AyeDubbleYoo Posted yesterday at 12:49 Share Posted yesterday at 12:49 3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said: Based on nothing I think we will build a new one, if it was an expansion I think we would have already known. Think it's just logistically too difficult to do an expansion and the extra capacity would be too small. Ideally I'd love to see a modern SJP on the same site but it seems so difficult to achieve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
On the Grid Posted yesterday at 12:54 Share Posted yesterday at 12:54 5 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Think it's just logistically too difficult to do an expansion and the extra capacity would be too small. Ideally I'd love to see a modern SJP on the same site but it seems so difficult to achieve. Chuck enough money at it and anything is possible Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack j Posted yesterday at 12:55 Share Posted yesterday at 12:55 I want us to move just so I never have to hear people calling it the cathedral on the hill ever again Makes me spew with cringe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted yesterday at 12:55 Share Posted yesterday at 12:55 Just now, jack j said: I want us to move just so I never have to hear people calling it the cathedral on the hill ever again Makes me spew with cringe. Cathedral on the Tyne? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack j Posted yesterday at 12:59 Share Posted yesterday at 12:59 3 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said: Cathedral on the Tyne? Cathedral near the retail park Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OpenC Posted yesterday at 13:04 Share Posted yesterday at 13:04 Cathedral by the Chicken Cottage it must stay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted yesterday at 13:05 Share Posted yesterday at 13:05 18 minutes ago, WilliamPS said: My own guess is staying, but with an extra tier on the gallowgate and two rows of boxes added to the east stand. As boxes can be built up instead of back that might be possible without impacting the street behind. Capacity up to 60,000 but corporate revenue through the roof Why would you increase the ground by only 7K when we currently have minimum 20K locked out whilst we finished 7th and haven’t made any stellar signings? Even more amazing when our players are apparently no good and EH has apparently took us as far he can… Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack27 Posted yesterday at 13:15 Share Posted yesterday at 13:15 Remember when Luke did that big exclusive back in April saying they'd decided on expansion. Haha, what a dick. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamPS Posted yesterday at 13:18 Share Posted yesterday at 13:18 5 minutes ago, LFEE said: Why would you increase the ground by only 7K when we currently have minimum 20K locked out whilst we finished 7th and haven’t made any stellar signings? Even more amazing when our players are apparently no good and EH has apparently took us as far he can… No idea what that last sentence is about, if that’s what you think fine but I don’t agree. On the stadium size, Spurs only built 60,000, Arsenal the same, Liverpool now have 62,000, Man City have 54,000 and attendance issues. Once you have European football regularly and good cup campaigns regularly the opportunities to go get much wider and ultimately the cost caps how often people can afford to go. Only Man Utd are substantially larger than 60,000 and they have the biggest fan base in world football. IMO a 70,000+ would end up with empty seats. It’s why nobody else has gone to that size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted yesterday at 13:22 Share Posted yesterday at 13:22 1 minute ago, WilliamPS said: No idea what that last sentence is about, if that’s what you think fine but I don’t agree. On the stadium size, Spurs only built 60,000, Arsenal the same, Liverpool now have 62,000, Man City have 54,000 and attendance issues. Once you have European football regularly and good cup campaigns regularly the opportunities to go get much wider and ultimately the cost caps how often people can afford to go. Only Man Utd are substantially larger than 60,000 and they have the biggest fan base in world football. IMO a 70,000+ would end up with empty seats. It’s why nobody else has gone to that size. A 70k+ stadium is filled comfortably by a successful NUFC If we match the capacity of the likes of Spurs or Arsenal then we’d be cementing just how far we are behind - we will never be able to charge what is charged at those grounds. Capacity isn’t the issue - income is. Spurs and Arsenal take £100m+ on match day revenues. We currently take about £35m. To truly catch up, we’d need significant expansion - ie 20k more than the present + shitloads of corporate Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted yesterday at 13:23 Share Posted yesterday at 13:23 4 minutes ago, WilliamPS said: No idea what that last sentence is about, if that’s what you think fine but I don’t agree. On the stadium size, Spurs only built 60,000, Arsenal the same, Liverpool now have 62,000, Man City have 54,000 and attendance issues. Once you have European football regularly and good cup campaigns regularly the opportunities to go get much wider and ultimately the cost caps how often people can afford to go. Only Man Utd are substantially larger than 60,000 and they have the biggest fan base in world football. IMO a 70,000+ would end up with empty seats. It’s why nobody else has gone to that size. Absolutely agree, I would look at between 64-68k at a maximum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paullow Posted yesterday at 13:27 Share Posted yesterday at 13:27 It's definitely getting to the stage now where I would be pretty disappointed if the news was (pretty minimal) expansion. The once in a generation thing does make it sound like a new stadium will be the direction they go, and it is a real chance to have one of the best stadiums in the world. Everyone raves about Spurs' stadium and it being the best in the country, well, with the wealth and infrastructure pedigree in place, here's a chance to build one bigger and better, perhaps with a full roof, like those in the States, and become the only significant stadium in England to have one. Imagine some of the world wide events that could become a possibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superior Acuña Posted yesterday at 13:30 Share Posted yesterday at 13:30 I'd rather we went down to League One than see us move out of the city. Can't see that happening though. I'd prefer 1) an extension or 2) rebuild