InnerCityAg said:

---

Please let the Gary Bears happen.

---

Instead of "Da Bears" it will become "Ga Bears."

BMX Bandit said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

TyHolden said:

---

They are going to be much closer to South Bend than Chicago.
Why not call them the Notre Dame Bears or the Indiana Bears?
Why does Chicago keep the naming right for a team that is 3 hours away in a different state?

---

get yourself a new map rand mcnally

---

I read Hamilton Indiana which is about 3 hours away.

---

grab some new readers also

---

yeah, it was Hammond

TRM said:

---

Quote:

---

Indiana is open for business, and our pro-growth environment continues to attract major opportunities like this partnership with the Chicago Bears. We've identified a promising site near Wolf Lake in Hammond and established a broad framework for negotiating a final deal. If approved, the proposed amendment to Senate Bill 27 puts forward the essential framework to complete this agreement, contingent upon site due diligence proceeding smoothly. The State of Indiana moves at the speed of business, and we've demonstrated that through our quick coordination between state agencies, local government, and the legislature to set the stage for a huge win for all Hoosiers. We have built a strong relationship with the Bears organization that will serve as the foundation for a public-private partnership, leading to the construction of a world-class stadium and a win for taxpayers.

---

Good on Indiana for being ready to play ball. Everyone knows IL, Cook County, and the city of Chicago are impossible to work with. I can’t blame the team whatsoever for this move.

For everyone getting upset about the move, well… here’s a map for reference. pic.twitter.com/ldsWsXwyob

— Andrew Moser (@Andrew_Moser) February 19, 2026

---

Thanks for posting. Up until now, everyone has just assumed it was pretty far away and jokingly used Gary as the example (which would have been damn funny and is a lost opportunity for the rest of us).

You can still use the new logo

the NFL tends to defy all logic when it comes to politics, the economy, and so forth

remember when 90,000 attended the opening of Jerryworld in 2009 (at outrageous prices) during the tail end of the Great Recession?

it's like there was no recession going on

Has the NFL's main fan base, Puerto Rican Bad Bunny fans, have they been notified or were they kept in the dark like everybody else???

BTKAG97 said:

---

Interesting that Chicago is so bad that they are threatening to not only move out of the city but to leave the State of Illinois entirely.

---

It's only 30 minutes away. Most of Chicago and the suburbs are further away than Hammond Indiana is.

it's easy to forget that Indiana already has an NFL team (Colts)

that was similarly acquired from its long-time traditional home

the Bears and Colts could become rivals

Esteban du Plantier said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Interesting that Chicago is so bad that they are threatening to not only move out of the city but to leave the State of Illinois entirely.

---

It's only 30 minutes away. Most of Chicago and the suburbs are further away than Hammond Indiana is.

---

Yep. Distance wise this would be the equivalent to the Texans building a stadium in The Woodlands in order to get out of Houston and Harris County.

W said:

---

it's easy to forget that Indiana already has an NFL team (Colts)

that was similarly acquired from its long-time traditional home

the Bears and Colts could become rivals

---

Would be odd for Indiana to have two NFL teams.

JWinTX said:

---

T dizl televizl said:

---

Whaler said:

---

I don't think any of our cities or counties should pay for new athletic stadiums for pro teams. Let the teams build their own stadiums. I expect I'm in the minority, though.

---

Yeah honestly I'm a big sports fan that lives in Dallas and while I'd hate to be left without a team if the Mavs/stars both leave, I don't think it would be a bad financial decision for the city.

The amount of $$$ cities have to contribute to get sports teams has gotten way out of hand.

---

You don't think Dallas hasn't made tons of dollars on top of this from sales revenues that ticket buyers are spending for parking, eating, drinking, stayin in hotels, etc...?

---

Well - yeah I do think Dallas has made a ton of dollars on a gross level, but every study that I've seen shows that the subsidies for these arenas that the government pays ends up being a net negative vs the "tons of dollars" that they receive.

I live 10 minutes from the AAC and love it. Have had the blessing of growing up in Dallas and getting to go to more than my fair share of games. I'm not anti sports teams or sports venues, just want the owner's to pay enough for the stadiums that it isn't a net negative to the city once you factor in all of the benefits and costs.

EX TEXASEX said:

---

Has the NFL's main fan base, Puerto Rican Bad Bunny fans, have they notified or kept in the dark like everybody else???

---

Let me tell you who aren't season ticket holders in Chicago.

T dizl televizl said:

---

JWinTX said:

---

T dizl televizl said:

---

Whaler said:

---

I don't think any of our cities or counties should pay for new athletic stadiums for pro teams. Let the teams build their own stadiums. I expect I'm in the minority, though.

