disagree with the wise Mr. Tomasch. The atmosphere is crap. Section 8 (and 9) is of a high standard, despite defections. But the rest of the stands are noticeably more sedate than they were at Soldier Field.

If the Fire made a permanent home in Naperville or a town like it, a part of the fan culture which was built in the Chicago years would be lost forever. It's a debatable point as to whether that's a good thing or not, but it's hard to argume with the point itself.

The inadequacy of the pitch and gridlines have been touched on ad nauseum. Fire management has been responsive and respectful of fan concerns.

I will grudgingly admit that the town itself is quite decent, and nearby businesses seem happy for the extra business. If they could get some similar town out in Dupage or Kane counties to donate the land for a soccer-specific stadium, the team would probably be better off long-term, even if it would suck for me personally. NCC sure as hell is not a long-term option, however.

[jjayg]

Originally posted by Godot22

But I must respectfully disagree with the wise Mr. Tomasch. The atmosphere is crap. Section 8 (and 9) is of a high standard, despite defections. But the rest of the stands are noticeably more sedate than they were at Soldier Field.

If the Fire made a permanent home in Naperville or a town like it, a part of the fan culture which was built in the Chicago years would be lost forever. It's a debatable point as to whether that's a good thing or not, but it's hard to argume with the point itself.

Section 8 (and 9) have been great and gotten better each week. There is some new fan base building going on in Naperville. It takes time for new fans to realize that it's ok and encouraged to be vocal and supportive. It was like this in Soldier Field in the begining too and people outside of Section 8 learned by watching the section 8 example. It would be the same in Naperville.
NCC really does suck as far as the stadium and field go so it is NOT an option for the future. This is very true. But a SSS anywhere in the Chicago area whether in the City (impossible) or someplace in the suburbs will become necessary for success. I am a bit tired of people who live in the city bitching (I know you weren't bitching, you provided a clear statement of your opinion) about how the original fanbase will dissappear if, when an SSS is build in the burbs. Any real fan will make their way to see the Fire or any other team regardless of where they are at. If not, they are not real fans. I live in the Northwest suburbs and driving to Soldier field is not the easiest thing to do, but I have and will do it as long as the Fire are there. I will travel to the West in Naperville and I will travel all the way to the South if we ever end up there. That's what real fans do and that is what real fan culture is all about. Anyone who would not support their team because it is slightly more inconvenient really isn't a true supporter of the team. They are just casual fans posing as supporters. There is a great bunch of long time city fans who make the trek to Naperville all the time. Any other true fans should bite the bullet and follow their example.

[mjtate]

I've only watched one game on TV that was played at NCC this year, and was pleasently suprised at the field and stadium. All I had read on the message boards was how horrible the stadium and field were. I don't like the football lines, but you get used to them while watching the game, and the stands looked 10 times better than any Metro, KC, or SJ game played infront of thousands of empty seats. The atmosphere seemed to be pretty good.

I realize the situation isn't good, but to an outsider, seemed to be managable for a couple years.

[Stan Collins]

they haven't experienced marauding hordes of visigoths trampling their neighborhoods

Bravo. I'd have to call that the analogy of the week. (also applies to all the people who fight tooth and nail against mass transit appearing near their neighborhoods).