Could the Bears move to the White Sox's current site? Former sports columnist makes the case
What happens to 35th and Shields if the White Sox leave? Could the Bears move in?
What happens to the land at 35th and Shields if the Chicago White Sox move to the South Loop? Does that potential move open the door for another professional sports franchise in Chicago?
CHICAGO - Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson once again said he wants to keep the Chicago Bears on the lakefront. It's a conversation you heard right here on Fox Chicago Tuesday night.
With the Chicago White Sox exploring a move to the South Loop, does that potentially open up another option for the Chicago Bears to stay in the city?
A stadium swap?
The backstory:
The Bears' future remains uncertain. The team has repeatedly said its focus is on Arlington Heights and Hammond, Indiana, while Mayor Johnson continues to push for a new domed stadium on the lakefront. Johnson has argued the Bears belong in Chicago and has promoted a plan that would keep the team on the Museum Campus.
"There’s still no better place for the Bears to play than the city of Chicago, and particularly on the lakefront," Johnson said.
Former Chicago Tribune reporter and sports columnist, Dave Wischnowsky sees another potential Chicago option — one that would move the Bears away from the lakefront while keeping them inside city limits. That option is 35th and Shields. He wrote about it nearly 14 years ago. While this exact scenario didn't play out, it's a similar stadium predicament both teams are in for the year 2026.
Why Bridgeport?
Wischnowsky says the location has one major advantage over Soldier Field: access. The area is near the Dan Ryan Expressway, the Stevenson Expressway and the CTA Red Line.
"You've got the Red Line, has a stop right there. You've got the expressway right there," Wischnowsky said. "There is room around here."
He also points out that Soldier Field has long presented challenges for Bears fans trying to get in and out of the stadium.
"You look at Soldier Field, it looks like it should be easy to get to, but it's not," Wischnowsky said. "It never is. It's always a hassle to get in and out of there."
At 35th and Shields, Wischnowsky believes there could be more options for parking, shuttles and traffic management. He suggested potential shuttle connections from areas like IIT or McCormick Place. The Bears already play fewer than a dozen home games. Wischnowsky says the biggest reason he believes the site could work is the number of events the Bears would actually host. Unlike a baseball stadium, which needs to accommodate 81 regular-season home games, a football stadium would have far fewer scheduled events.
"I feel like that's not a great location for 81 baseball games, but for nine, 10, 11 football games, I think it could be a great spot," Wischnowsky said.
And if the stadium had a retractable or enclosed roof, Wischnowsky believes Chicago could host much more than Bears games.
"You get Super Bowls there. You get Final Fours there. You get concerts there. You get whatever else you might get with an enclosed roof stadium," he said.
Wischnowsky believes Chicago needs another major enclosed stadium and says 35th and Shields could provide an opportunity without moving the Bears to the suburbs or Indiana.
What about Bridgeport?
For residents who have watched the White Sox potentially move away from the neighborhood, the Bears could provide a different kind of economic boost. South Side resident Dave Kula said keeping a major professional sports team in Bridgeport would be a win for the neighborhood.
"There’s a lot of people I know who work in and around that sports vending stuff," Kula said. "So if they can keep the team here in Chicago, Bears games are better attended than Sox games. They do better. You know what I mean? It would be a win-win for this area."
Kula also believes the location could solve some of the transportation headaches associated with Soldier Field.
"Logistically it makes a lot more sense," Kula said. "Right, because you're off of the lakefront."
He also pointed to the amount of land and access to major highways.
"There’s a lot of acreage here," Kula said. "Great access, right? Dan Ryan, the Stevenson. There’s a lot of pluses to being in this area."
Would there be an entertainment district?
Wischnowsky isn't convinced Bridgeport needs the massive entertainment complex the Bears have envisioned for Arlington Heights. He believes a smaller collection of restaurants, bars and other businesses could develop around a new stadium.
"You could build something smaller, I think, that would be even more popular, potentially, in the Bridgeport area," Wischnowsky said.
The neighborhood already has businesses and entertainment options that could potentially grow around a stadium. But Wischnowsky says the first step would be figuring out whether a stadium could actually fit on the site.
"You really sit down and look at it and get urban planners to think what could be done here," he said. "There's gotta be some ideas there."
The political question
Illinois lawmakers are also considering legislation that could change the playing field for a potential Bears stadium. Wischnowsky believes a stadium authority structure could ultimately give Chicago another option to compete with Arlington Heights. Mayor Johnson has repeatedly argued that Chicago already has a plan.
"What we are counting on in this moment is to make sure that we have partnership in Springfield working with the Bears to keep them in Chicago," Johnson said.
Johnson's preferred location remains the lakefront.
"The best way to make everyone happy is again, to keep the Bears in Chicago, to keep those jobs in Chicago," Johnson said.
But Wischnowsky believes the city should think beyond the lakefront.
He also doesn't believe the Bears need to rush into a decision.
"I think the whole rush for everything is artificial to me," Wischnowsky said. "The Bears have the lease through 2033 at Soldier Field. They're not in a rush to do anything and you don't want to rush into a bad decision."
The Bears' position
The Bears have continued to identify Arlington Heights and Hammond as their stadium options.
The team has not publicly embraced the 35th and Shields concept. Wischnowsky says he has never formally pitched the idea to the Bears or city officials. It was originally a column he wrote as a thought experiment. But he believes the circumstances have changed.
"What was just a fun thing to bring up" years ago has become "more and more real," Wischnowsky said.
And if the White Sox ultimately leave Bridgeport for a new stadium near The 78, he believes Chicago should at least study what could replace them.
"I do think that the Bears really belong in Chicago if there's a way to keep them here," Wischnowsky said.
What's next:
The White Sox are exploring a potential new stadium in the South Loop near The 78, while the Bears continue to weigh Arlington Heights and Hammond.
But if the White Sox leave Bridgeport, Wischnowsky believes the city could have a rare opportunity to rethink one of Chicago's most historic sports sites.
"Move the Bears to a place where there's already a stadium has been for a century," Wischnowsky said. "It's not like some new thing there and it could be a really good thing, I think, for the city and the Bears and the NFL and everyone involved really if they could stay in the city."
The Source: The information in this report came from an exclusive FOX Chicago interview with Mayor Brandon Johnson, an interview with former Chicago Tribune sports columnist Dave Wischnowsky, interviews with Bridgeport resident Dave Kula, previous reporting on the Bears' and White Sox's stadium plans, and publicly available information about proposed Illinois stadium legislation.