St James' Park

[Foluwashola]

Got to agree with Wullie & Co, completely against it. Was against it under Ashley, would be against it now. 

 

Absolutely no need to it given the wealth of this lot as well. You'd like to think given the noises from them during the takeover they wouldn't go down this route, although under no illusions that every owner is going to say the right things to begin with

[Kid Icarus]

I remember saying to Yorkie last year when the takeover fell through that everyone's searching for a feeling rather than success. Hopefully if that's true, people will get that feeling back soon and realise they shouldn't need to compromise on the daft little things that mean a lot in exchange for the success, it can/will happen regardless.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by kisearch

[timnufc22]

18 minutes ago, Colos Short and Curlies said:

 

I don't think its just a case of it being precious, its also the case with OT and Anfield that the names are so well known globally that sponsors also know that it would be pointless renaming them as no one would take any notice. You just get a shit load of branding all over the place.

 

Would people be OK with SJP becoming a real corporate stadium with every last inch plastered with sponsors if the name was kept? 

Yea I’d accept x company name on the stands like SD, I wouldn’t exactly like it but I could accept it because we’d get money, it’d be arranged by owners who want the club to do well and we would also keep the official name as SJP at the same time. It’s a compromise.
 

If Ashley had ran us with good intentions and did the SD signs more tactfully (ie not tearing down the original Newcastle United lettering) then I would have begrudgingly accepted that.

 

But the official SJP name has been that way for how long, barring the SDA fiasco?? It’s an iconic name, it’s relates in exactly the same way the SBR quote does as has been mentioned. You would still have the St. James’ Park lettering at the Milburn stand. It’s part of the NUFC fabric, just like OT and Anfield at both clubs. This is the romance of football, these names bring up feelings and images of history and the games that have come before. We cannot throw that away, we should be straight to the point about this and say we draw the line here re sponsorship. We don’t have to bow down to every proposal of the new owners and that obviously doesn’t mean you still don’t back them. We’re Newcastle United and we play at St. James’ Park. And don’t think that would live on after 5-10 after another name, because it’d be ancient history to media outlets and younger fans. 

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, kisearch said:

I remember saying to Yorkie last year when the takeover feel through that everyone's searching for a feeling rather than success. Hopefully if that's true, people will get that feeling back soon and realise they shouldn't need to compromise on the daft little things that mean a lot in exchange for the success, it can/will happen regardless.

 

This is absolutely correct, though of course many never lost 'the feeling.'

[Manxst]

Just now, Foluwashola said:

Got to agree with Wullie & Co, completely against it. Was against it under Ashley, would be against it now. 

 

Absolutely no need to it given the wealth of this lot as well. You'd like to think given the noises from them during the takeover they wouldn't go down this route, although under no illusions that every owner is going to say the right things to begin with

Its not about the wealth of the owners, but about the wealth of the club, and how that wealth is allowed to be used under the regulations. Clubs need sponsorship to be allowed to grow their finances. Without it, we’ll be left behind. I guess it depends on whether we want to be the worlds number one club, or whether we are lumped in to the elite group. If a compromise is reached and St James Park is incorporated into the name, I don’t see an issue. It’s either that, or at some point we’ll have to move stadium and lose the name altogether. 

[HaydnNUFC]

Fuck off renaming it. Football has continually sold away bits of it's soul piece by piece since 1992 and the fact that some clubs still play at their original grounds that still have their original names is one of the final pieces left. Do not touch what is and always will be St. James' Park.

[et tu brute]

1 minute ago, Foluwashola said:

Got to agree with Wullie & Co, completely against it. Was against it under Ashley, would be against it now. 

 

Absolutely no need to it given the wealth of this lot as well. You'd like to think given the noises from them during the takeover they wouldn't go down this route, although under no illusions that every owner is going to say the right things to begin with

Wealth is not a factor under FFP (look at Everton’s budget this Summer even though they have one of the richest set of owners). You have to massively increase the revenue streams via sponsorship and commercial deals to allow you to spend that wealth.

[manorpark]

1 hour ago, Wandy said:

I'd have no problem with it being something like "The Aramco Stadium at St James Park". As long as that full name gets said by commentators etc at games etc then there's no issue for me. I guess the two most important issues with a renaming are the St James being in the title, and the whole name needs to sound prestigious. That's one of the main reasons why people were aghast at the SD Arena.

 

You don't need to have such a 'long' re-name as that, just Aramco St James' Park would do the job (for them, AND for us).

[Tiresias]

I would rather us just have less money to spend than change stadium name at all tbh. 