---

Yeah honestly I'm a big sports fan that lives in Dallas and while I'd hate to be left without a team if the Mavs/stars both leave, I don't think it would be a bad financial decision for the city.

The amount of $$$ cities have to contribute to get sports teams has gotten way out of hand.

---

You don't think Dallas hasn't made tons of dollars on top of this from sales revenues that ticket buyers are spending for parking, eating, drinking, stayin in hotels, etc...?

---

Well - yeah I do think Dallas has made a ton of dollars on a gross level, but every study that I've seen shows that the subsidies for these arenas that the government pays ends up being a net negative vs the "tons of dollars" that they receive.

I live 10 minutes from the AAC and love it. Have had the blessing of growing up in Dallas and getting to go to more than my fair share of games. I'm not anti sports teams or sports venues, just want the owner's to pay enough for the stadiums that it isn't a net negative to the city once you factor in all of the benefits and costs.

---

The kicker here is that the Bears were willing to build the stadium on their own dime, and already spend over $200 million acquiring Arlington Park and knocking down the old horse racing track. All they wanted the state to do was tailor the surrounding roads to suit the kind of traffic they are hoping to draw, and give them some kind of property tax break (very common for new businesses that build significant facilities). So, I wouldn't compare what the Bears are asking from Illinois to, say, what the Chiefs are getting from the State of Kansas.

HTownAg98 said:

---

EX TEXASEX said:

---

Has the NFL's main fan base, Puerto Rican Bad Bunny fans, have they notified or kept in the dark like everybody else???

---

Let me tell you who aren't season ticket holders in Chicago.

---

Ay Dios mio. Es esto cierto? Also, who had Indiana having TWO NFL teams on their bingo card?

T dizl televizl said:

---

Whaler said:

---

I don't think any of our cities or counties should pay for new athletic stadiums for pro teams. Let the teams build their own stadiums. I expect I'm in the minority, though.

---

Yeah honestly I'm a big sports fan that lives in Dallas and while I'd hate to be left without a team if the Mavs/stars both leave, I don't think it would be a bad financial decision for the city.

The amount of $$$ cities have to contribute to get sports teams has gotten way out of hand.

---

Well, the Dallas Cowboys left a LONG time ago...

and they got a crazy monument built for them to play in.

TRM said:

---

Quote:

---

Indiana is open for business, and our pro-growth environment continues to attract major opportunities like this partnership with the Chicago Bears. We've identified a promising site near Wolf Lake in Hammond and established a broad framework for negotiating a final deal. If approved, the proposed amendment to Senate Bill 27 puts forward the essential framework to complete this agreement, contingent upon site due diligence proceeding smoothly. The State of Indiana moves at the speed of business, and we've demonstrated that through our quick coordination between state agencies, local government, and the legislature to set the stage for a huge win for all Hoosiers. We have built a strong relationship with the Bears organization that will serve as the foundation for a public-private partnership, leading to the construction of a world-class stadium and a win for taxpayers.

---

Good on Indiana for being ready to play ball. Everyone knows IL, Cook County, and the city of Chicago are impossible to work with. I can’t blame the team whatsoever for this move.

For everyone getting upset about the move, well… here’s a map for reference. pic.twitter.com/ldsWsXwyob

— Andrew Moser (@Andrew_Moser) February 19, 2026

---

I'm not an economist, but the studies that you mention are usually (my impression) launched with the intention to find that the city squandered tax payer money by becoming involved with the construction of a new stadium under the assumption that staying in the old stadium was an option. (it's not)

We've seen liberal cities like Seattle run a team (Sonics) out of town only to then realize belatedly that what they characterized as being held hostage by the team was actually not a bad deal when they find out how much they lose out on when a team leaves. And this is the main crux of my argument, while the ROI might be slightly to massively inflated for building a new stadium, the massive losses associated with losing your pro team are much worse. (IMO)

Perhaps you could argue, well then the best solution is to play in that old stadium you already have... and yes that is true in a sense, but as I said earlier that solution isn't on the table when a neighboring (or far away) city is willing to build a new stadium.

TAMUallen said:

---

REPORTER: "An illegal alien from Nicaragua grabbed a woman on the north side last week, bashed her head into the sidewalk, knocked her unconscious and raped her..."

CHICAGO MAYOR: "Let's move on." pic.twitter.com/HUVrK66POP

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) October 27, 2025

---

"Now image she was black"
Matthew McConaughey - from A Time to Kill

YouBet said:

---

W said:

---

it's easy to forget that Indiana already has an NFL team (Colts)

that was similarly acquired from its long-time traditional home

the Bears and Colts could become rivals

---

Would be odd for Indiana to have two NFL teams.

