So much about the Chicago Bears‘ stadium project is unknown in April. In January, President Kevin Warren wanted shovels in the ground by the end of the year, but the last thing we heard from him on the subject in early April was that he was still looking at feasibility studies.
The Bears are still trying to find a location for the new stadium. Warren is still trying to determine which of the locations of downtown Chicago or Arlington Heights is best for a build.
The biggest kept secret is the size of the stadium.
The Chicago Bears are planning to build a small stadium
Rumors are floating around that the Bears intend to build a stadium with 65-70,000 seats. In comparison, Soldier Field has a capacity of 62,500 butt holders, which feels low for third-largest city in the country.
MetLife Stadium (New York Jets/Giants) has a capacity of 82,500, Lambeau Field (Green Bay Packers) has a capacity of 81,441, and AT&T Stadium (Dallas Cowboys) can host 80,000. Thirteen NFL teams have home stadiums with a seat capacity of more than 70,000.
The Bears’ decision to go under that has nothing to do with not wanting the Detroit Lions to have a larger advantage at Soldier Field than last season (much to chairman George McCaskey’s dismay).
Higher capacity stadiums cost more to build, with lower returns
Per Brad Biggs of the Chicago Tribune, the Bears want to keep building costs down because the extra seats don’t earn as much return in revenue.
Biggs reports that he’s heard the stadium will seat anywhere from the mid-to-high 60,000s. He quoted Marc Gianis, the president of Sportscorp, about the logistical issues of adding more seats to a stadium.
“I would think high 60s would be the right number,” Ganis said. “There’s an odd cost factor associated with the geometry of the stadium. The most expensive seats to construct are the seats that are furthest away from the field as you expand the building. As you increase the capacity, you have to increase the size of the entire building.
So you add five rows at the top of the stadium to add another few thousand seats. Those are the most expensive seats to build while being the seats that generate the lowest revenue. Is it 66,000? 69,000? Do they have the ability to have standing room to get it to 72,000? That is the general range.”
The Bears fans who were hoping for extra seats so they could afford to go to games will be sorely disappointed after the build. Chicago’s front office wants to keep ticket prices artificially high by creating a low supply in a market of high demand.
It’s another reason taxpayers shouldn’t subsidize the building costs.
For More Chicago Sports:
Follow me on Twitter at @JordanSig, and follow us @ChiCitySports23. You can also reach out to Jordan Sigler via email at jordanmsigler@gmail.com. To read more of our articles and keep up to date on the latest in ALL of Chicago sports, click here! Chicago Bears, Chicago Bulls, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Chicago Blackhawks.
Report: Chicago Bears made ‘aggressive’ second-round trade up attempt for running back
Read MoreFor More Great Chicago Sports Content
Get the latest Chicago sports news, analysis, and breaking stories on the Bears, Bulls, Blackhawks, Cubs, White Sox, Sky, and more! Tap the star to add us to your favorites on Google News, so you never miss a story on your favorite Chicago teams.
Follow us on Twitter at @chicitysports23 for more great content. We appreciate you taking time to read our articles. To interact more with our community and keep up to date on the latest in Chicago sports news, JOIN OUR FREE FACEBOOK GROUP by CLICKING HERE
2 Comments
No 9ne should. That’s the first sign of an unbalanced team!
As I understand it, 70,000 football seats is the minimum number required to host a SuperBowl. So yeah, makes sense they go that route. Bears remain penny-wise and pound-foolish…