Cool. I am trying to give as little money to the organization as possible so if i could avoid paying for parking that would be great. In fact if people ever just want to trade stuff for tickets i'd be all over it. Is section 8 gonna have a "donate a can of soup get a free ticket day" any time soon?
Well you can be confident that the Fire won't be getting any of that if they go downtown unless Mansueto's real estate empire acquires some museum campus parking lots between now and then. The team and village split 50/50 of parking revenue in Bridgeview now (but the team only gets 22% of the merchandise sales...)
We should probably be honest, but Soldier Field is almost certainly not sustainable unless we’re hitting 40k in attendance or something similar. It’s going to be tough.
Do we actually know what the team's balance sheets look like now though in the current digs to compare it to though? Miki Turner's blog last year had a nice summary of the lease itself and some of the more bizarre elements of it, but I don't think I've seen the reds and blacks of the team spreadsheets laid out or estimated anywhere.
The more I think about it, the less sense SF makes. If you want to improve the Fire's relevance/image/success in Chicago, then it comes down to a combination of winning, first rate organization, and stadium location. As you say, SF is not sustainable, so they'd need a downtown venue in the 25-30 range in the near future. Why not get working on that, as it will likely take many years to come to fruition, and in the mean time, improve the Fire organization while playing in Bridgeview?
As my grandfather who passed away a couple weeks ago used to say, "get while the gettin' is good." If Landek is willing to negotiate an exit and Mansueto's buddy Rahm is willing to work some magic with the relevant organizations (Rahm being involved was implied in the original tweet that started this madness) take the deal while it's potentially on the table. And like I said above, even with good attendance at SGS like two years ago, is anyone confident that the Fire are generating that good of a cash flow in those situations? And besides, NRod made a statement today defending Bridgeview Stadium. As good a reason to bail as you can get right there.
I'm yeah, I'm excited about a move to SF, because look at my location, but stepping back and looking at the big picture, I think my optimism for the organization if they move is less significant than my pessimism if the team stays put. I'd love to believe that winning = relevance but I really feel like I'd be forcing myself to believe that that's true. Look at another PITA to get to from downtown team in Dallas who've been one of the more consistent teams in the league on the field over the past decade. They don't have too many marketable stars but they crank out young talent and won the shield and Open Cup in 2016. That 2016 season their HIGHEST attendance was 16k in a 20+k stadium...and they're in a car-centric market and actually have some entertainment options near the stadium. Now to be fair, they're doing A LOT better at the gate than the early part of the decade when they'd average 10k announced attendance, but I think their relevance has a ceiling. You can counter with the success of a team like KC but as discussed in the MLSN&A thread, it's not an apples to apples comparison. Philly might be a better comparison now that they're getting their shit together with Sakiewicz gone, but I've done the trip to both stadiums many times and the trip from the center of town to Chester is way easier.
Keep in mind that back when Bridgeview was built there were two things going on. First Daley was not helpful in finding a city location. Second it was thought the games would be attended by suburban soccer moms filling the kids into the minivan. Those two assumptions no longer really apply. As also noted that given better team ownership and a better team attendance would be better. All that said I still think Lincoln Yards was the best site for a new stadium. Then again I am in the minority of Lincoln Park residents in supporting the project (my issues are I want to see more thought given to the effect on schools and transport as well as my general opposition to TIFs).
I was excited for the Fire when Bview was announced but even then I remember thinking this was a bit of an optimistic take on the location back when it was announced. All the youth soccer clubs I'd see at tournaments when I was growing up were the more upscale 'burbs to the west and north. I was just a college kid in Michigan when this was announced, but I remember looking at the map and thinking they were isolating themselves from that base too.
From personal experience this is still the case. Since my son started playing travel soccer I have gotten an education in the northern and western suburbs. I think only once has he had a game down south (and even then it was so far down I-55 I thought I was heading to St. Louis). Tomorrow’s initial spring season game is in Bloomingdale. Naperville is about as far south as we will go this year. That said there are AYSO and other youth leagues down south. And at least for his high school team in the fall he played lots of games south.
If this was supposed to be a move to get the suburban soccer moms, they should have built at the Kane county fairgrounds with the proposed new Metra stop a few blocks away. That would be a dumb strategy for the Fire, but a perfect one for the non-existent USL affiliate.
Minor league ballparks seem to be all the rage in USL nowadays. I wonder if you could squeeze a soccer field into Impact Field in Rosemont. I already have the perfect logo/mascot for a Fire USL affiliate:
Top 50 clubs with the highest average attendances in the world between 2013 and 2018 https://www.givemesport.com/1467865...ttendances-in-the-world-between-2013-and-2018
As a former STH along with 6 other Naperville families, the reason we don't go to games anymore is that the team sucked and the owner didn't care. You don't win fans back with that. They are giving up the whole Western Suburbs to be located in a place that sucks to get to. I will never forget telling Atul to go all in when the Sox and Cubs both sucked in 2012-13. They would have been able to capture a market segment but that window is now closed. They had a chance to make this franchise something but decided to be cheap.
Which is why I said above -- "given better team ownership and a better team attendance would be better."
No matter what anyone thinks the stadium in bridgeview would be filled on fire gamedays if we had a championship team. Back in 2006 peter wilt would have preferred a downtown soccer stadium but chicago wasn't going to help pay for it and still won't. Soldier field is too big and expensive to rent. I don't know what they are thinking now. Do they think they can make money at sf paying high rent. Are they going to get a sweet deal? The only good thing is they really will be forced to put together a great team to make any money at SF.
So maybe part of the plan is that Joe is gonna buy some EPL and LigaMX and Ekstraklasa players and then NSF will be packed.
Well said. Over on the MLS N&E thread, you'll read our of towners claiming that a move to NSF would be a wash financially, but I think most of us from Chicago disagree. That said, I've maintained FOR YEARS that Bridgeview is "a" problem, not "THE" problem with this club. Fix the quality of the product, and more people will want to buy it. (I feel like we've been posting this for years.)
At the game last night the 2 people I sit with were talking about this. I have a feeling that if the move to Soldier Field happens that ticket prices will go up significantly due to the higher rent that will have to be paid to the Park District. If I recall correctly the last season at SF my season ticket in Section 8 was $450. The move will affect a lot of STHs financially both through tickets and don't forget parking. The train may work for some people but for others it just doesn't.