St James' Park

[Keegans Export]

1 minute ago, wyn davies said:

Can't see the point in moving and building a stadium with only an increase in capacity of say 13000, when as mentioned previously by other posters, get rid of seats and have a standing , before changing the stadium previously we used to get 60000 standing at certain games, unless the idea is to continually create a demand which is probably the club's intention by only increasing slightly.

I'm not 100% sure but there's a restriction on standing/seating ratio.

 

So we couldn't take out 5k seated and replace with 7k standing. I'm not sure of the exact rule.

[NUFC91]

2 hours ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

Tbf the Allianz has been sold out and massively oversubscribed for every single Bayern match since it was built so the argument there would be that it's too small for Bayern.

 

Spanish football is a bit different. Barca can't fill the 55,000 Olympic stadium they're currently playing in and Real hardly ever fill the Bernabeu. Obviously their worldwide fanbase absolutely dwarfs ours but gloryhunters in far flung corners of Asia don't fill seats at a football stadium.

 

A lot of comments I've seen on twitter rightly say that we could have taken SJP up to 60,800 so is it really worth losing all that history for 4k seats, the majority of which will be probably be swallowed up by corporate anyway?

 

I do think 70k would have appeased more of those fans who don't want to leave SJP more than just going for slightly more than we could have got in a renovated and extended SJP.

 

Anyway it's still only newspaper rumours at the minute so I'm hopeful that when the plans are released officially they've shown a little bit more ambition than building stadium we'd already be filling every week right now.

 

Obviously all paper talk but in terms of the grounds you have visited in Europe do you think any we should particularly model on, I'm hoping whatever the decision as close to pitch as possible and steep one tier stands.

[Wallsendmag]

5 minutes ago, NUFC91 said:

 

Obviously all paper talk but in terms of the grounds you have visited in Europe do you think any we should particularly model on, I'm hoping whatever the decision as close to pitch as possible and steep one tier stands.

 

I'm more the traditional 4 separate stands type rather than the wraparound bowls that are more commonplace. I just think they hold the atmosphere in better.

 

A bigger version of PSV would be quality. Ridiculously steep stands (theirs is 2 tiers) plus being close to the pitch so it seems like the crowd are on top of the players. 

 

A huge 1 tiered home end with safe standing which can fit in 20k would be tremendous. It would piss all over SJP for noise levels from that stand alone.

 

One of the best stadiums I've been to was actually the Millenium stadium for the Semi final. Huge 75k capacity but still close to the pitch and the steep stands still gave it that intimate feel. No coincidence that our atmosphere was off the scale that day. It's a far better stadium than Wembley in my opinion.

[Jonas]

Its an interesting point about Bayern at the Allianz. They rarely filled the Olympic Stadium so probably thought 75k was about all they'd need.

Presuming its nearer the city centre.  Definitely need to avoid that problem as it doesn't look like they can expand.

 

The 'news' has at least allowed us to know how we'd feel about a Leazes Park stadium and moving. 1st option was always to stay at SJP and somehow crack the accursed East Stand/Leazes Terrace problem and get another tier on the Gallowgate but I'd be fine with this as it turns out.

[gjohnson]

6 minutes ago, Jonas said:

Its an interesting point about Bayern at the Allianz. They rarely filled the Olympic Stadium so probably thought 75k was about all they'd need.

Presuming its nearer the city centre.  Definitely need to avoid that problem as it doesn't look like they can expand.

 

The 'news' has at least allowed us to know how we'd feel about a Leazes Park stadium and moving. 1st option was always to stay at SJP and somehow crack the accursed East Stand/Leazes Terrace problem and get another tier on the Gallowgate but I'd be fine with this as it turns out.

The only reason for building 'expandable' is if you think you can't meet the goals. 65-70k could be done tomorrow on existing demand.  Should really be looking at 85-90

[Hank Marvin]

Right - So we're leaving our beloved, world famous home of over 100 years because we can't realistically expand it beyond a few extra thousand seats due to the listed buildings and road access, and we need more due to the very high demand for tickets, which feeds back into revenue, which feeds back into being able to spend more by satisfying PSR regulations. Got it. Makes sense.

 

So we're moving. Fine, understandable, smart. And we're going to stay basically where we are, moving literally a hundred meters or so to the north west, and slightly reorienting the stadium position - Great, good idea, love it.

 

And the PIF want to invest big time and make it a world class stadium, have the best architects work on it and have lots of interesting concept ideas, and seemingly don't want to spare any expense in making this an incredible stadium. Fantastic, brilliant, really enthusiastic for it.

 

And it will be 65,000 capacity...Excuse me?

 

What on Earth is that?

 

I thought we were moving because we were restricted to only increasing SJP by a few extra thousand - To around 60k - So that means we're destroying our esteemed home to create 5 thousand extra seats? Excuse me?

 

I'm sorry, this doesn't make any sense, with the exception of the very short sighted idea that matches in the near future played against less glamorous opposition may not get 65k at times, leaving some free seats...Forgetting entirely that the idea for this club is to have it, *eventually*, as top dog with a stadium befitting our hoped for, future stature as one of the best teams in the world.

 

And somebody has weighed up those two things, and has come to the conclusion that it is preferrable to make sure we have no spare seats for Ipswich Town, rather than a bursting capacity for Barcelona. Silly.

 

A once in a lifetime move. A motivated, loaded investor. A huge, hungry fan base stretching from the Scottish Borders to County Durham & from the North Sea Coast to Cumbria - And not to forget our incredible international fans, who will only grow in numbers...And we're capping it at 65k, when we have the opportunity right now, to futureproof ourselves for the growth of our club that we all know coming in the next decade.

