Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: More magic beans
Next Post: Isabel’s afternoon roundup
Posted in:
* Maybe somebody should tell Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred that a large number of South Side legislators will be asked to vote on a subsidy for the Chicago White Sox. So, dissing their part of town is just dumb. As subscribers know, Ozzie Guillen also “went there” in the presence of a bunch of South Side lawmakers last month. As Sneed might say, dumb-dee-dumb-dumb…
I have no idea what "the location of the stadium is tough" means https://t.co/WgTzELNURq
— Tyrone (@TheTyronePalmer) October 23, 2024
* Transcript…
Q: Commissioner, I’m from Chicago, and there’s reports that the White Sox might be going up for sale. There’s talk of public funding and debates on the stadium, and next year will be the 125th season of the White Sox on the South Side. I’m wondering what assurances you can give to White Sox fans that no matter what happens with the stadium or a sale, that the White Sox will be in Chicago?
MLB Commissioner Manfred: Look, Chicago is an anchor city for us. You know, I think that the White Sox are in a difficult situation. I think the location of the stadium is tough. But, you know, I have confidence that things are going to work out in Chicago, and we’re going to continue to have two teams in Chicago.
Asked about the comment, a South Side legislator told me today that “Its wild how [Jerry Reinsdorf] maybe found a way to pass the Bears in worst stadium lobbying of the decade.”
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 1:52 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: More magic beans
Next Post: Isabel’s afternoon roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Yeah, I do not understand the thinking. Josh Nelson sketched out a plan in the Sox Machine comments to build on the parking lots around the stadium that makes a lot of sense to me. Bridgeport is a wonderful neighborhood. There are more reasons for the White Sox to stay at 35th and Shields now than there were 35 years ago.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:25 pm
I read that more as meaning that the vicinity of the ballpark is unfun, what with all the parking lots and lack of bars and stores and stuff.
But it’s still possible Manfredi is one of these people who thinks nothing south of Cermak Road is safe or worth seeing.
Comment by Benjamin Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:29 pm
*Manfred. Sorry.
Comment by Benjamin Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:29 pm
== I think the location of the stadium is tough. ==
I would like to see Manfred (and others who say similar things) get pushed to explain *exactly* what they mean by that. If they mean the stadium is surrounded by too many parking lots and not enough amenities, I would agree. But I’m fairly confident that’s not what he’s referring to. Instead, he’s giving voice to an all too common and not so subtle racist trope attached to the South Side by people who rarely, if ever, go to the ballpark.
The irony is the neighborhood around the park has indeed “changed” in recent decades — for the better. Bridgeport is no longer the clannish white enclave of shingled-walled worker’s cottages. It’s one of the most ethnically diverse neighborhoods in the city, with artists lofts and some great restaurant. The north end has been essentially become Chinatown. And the CHA projects that lined the expressway east of the stadium have come down, replaced by attractive mixed income housing, expansion of the IIT campus, and the Chicago Police Headquarters (so much for being “unsafe.”)
Comment by BC Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:36 pm
- I read that more as meaning that the vicinity of the ballpark is unfun, what with all the parking lots and lack of bars and stores and stuff. -
It always seemed to me this was intentional to make sure the bar and grill stayed packed every game day.
Comment by Excitable Boy Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:37 pm
“Rob in New York, you’re on The Score.”
Comment by DS Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:38 pm
To be fair, that’s about the level of commentary and critical thinking I expect from the person who called the World Series trophy “just a piece of metal”.
Comment by Charles Edward Cheese Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:38 pm
== “Rob in New York, you’re on The Score.” ==
Well played, DS.
Comment by BC Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:46 pm
Jerry Reinsdorf’s other team has led the NBA in attendance for years. And they’ve been lousy for most of that period. I think that’s the litmus test being applied here. Where can we put the White Sox where they’ll consistently draw attendees regardless of the product on the field.
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 2:59 pm
===with artists lofts and some great restaurant===
I know this was probably a typo (”restaurants” was probably intended), but I can’t help but think “yup. That one restaurant in the area is awesome.”
Comment by Leslie K Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 3:10 pm
Not sure tough meant tough neighborhood. More like tough logistically.
Even though Wrigley is far harder to get to and park, Jerry thinks Northsiders go to Wrigley, and Southsiders go to the Cell. Jerry wants the Northsiders, the Northshore, and the Gold Coast.
Comment by Frida's Boss Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 3:15 pm
Rob should have been asked to compare the “toughness” of the location to the location of Yankee Stadium.
Comment by Chris Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 3:44 pm
Whatever Manfred meant he was wrong. I grew up on the far north side of Chicago and have been going to White Sox games unaccompanied since I was a teenager. Never had any problems walking from the 35th street station and that included all the time that the Robert Taylor high rise home were located on the south side of 35th and the walk was about 3 blocks longer than the current walk from the “L”.
Comment by Retired SURS Employee Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 3:45 pm
There really is nothing wrong with the Sox stadium. Is it the best in baseball? Of course not. Is it especially charming? No, again. But they have worked on it over the years and it has good sight lines, it’s not in disrepair, and it is accessible by road and public transit.
What seems to be missing is any sort of imagination of how to integrate the park and the team into the surrounding neighborhoods. I know it is never going to be Wrigleyville, and to that I say thank God. But Bridgeport and Chinatown and Bronzeville are great dynamic neighborhoods and I refuse to believe that there do not exist in the world creative marketing types who could figure out how to work with those communities so that many people would be just as thrilled to head to the South Side, whether the Sox are winning or losing, in the same way the mindless North Side fans have been doing for decades.
But that would require money and a view of the world post 1985. And as long as old man Jerry owns the place neither of those resources will be forthcoming.
Comment by DougChicago Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 4:01 pm
“Where can we put the White Sox where they’ll consistently draw attendees regardless of the product on the field.”
Nashville? The Cubs will always draw the casual fans just looking for a grand day out.
Comment by Michael Feltes Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 4:19 pm
=Nashville?=
MLB wouldn’t allow it and it’s not in their financial interest. They see value in having two teams in Chicago (an anchor market). There would be no shortage of buyers willing to invest in the White Sox in an established market. The MLB owners will extract a payment of north of $2B for a new expansion team in Nashville. They aren’t giving that up for Jerry. Reinsdorf is merely posturing to get the best deal for his kids. If you know his bio and history it all makes sense.
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Oct 24, 24 @ 4:35 pm