on same site but I could prob be happy with a new city centre stadium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted yesterday at 13:37 Share Posted yesterday at 13:37 12 minutes ago, WilliamPS said: No idea what that last sentence is about, if that’s what you think fine but I don’t agree. On the stadium size, Spurs only built 60,000, Arsenal the same, Liverpool now have 62,000, Man City have 54,000 and attendance issues. Once you have European football regularly and good cup campaigns regularly the opportunities to go get much wider and ultimately the cost caps how often people can afford to go. Only Man Utd are substantially larger than 60,000 and they have the biggest fan base in world football. IMO a 70,000+ would end up with empty seats. It’s why nobody else has gone to that size. Certainly not what I think but what many on here say. I’ll put it the way i think. We’ve just started the rebuild journey of the club and without any real success we are massively over subscribed. If Arsenal and Liverpool could expand further they would. Spurs also might regret the size they went for. The bigger our stadium the lower the cost can be to the fan going. Like they say this is a one time cheque. I’d rather have a few games with some empty seats on the the top rows and then the majority of the games sold out with less fans locked out for a lifetime. This isn’t a stadium for where football, sport and music is in 2024. It’s for the next 50+ years. Get your head round it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted yesterday at 13:39 Share Posted yesterday at 13:39 17 minutes ago, WilliamPS said: No idea what that last sentence is about, if that’s what you think fine but I don’t agree. On the stadium size, Spurs only built 60,000, Arsenal the same, Liverpool now have 62,000, Man City have 54,000 and attendance issues. Once you have European football regularly and good cup campaigns regularly the opportunities to go get much wider and ultimately the cost caps how often people can afford to go. Only Man Utd are substantially larger than 60,000 and they have the biggest fan base in world football. IMO a 70,000+ would end up with empty seats. It’s why nobody else has gone to that size. Spurs and Arsenal were still limited by site size. In Arsenals case they built their stadium 20 years ago, if they were to do it today they would go bigger. Man City are in the process of expanding. Liverpools plans is to have a 70k-80k seater that they are doing in stages. Man Utd are wanting to get as close to 100k as they can. Aston Villa want a 50k-60k stadium and have even put that on hold to determine if their upturn in form and demand holds. West Han have a 60k+ stadium, Everton will have a 52k stadium next year, and they are on the doorstep to Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordie_b Posted yesterday at 13:44 Share Posted yesterday at 13:44 1 hour ago, Ikon said: I wonder how many quid. Hundreds of Billions easy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-more Mag Posted yesterday at 13:49 Share Posted yesterday at 13:49 Living in a place where teams move relatively frequently (both in terms of same-city location and between cities), the history of the club playing in the same location for 130+ years is awesome, and it would suck to see that end. But at the same time, I can see why it would need to be done, given the existing site circumstances. Hopefully if it's a new stadium it'll have appropriate call-backs to SJP and there will be some sort of memorial where it was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandy Posted yesterday at 13:54 Share Posted yesterday at 13:54 Yeah lets only have a 60k stadium when Man U plan to go to 100k. FFS the lack of foresight on here is staggering at times when it comes to this issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Charlton Posted yesterday at 13:56 Share Posted yesterday at 13:56 15 minutes ago, Stifler said: Liverpools plans is to have a 70k-80k seater that they are doing in stages. They are waiting for all the locals around Anfield road to die off,Houses they've purchased have been empty for over 20 years and falling apart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted yesterday at 13:57 Share Posted yesterday at 13:57 5 minutes ago, B-more Mag said: Living in a place where teams move relatively frequently (both in terms of same-city location and between cities), the history of the club playing in the same location for 130+ years is awesome, and it would suck to see that end. But at the same time, I can see why it would need to be done, given the existing site circumstances. Hopefully if it's a new stadium it'll have appropriate call-backs to SJP and there will be some sort of memorial where it was. I’ve been going since the early 80’s and nothing about the ground apart from the East Stand upper tier is the same. Got some great memories of the place but I’ve got some awful ones also Let’s make some new ones elsewhere from 2028/29. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted yesterday at 13:59 Share Posted yesterday at 13:59 Wanting to be the worlds No1 team smacks of a new stadium to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted yesterday at 14:02 Share Posted yesterday at 14:02 12 minutes ago, B-more Mag said: Living in a place where teams move relatively frequently (both in terms of same-city location and between cities), the history of the club playing in the same location for 130+ years is awesome, and it would suck to see that end. But at the same time, I can see why it would need to be done, given the existing site circumstances. Hopefully if it's a new stadium it'll have appropriate call-backs to SJP and there will be some sort of memorial where it was. Take your point, but the move in to Leazes is very, very close, it's barely even a move. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUHRLYASLEEVESUP Posted yesterday at 14:08 Share Posted yesterday at 14:08 Anyone know the crack with this ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted yesterday at 14:12 Share Posted yesterday at 14:12 1 minute ago, RUHRLYASLEEVESUP said: Anyone know the crack with this ? A timely reminder to the old farts in the East Stand the limitations of the land and that we need to relocate the ground probably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus Posted yesterday at 14:13 Share Posted yesterday at 14:13 2 minutes ago, RUHRLYASLEEVESUP said: Anyone know the crack with this ? Basically that tiny bit of land that the container is sitting on is owned by some random - and theyre being a bit awkward/twatty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now