St James' Park

[Kanji]

3 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Except that's a fucking insult as it only refers to a certain amount of supporters, which is totally in keeping with the rest of the Guardian's lazy, sensationalist wank around what's happening. 

 

That quote by Jonathan Liew is fucking rancid. Agree with you. Such a lazy comparison and doesn't make a bout of sense. Football clubs aren't little community clubs anymore, they are global brands and businesses. They employ hundreds of people. Having morals/values = communicating with your fans and listening to them. But the other side of this is that in order to be a relevant football club and become successful, money needs to be invested. 

[Kid Icarus]

4 minutes ago, Wullie said:

 

Yeah that's absolutely spot on, can't believe that quote didn't occur to me.

 

Jonathan Liew was on Second Captains last week, and he said something that really resonated with me:

 

The really cynical view that Mike Ashley had of football fans as this pliant consumer base, he's been totally vindicated. He's gone and the Newcastle fans, who you'd like to think were vaguely engaged with the idea of Newcastle United as this local community club with values and a morality, independent of winning games or signing players, that's all been exposed as a bit of a sham.

 

Yeah I think that's absolutely spot on like. Not that I personally blame Newcastle fans, I just think it's a sad indictment of the position Ashley and his frontmen drove the fanbase over 14 years, just as it was driven to those better positions about what a football club is supposed to mean by the likes of Keegan and SBR in the first place. 

[Guest neesy111]

St James' Park has been in place over 120 years.  They won't rename it.

[r0cafella]

4 minutes ago, neesy111 said:

St James' Park has been in place over 120 years.  They won't rename it.

Sorry to remind you but you seem to have forgotten sports direct @ st James’ park. 

[Yorkie]

Sorry like but who has Jonny Liew canvassed to develop these extremely broad opinions of the fanbase? What's it based on? The absolutely miniscule percentage of the fanbase who've been wearing bedsheets and waving notes? The europhic bunch outside SJP the other week bellowing "we've got our club back"? I take it that it's these people, is it? Sound, a really reliable sample there. Make your conclusions and sneer away. 

 

Of course there will be fans out there who will see the takeover as a jackpot and will happily sacrifice whatever they previously stood for, for a place among the elite. There'll be fans out there in favour of the Super League.

 

But insinuating that the entire fanbase has lost its sense of identity and/or it was a sham all along is just utter tripe and smacks of an 'opinion' having already been made before the events actually unfolded. 

[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.