[Guest HTT II]

13 minutes ago, Tiresias said:

I would rather us just have less money to spend than change stadium name at all tbh. 

Or move too. They don’t need to create a new identity/culture/heritage or legacy here there is over 120 years of it, if they end the silverware drought and we start competing again at the top level, all of that just grows even further and will be entrenched into the club’s history like the Entertainers, or the Fairs Cup or the Edwardian dominance we enjoyed.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by HTT II

[Foluwashola]

5 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

Wealth is not a factor under FFP (look at Everton’s budget this Summer even though they have one of the richest set of owners). You have to massively increase the revenue streams via sponsorship and commercial deals to allow you to spend that wealth.

Sure they'll find a way without renaming the stadium (if the Premier League allow them to). 

[ElDiablo]

14 minutes ago, kisearch said:

I remember saying to Yorkie last year when the takeover fell through that everyone's searching for a feeling rather than success. Hopefully if that's true, people will get that feeling back soon and realise they shouldn't need to compromise on the daft little things that mean a lot in exchange for the success, it can/will happen regardless.

 

 

 

 

Remember, on here, when it was "we just want someone who will run the club properly, they don't need to spend loads of money".

 

Bit disconcerting to see how quickly that's gone out of the window and a lot of people are now happily discussing ways we can maximise our spending at the expense of the name of our ground.

 

I think it's healthy to draw a line in the sand with any new owners and I hope this could be it.

[et tu brute]

Just now, Foluwashola said:

Sure they'll find a way without renaming the stadium (if the Premier League allow them to). 

If they did great, looks like the owners are not thinking the same way though judging by yesterday’s exclusive from Hope. Personally I can see exactly why they are also and the fact that St James’ Park will still be there in the stadium name is a no brainer also. No doubt we will soon find out clearer plans in the not too distant future from the consortium.

[Guest]

Bloody legacy fans, man.

[Guest HTT II]

8 minutes ago, ElDiablo said:

 

Remember, on here, when it was "we just want someone who will run the club properly, they don't need to spend loads of money".

 

Bit disconcerting to see how quickly that's gone out of the window and a lot of people are now happily discussing ways we can maximise our spending at the expense of the name of our ground.

 

I think it's healthy to draw a line in the sand with any new owners and I hope this could be it.

Because we’ve been starved commercially by Ashley it’s also healthy as a fanbase, or certainly as a forum on here, that we can now start thinking about that side of our club again which we have to if we want to compete, and I’m of the opinion I’d rather we did it say how Leicester have than Man City or Chelsea have and if we do go down that route and major success comes, great, it would take the tint of it all for me though and I’d hate our fanbase to become tossers in the process. Ashley has damaged our club and fanbase so much though, it’s like we are all bi polar at the moment or something. 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by HTT II

[Guest]

Does anyone think less of Man City btw? I know you get the mong element with the shite ‘Emptihad’ craic but most real supporters I’d say think good on the real supporters like those who were there down in Division Two. Do most of them wish they were back at Maine Road yoyo-ing between the top 2 divisions peaking at mid-table?

[Guest HTT II]

2 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Does anyone think less of Man City btw? I know you get the mong element with the shite ‘Emptihad’ craic but most real supporters I’d say think good on the real supporters like those who were there down in Division Two. Do most of them wish they were back at Maine Road yoyo-ing between the top 2 divisions peaking at mid-table?

Only Liverpool and Man Utd really, I’ve had a go at them in the past, but having seen what their owners have done for the area, well, that in itself speaks volumes. I’ve said from day one it’s not the likes of PIF who are bad for the game, it’s the likes of Ashley and I stand by that.

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by HTT II

[ElDiablo]

2 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Because we’ve been starved commercially by Ashley it’s also healthy as a fanbase, or certainly as a forum on here, that we can now start thinking about that side of our club again which we have to if we want to compete, and I’m of the opinion I’d rather we did it say how Leicester have than Man City or Chelsea have and if we do go down that route and major success comes, great, it would take the tint of it all for me though and I’d hate our fanbase to become tossers in the process. Ashley has damaged our club and fans base so much though, it’s like we are all bi polar at the moment or something. 

 

Yeah agreed, we can and should also start to rediscover our agency as a fanbase and agitate for what we believe in. Ashley as you say completely killed that. The circumstances and context are so that the new owners HAVE to develop a good relationship with the fans. Let's use that!

