Rowan DuBois | staff writer

When the Rams moved from St. Louis back to Los Angeles in 2016, there was an uproar. The same could be said for the Raiders or the Chargers, who also vacated their former cities.

As outrageous as those moves looked to fans, they all seemed to make at least a little bit of sense. The Chargers and the Raiders couldn’t secure funding for new stadiums in San Diego and Oakland respectively, and the Rams were moving from small-market St. Louis to Los Angeles, one of the biggest markets in the country.

But when the Chicago Bears’ plan for a new stadium took a turn outside of Illinois and toward Hammond, Indiana, naturally, there was much confusion.

On Feb. 19, Indiana’s State House Ways and Means Committee unanimously approved an amendment to Indiana State Bill 27 that would clear a path for the Bears to build a stadium in the Northwest Indiana city.

“The passage of SB 27 would mark the most meaningful step forward in our stadium planning efforts to date,” the Bears said in a statement. “We are committed to finishing the remaining site-specific necessary due diligence to support our vision to build a world-class stadium near the Wolf Lake area in Hammond, Indiana.

Although the Hammond Bears doesn’t have the same ring to it as past NFL relocations, the move might make economic sense. The Bears’ stadium negotiations in Illinois have been slow, with the franchise pushing for a new home for almost five years, and a move to Indiana would likely decrease the amount of tax the team pays.

Indiana’s approval of the bill is essentially an attempt to lure the team across statelines, and the Bears have done everything short of accepting the deal.

“The Bears’ Indiana flirtation is both substantive and strategic,” Mitchell Armentrout, a journalist for the Chicago Sun Times said. “Whether or not the team has any sincere intention of crossing the border, the Bears have succeeded in generating public pressure on Illinois legislators to reach a deal, and it leaves the team open to being swept off their feet by the exuberant generosity of Indiana lawmakers and taxpayers.”

The Wolf Lake area which the Bears have their eyes on isn’t as far from Chicago as it sounds. It is only about 30 minutes by car from Soldier Field, which has been the team’s home since 1971.

In December, another one of the NFL’s biggest franchises, the Kansas City Chiefs, announced a move out of state.

In 2031, the Chiefs will leave GEHA field, and Missouri, to relocate just over 20 miles west in Kansas.

On his “New Heights” Podcast, Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce said he understood the move from a business standpoint, but that he has some negative feelings about leaving Arrowhead.

“It is going to be kind of heartbreaking knowing that the Chiefs are going to move away from Arrowhead and that Missouri side of Kansas City,” Kelce said. “It’s part of the old professional sports. It is a business at the end of the day.”

The Bears and Chiefs are the newest editions of a long list of NFL teams planning on a new home as stadiums are becoming the mark of a powerful franchise.

Construction is already underway for the Bills and Titans, who are both building stadiums right next to their old homes, while plans are forming for the Broncos, Browns, Commanders and Jaguars to begin new stadium projects.

The main goal behind most of this construction is to host the Super Bowl.

The Super Bowl is among the most sought after events for local economic growth, hence why cities are keen to help these franchises achieve their new stadium dreams, even if it hurts them initially.

In 2030, GEHA Field will be empty, and Missouri will more than likely be left to pay its demolition bill, which is expected to be more than $150 million.

In Nashville, $500 million of the $2.2 billion needed for the new Titans stadium is set to be state funded, making the project one of the largest commitments of taxpayer money for a sports stadium ever.

The bottom line is clear — cities are willing to make sacrifices to keep their teams happy, and all they ask in return is that it is monetarily worthwhile.

All eyes remain on Illinois lawmakers to see if they will respond to Indiana’s legislature, and Armentrout believes the Bears’ potential stadium site in Arlington Heights, Illinois, one of the earlier suggestions, is still very much in play.

“Hammond is by no means a done deal,” Armentrout said, “and Arlington Heights seems to make more sense logistically for the team’s long-term plans, but the [Bear’s ownership] will do what’s best for their bottom line.”

Rowan DuBois can be reached at
duboisr1@duq.edu