Jump to content

Should we stay or should we go?


Kid Icarus

Should we stay or should we go?  

496 members have voted

  1. 1. Stadium expansion vs a new stadium

    • Stay - expand St James's Park to the rumoured 65k capacity
    • Go - move to an alternative city centre location


Recommended Posts

If its possible to redevelop the current SJP into the world-class stadium our owners will want then that has to be the best option. 

 

If there isn't a way to achieve that, building a 65k stadium in Leazes Park would be my second choice. Make it unique, not a soul-less bowl. Design it with noise & atmosphere in mind. It would also open up stadium naming rights in a way staying at the current site may not and they could maximise the corporate facilities/numbers which would both inject a healthy amount of cash. 

 

Third choice would be stay at SJP in its current form, a new stadium further afield would be a distant fourth.

 

If we assume money is (almost) no object, it wouldn't surprise me that much if they did what they're doing with the training ground - develop it as much as they can but ultimately move to a "best in class" alternative down the line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Big River said:

sorry if this has already been discussed, but what's the significance in a feasibility study? I take it it goes beyond just having an architect look at it, and it's things like speaking to the council etc?


think it will be an every single angle, no stone unturned study at expansion at the current ground and will probably include legal review, zoning, local council feedback etc. it’ll also probably include alternative locations, and etc. probably the definitive playbook on expansion or build new. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My preference would be to relocate temporarily while SJP is demolished and rebuilt. I have an image of it in my head.. an exterior made of stone, something that will be there for centuries, not unlike the colosseum, with a modern interior. Go slightly into Leazes Park to protect the Terrace

 

IMG_1502.thumb.jpeg.328ad62bcc47005389fdcc6f7395fccf.jpeg

 

Go big with capacity.. 80k, we’d sell the seats no bother. More chance of getting Jennifer Lawrence into my bed than a new season ticket currently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said:

My preference would be to relocate temporarily while SJP is demolished and rebuilt. I have an image of it in my head.. an exterior made of stone, something that will be there for centuries, not unlike the colosseum, with a modern interior. Go slightly into Leazes Park to protect the Terrace

 

IMG_1502.thumb.jpeg.328ad62bcc47005389fdcc6f7395fccf.jpeg

 

Go big with capacity.. 80k, we’d sell the seats no bother. More chance of getting Jennifer Lawrence into my bed than a new season ticket currently.

another 15k season ticket holders and then another 15 k matchday tickets (that wont be cheap)? 

might be pushing it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Mike said:

Yankees have never recovered (spiritually) from tearing down Yankee Stadium.


Doesn’t help that a bunch of seats are a few hundred dollars or more for a damn baseball game. But yeah, part of me died when the old stadium went.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RS said:

80,000 seat stadium would look shit with just 45,000 in when the plastics didn’t fancy a wet Wednesday League cup game. 

Inter/Milan, Bayern, Real Madrid and Barcelona did and looked alright despite having gates a lot more sparse than that for lesser games.

Bernabeau might have looked sparse when there was 25,000 there for Leeds and Milan (doesn't show as much) when there was 10,000 there for a CL qualifier....but the other 95% of games probably made up for it.

 

 

Edited by Jonas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Must admit when I'm thinking about having a 70k+ stadium one thing that will never ever enter my head is "I wonder what other fans will think?"

 

I couldn't give a tenth of a fuck what it looks like or what other people think or their perceptions of seeing 20k empty seats for a lower profile match. I'm interested in all fans, especially kids, being able to buy a ticket on a fairly regular basis if they want. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My preferred option would be to stay at SJP. In reality though, we are only ever going to be able to expand the Gallowgate end. The East stand is too close to Leazers Terrace, and St James Terrace, and we can’t move the foot print of the stadium West as we have Barrack road there.

We could expand over Strawberry place. I was watching a documentary about the railway yards in New York and how they are building skyscrapers above them with beams over the railways lines which means there is no support beams disrupting the lines. It is possible if you have money, which you would imagine we do now. You could even move Strawberry Road south to just outside the Sky call centre.

 

The problem is though, a Gallowgate expansion probably isn’t giving you the amount of seats you need. It possibly isn’t giving you the amount of corporate seats you need either. It also won’t be giving you as much concourse space as you need now either, especially in the East stand.