---

Why? New Jersey has two.

reineraggie09 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

W said:

---

it's easy to forget that Indiana already has an NFL team (Colts)

that was similarly acquired from its long-time traditional home

the Bears and Colts could become rivals

---

Would be odd for Indiana to have two NFL teams.

---

Why? New Jersey has two.

---

Texas has two. Florida has three. Ohio has two. PA has two.

ETA: Lost track of which teams are or are not in CA, other than 49ers and San Diego.

AggieEP said:

---

I'm not an economist, but the studies that you mention are usually (my impression) launched with the intention to find that the city squandered tax payer money by becoming involved with the construction of a new stadium under the assumption that staying in the old stadium was an option. (it's not)

We've seen liberal cities like Seattle run a team (Sonics) out of town only to then realize belatedly that what they characterized as being held hostage by the team was actually not a bad deal when they find out how much they lose out on when a team leaves. And this is the main crux of my argument, while the ROI might be slightly to massively inflated for building a new stadium, the massive losses associated with losing your pro team are much worse. (IMO)

Perhaps you could argue, well then the best solution is to play in that old stadium you already have... and yes that is true in a sense, but as I said earlier that solution isn't on the table when a neighboring (or far away) city is willing to build a new stadium.

---

Yeah that all makes sense. I'm not an economist either, so I really don't know the answer. At some point the returns aren't there, based on how much the City invests in the project. I was under the impression that we have passed that point, but I also wouldn't be surprised as you are saying if the studies are slanted to make it look worse than it actually is. Something about a Perryman report saying Waco would fall into a sinkhole if A&M were to leave for the SEC makes me a little skeptical of all economic projections.

California has 3

NY has 1

bigjag19 said:

---

NY has 1

---

Jets and Giants? I know Giants have their stadium just across the river in NJ but they are still the New York Giants. Colts changed their city name when they moved to Indy. Oilers changed their name completely when they moved to TN. Rams changed city name when they moved to St. Louis.

Buffalo Bills.


Like Green Bay, WI, there is no way in hell that a newly-formed NFL would put a franchise in Buffalo, NY

rocky the dog said:

---

---

* Leave alive, not throught the morgue which is how must people leave Chirac

https://heyjackass.com/

Eliminatus said:

---

Highway6 said:

---

Would not surprise me. Chicago is incapable of building a new stadium for the same reasons Dallas can't, NY City can't, and SF can't

---

Not sure if that is quite a gotcha. NFL stadiums are one of the biggest grifts a city can undergo. The difference between who pays, who profits, who is liable, and whose money is at stake is borderline criminal IMO.

---

Agreed. There's one thing, and ONLY one thing economists agree on: sports stadiums are NOT fiscal winners for cities despite the hoopla. Getting into a bidding war with another city is downright stupid, unless the city wants to make the team owners overnight multi-billionares AND let's their voters in on that secret.

bonfarr said:

---

Has Governor Fatbody weighed in on this topic yet?

---

He can't ... too consumed w/ stuffing Italian beefs and Chicago dogs into his pie hole.

reineraggie09 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

W said:

---

it's easy to forget that Indiana already has an NFL team (Colts)

that was similarly acquired from its long-time traditional home

the Bears and Colts could become rivals

---

Would be odd for Indiana to have two NFL teams.

---

Why? New Jersey has two.

---

I guess because it's Indiana. They have one city.

Where this is going is really still Chicago.

Say goodbye to a 100-year tradition.
​It’s a sad morning for local Bears fans, but the writing is finally on the wall.

While Illinois politicians were canceling meetings today, Indiana just held a vote and won 24-0 to make Hammond the official site for a new $2 billion stadium.… pic.twitter.com/zJCCLq6Px4

— Desiree (@DesireeAmerica4) February 19, 2026

More details.. Close to Gary IN and South Chicago..

aggiehawg said:

---

bigjag19 said:

---

NY has 1

---

Jets and Giants? I know Giants have their stadium just across the river in NJ but they are still the New York Giants.

---

The Dallas Cowboys haven't played in Dallas since 1971, FWIW...

Quote:

---

Oilers changed their name completely when they moved to TN.

---

Well, they DID play as the Tennessee Oilers for 2 years.

https://twitchy.com/samj/2026/02/19/chicago-bears-so-sick-of-democrat-rule-theyre-bailing-on-chicago-mayor-brandon-johnson-freaking-out-n2425192