Yeah this is no-news like the daily herald article. All it means is the park district finally got around to approving the contract for the Fire to play in Sf the next two years, while we build a new stadium in Bridgeview.
One interesting new tidbit regarding losses. The article says its seven figures, but that the new deal at SF will cut losses by 25%. Kind of kills the arguments that people made earlier that the new deal is so much better that the team would be profitable staying put.
Well, it was already posted in the current discussion on stadium issues, already. And as someone already pointed out, the article basically says nothing--at least nothing that should come as a shock. Did anyone here really think that the Fire wouldn't be at Soldier Field for the next two years? That's how long a stadium will take to get built...
I agree Chris. Wasn't the original plan 3 three year leases? So now they've signed on for two years, then the 3 three year deals? Sounds like they are setting up to get out.
Don't you mean Lane Tech? I'm sure Fonsos is still checking into this possibility. Now, what was the raeson they couldn't play at Northwestern?
I think you mean Lane Tech Lincoln Tech advertises on Saturday afternoon B-movies on channel 26 and 50.
The thing about this article that is wierd is this opening line: "The Fire on Wednesday locked in two more years at their current home, Soldier Field, delaying a franchise decision on whether to build a soccer-specific stadium." Is this just an example of journalist making stuff up, or is there some relationship between the deal at SF and the fact that we have yet to hear the official announcement of whether the Fire will settle in Bridgeview or Chicago? One fact about the NSF lease, as I understood it, a seried of three three-year agreements, with an option to get out in the middle of one of these if the team was to build an SSS in the city. This two year deal speeds up the allowable exit point from NSF from the 2007 season to the 2006 season, indicating that a Bridgeview announcement is imminent. So here's my real question: Why do the Chicago papers insist on having people who are wholely ignorant of the game cover the sport?
It sounds like the former, as they also quote the mayor of Bridgeview saying a decision should be made in the next few weeks. As to their journalistic standards, I've got no answer about that.