 

If those are things that we must have moving forward, then a new stadium is the only option, and at that point you are looking at Leazers Park. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who weren't around in the 90s, I'd also point out that when John Hall put forward his proposal for the new stadium on Castle Leazes there wasn't a peep of opposition from the fanbase. So if anyone is expecting a surge of protest, if a new super-stadium is proposed, they might get a surprise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would absolutely take on board the argument of more seats meaning more access to matches for kids and people who can't afford it if there was even a slither of evidence to back it up, but as far as I can tell it's only the opposite.

 

There being more day trippers, more VIP seats and higher ticket prices are there to see almost across the board. We've already had someone on here being priced out of their season ticket at Newcastle. This idea that it's going to help the little man seems like a bit of a fantasy.

 

 

Edited by Kid Icarus

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wandy said:

For those who weren't around in the 90s, I'd also point out that when John Hall put forward his proposal for the new stadium on Castle Leazes there wasn't a peep of opposition from the fanbase. So if anyone is expecting a surge of protest, if a new super-stadium is proposed, they might get a surprise.

 :lol: 31% of the fanbase (not even counting non-football fans) opposing it at the time doesn't line up with 'not a peep of opposition' like. Totally different circumstances then as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why this is even a debate.

 

Mehrdad has said they’d never leave. We will be able to expand the Gallowgate (we were going to do it under Shepherd and I’m sure technology has improved in the last 15-20 years). 
 

We clearly will be able to do something with the East Stand. 
 

It will happen, I’m sure of it. They’ve already started dripping that East Stand info into the public domain - so there must be something in it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 :lol: 31% of the fanbase (not even counting non-football fans) opposing it at the time doesn't line up with 'not a peep of opposition' like. Totally different circumstances then as well. 

 

Did they? First I've ever heard of that mind. Got a link? I will happily stand corrected if so.

 

The circumstances aren't particularly different either. If anything the club was higher in profile back then that it is right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TheGuv said:

Not sure why this is even a debate.

 

Mehrdad has said they’d never leave. We will be able to expand the Gallowgate (we were going to do it under Shepherd and I’m sure technology has improved in the last 15-20 years). 
 

We clearly will be able to do something with the East Stand. 
 

It will happen, I’m sure of it. They’ve already started dripping that East Stand info into the public domain - so there must be something in it.

 

I think Mehrdad may regret saying that. Anyway my own interpretation of what he said was that the stadium will never leave the city centre.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with the person who reckoned this proposed East Stand expansion is what will be used to declare a major increase of the current stadium capacity impossible. There just doesn’t appear to be any way to increase the footprint of that stand without directly interfering with the buildings behind. I get there’s been advancements in engineering and architectural techniques but even mathematics and physics are against us here.

 

 

Edited by Novocastrian

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

Did they? First I've ever heard of that mind. Got a link? I will happily stand corrected if so.

 

The circumstances aren't particularly different either. If anything the club was higher in profile back then that it is right now.

A Chronicle poll of Newcastle supporters at the time. I can't find the original, but they themselves and The Athletic reference it. Obviously remember that it didn't go ahead because 36,000 people signed a petition opposing it for their own non-football reasons as well.

 

Just one example.

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/imagine-70000-capacity-newcastle-united-12772276

 

I think the circumstances were different. We didn't know the potential opposition there would be and the years of hoop jumping that would be needed to relocate to Leazes Park then, but we do now. 

 

 

Edited by Kid Icarus

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

A Chronicle poll of Newcastle supporters at the time. I can't find the original, but they themselves and The Athletic reference it. Obviously remember that it didn't go ahead because 36,000 people signed a petition opposing it for their own non-football reasons as well.

 

Just one example.

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/imagine-70000-capacity-newcastle-united-12772276

 

I think the circumstances were different. We didn't know the potential opposition there would be and the years of hoop jumping that would be needed to relocate to Leazes Park then, but we do now. 

 

These polls are always dubious but even that one shows that more than twice as many people were in approval than those who were opposed.

 

I think the club caved in far too easily back then. If anything now though, the "friends of the park" lot have been more receptive to the move, providing that the club do their bit in bringing the park back to it's former glory.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...