Chicago Bears 2026

#101      
Roundball Sage
If the Bears do relocate this is tough for Chicago but a great day for Northwest Indiana.

Northwest Indiana has suffered greatly since the closure of much of America’s industrial might. Northwest Indi needs an economic boost badly and the relocation of the Bears will be a great start to that... along with the related new development in the area that will no doubt follow.

Chicagoland has always been a Region and not just the city limits.

The Bears have been looking to move for 50 years already (at least since 1970) and the State of Illinois had all that time to work something out over the years.

The long-suffering people of Northwest Indiana get something to build around. And let’s not forget all these folks from Illinois who are relocating across the border that wont mind a Bears move that way.

The Chicago Cardinals are now a long way off in Arizona. The Bears will be right in The Neighborhood.
 
#102      
tatupu70
lstewart53x3 said:
No one”s disputing the project count. It’s what it measures that’s the problem.

Site Selection ranks metros by the raw number of projects across the whole region. The article says so itself: “Chicagoland counts 10,000+ square miles and 9.4 million people”, so of course it racks up a big number. Bigger footprint = more projects.

But that same article also looks at Chicago in Milken’s Best-Performing Cities report, which measures the stuff that actually tells you if a place is worth moving to: job growth, wage growth, and housing affordability. Chicago finishes in the high 100s. Milken ranks about 200 big metros, so that’s near the bottom. For comparison, Indianapolis is 17th, Charlotte 23rd, Dallas 35th.

So both things are true. Chicago is No. 1 at counting buildings going up across a giant region, and near the bottom on whether wages, jobs, and affordability are any good for the people who live there.

“We’re No. 1 in projects” tells you something got built somewhere across seven counties. It tells you nothing about where 15,000 new Arlington Heights residents are supposed to come from. And the ranking that does speak to that, from your own source, says Chicago is one of the weaker big metros on exactly the things that pull people in.
Click to expand...
I don't want to argue just to argue which I'm afraid we're doing now, but the Milken report is measure different things.

"The report does not measure facility investment, but such factors as wage and job growth, high-tech GDP, broadband access, housing affordability and economic inequality (via the GINI index)."

Job growth is definitely important--the other ones I find less impactful.

And from the article, Chicago was 2nd in per capita projects so it's not just a size effect.
 
Back