[Decky]

Theres definitely only a few stadiums left at the top of the English game with long standing traditional names so there's a lot to be said for preserving that. Could you see Anfield or Old Trafford ever being called something else? If not then why are we any different? Its good that they're consulting the fans though. A few days ago I was of the opinion that if it was reinvested into the playing squad it might be worth it but upon reflection I'd absolutely hate it, there's other means of getting money in. 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by Decky

[mrmojorisin75]

Yeah fuck it I'm out.  Don't really strongly enough that I'd kick off or protest or whatever depending how it was done but I'm firmly in the no camp having thought about it more.

 

A big part of getting shot of Ashley was to get the club and connection back, don't think the best way to do that is to change the name of the ground.

[timnufc22]

7 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Does anyone think less of Man City btw? I know you get the mong element with the shite ‘Emptihad’ craic but most real supporters I’d say think good on the real supporters like those who were there down in Division Two. Do most of them wish they were back at Maine Road yoyo-ing between the top 2 divisions peaking at mid-table?

 

Man City had only moved into that stadium only around 5 years before the takeover and it wasn't even built for them if I understand correctly, it was an athletics stadium converted for them. So their ground was already lacking identity. I look at it now and feel its an empty husk of a ground, it seems an absolute library and they even seem apathetic to the success. Nothing against those fans who were going while at Maine Road, but I bet a lot of those fans would've loved to have re-developed / extended Maine Road in hindsight and had their success there instead.

[Guest HTT II]

5 minutes ago, Decky said:

Theres definitely only a few stadiums left at the top of the English game with long standing traditional names so there's a lot to be said for preserving that. Could you see Anfield or Old Trafford ever being called something else? If not then why are we any different? Its good that they're consulting the fans though. A few days ago I was of the opinion that if it was reinvested into the playing squad it might be worth it but upon reflection I'd absolutely hate it, there's other means of getting money in. 

 

 

 

Exactly, plaster the stadium with a sponsor, it’s not like that would be unusual for us fans, just don’t rename the stadium, or relocate. I honestly think if they did one or both, I’d be a passive armchair fan only really. Like you said, they have all manner of ways to bring money into the club and I honestly think it would cost less to expand the stadium even with all the current restrictions and difficulties, than a complete rebuild in another location. I’d rather they went about rebuilding a new academy from scratch and training facilities.

[mrmojorisin75]

Just now, HTT II said:

Exactly, plaster the stadium with a sponsor, it’s not like that would be unusual for us fans, just don’t rename the stadium, or relocate. I honestly think if they did one or both, I’d be a passive armchair fan only really. Like you said, they have all manner of ways to bring money into the club and I honestly think it would cost less to expand the stadium even with all the current restrictions and difficulties, than a complete rebuild in another location. I’d rather they went about rebuilding a new academy from scratch and training facilities.

 

Yeah just do what manyoo have done

 

official noodle sponsor

official tractor provider

preferred fedora partner

 

just fuckin rinse it dry

 

[timnufc22]

21 minutes ago, Decky said:

Theres definitely only a few stadiums left at the top of the English game with long standing traditional names so there's a lot to be said for preserving that. Could you see Anfield or Old Trafford ever being called something is? If not then why are we any different? Its good that they're consulting the fans though. A few days ago I was of the opinion that if it was reinvested into the playing squad it might be worth it but upon reflection I'd absolutely hate it, there's other means of getting money in. 

 

Exactly, no-one can tell me that having stadium signage and a training ground sponsored name wouldn't be enough to supply a good chunk of money. "well we'll miss out on a few million more without stadium name changed"... so fuck, we'll still have tradition & identity over those other clubs which is priceless thankyou very much... and guess how we'll make up that extra few million? By using ambition and intelligence to appoint a quality manager who will wring an extra 10% out of the players that a different manager wouldn't. By developing quality academy players through facility/coaching investment. Isn't that the better way? The more fun way? Because we can do these things now after 14yrs of being on pause - this gets me excited more than a lot of things after such neglect... or do we just want to play football manager? 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2021 by timnufc22

[et tu brute]

1 minute ago, HTT II said:

Exactly, plaster the stadium with a sponsor, it’s not like that would be unusual for us fans, just don’t rename the stadium, or relocate. I honestly think if they did one or both, I’d be a passive armchair fan only really. Like you said, they have all manner of ways to bring money into the club and I honestly think it would cost less to expand the stadium even with all the current restrictions and difficulties, than a complete rebuild in another location. I’d rather they went about rebuilding a new academy from scratch and training facilities.

 

I'm the total opposite as I would rename the ground (with St James' Park included) to give immediate increased revenue short term until they built a new stadium, which would then further increase the revenue. Be interesting having a poll to see initial opinion.