 

75k with room to expand would have been ideal. 70k would have been acceptable to most, including myself, as a balanced option between filling the capacity week on week and having enough room for high demand games. But 65k, quite honestly, is a bit disappointing to most, even if they won't readily admit it up front.

 

If we're going to move, then at least let it be said that it was for a huge, near enough 20 thousand increase in seats, not some pitiful increase of about 5 thousand extra on what it could have been if we just sat on our arse at the SJP and got some decent architects to expand the Gallowgate, to reach an overall capacity of 60k.

 

It is disappointing, and I hate to say it, because I love what the owners have done so far, the level of investment, the reinvigoration of the club, the competing for European places, buying great players, the engagement with the fans (although that has somewhat faltered since Amanda has left)...But this 'isn't it' as the kids say.

 

I really hope whoever is in charge of making the final decision on this takes time to reflect on what I think is a collective consensus of opinion within the fanbase - Which is that, we're okay with moving if it means we're going to do something we otherwise couldn't have done staying where we are - With the two non negotiables, one, that we don't move too far (Which is definitely satisfied in Leazes Park), and two, that the size & scale of the stadium be a befitting & grandiose replacement for what was an incredible home - Which, on present terms, at a 65k capacity, leaves a majority of us feeling a bit disheartened, and a bit less enthusiastic about moving at all.

 

If it is Darren calling the shots on this one, and I say this with all due respect, I know he's going through some trying times at the moment, and we all wish him well, but I hope the message from the base gets to him, that we would really like him to reassess this one, taking into consideration our sentiments, because the fans should be heard on this matter before the JCB's start rolling in.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

We can only assume they're not capping it at 65k though, since they know everything you just posted. 

 

I've said before that I personally think it's too small. But if they bake in easy expansion then maybe OK. 

 

Also it hasn't been announced what the capacity is going to be. In fact nothing's been announced

[mattypnufc]

Lets not all piss our pants like.  Nowts actually been announced by anyone.  

[Chris_R]

Plus we're not just moving for the extra seats, we need corporate facilities too which SJP doesn't have to the level we need. That's more important to the PSR line than putting 5, 10 or even 20k extra bums in seats.

[Disco]

Everyone knows a 80,085 capacity would be optimum.

[mattypnufc]

Thing people have to remember is that SJP isn’t getting any newer. It’s dated and it can’t be ‘upgraded’ easily. It’s all been talked to death on this thread. 
 

Moving 500m up the road to a new facility isn’t just about the capacity, it’s about everything else that comes with it. Again which has been done to death.

 

irrespective of 65k, it gives scope for expansion at least. Our current footprint does not beyond what has already been proposed. 
 

Blah blah blah. You all know the crack. 
 

 

[PauloGeordio]

59 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

We can only assume they're not capping it at 65k though, since they know everything you just posted. 

 

I've said before that I personally think it's too small. But if they bake in easy expansion then maybe OK. 

 

Also it hasn't been announced what the capacity is going to be. In fact nothing's been announced

I doubt it will be 65K. Hopefully something more concrete  (like new foundations) in the not too distant.

 

 

Edited March 14 by PauloGeordio

[AyeDubbleYoo]

57 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

Plus we're not just moving for the extra seats, we need corporate facilities too which SJP doesn't have to the level we need. That's more important to the PSR line than putting 5, 10 or even 20k extra bums in seats.

 

Not just, but I'd say it's very important. 

[Nucasol]

69-70k is the absolute sweet spot I reckon. Stick a roof on and we’ll have an atmosphere to rival any stadium if they don’t drop a bollock on rehousing the noiser sections of our support. Logan’s Running the East Stand clientele would be great too.

[Mikky]

24 minutes ago, Nucasol said:

69-70k is the absolute sweet spot I reckon. Stick a roof on and we’ll have an atmosphere to rival any stadium if they don’t drop a bollock on rehousing the noiser sections of our support. Logan’s Running the East Stand clientele would be great too.

The roof is a must for me - will be completely unique in the PL

[sempuki]

Eales has been quite open about not making it too big so there'll still be competition for tickets to keep driving demand. 75k would be a good compromise in my opinion. 

[TRon]

7 hours ago, wyn davies said:

Can't see the point in moving and building a stadium with only an increase in capacity of say 13000, when as mentioned previously by other posters, get rid of seats and have a standing , before changing the stadium previously we used to get 60000 standing at certain games, unless the idea is to continually create a demand which is probably the club's intention by only increasing slightly.

 

It will be more about making the stadium a big earner from third party events I would think, like concerts, conferences, maybe even shopping and restaurants. I think that's what they are doing at Spurs and other new stadiums.

[Memphis]

The reaction to this from some people is a bit bizarre to me. We know nothing official, so all of this is largely speculation, but we have a seemingly very bright and well-regarded commercial team now who will have consulted with some of the finest architectural firms in the world so I’m going to guess that they have a very solid rationale for whatever capacity choice they make. 
 

The specific design itself is going to make some people angry, whatever it is. Architecture is a subjective art. I’m more concerned with how they’re going to preserve and enhance the atmosphere and fan experience. Whatever the exterior is, there are huge decisions about the interior seating - placement, angle, proximity to the pitch, etc - that they’ve got to get right or risk losing atmosphere. 

[Holloway]

I do wonder how much consideration they'll give to enhancing the atmosphere/ fan experience with the likes of a big standing section etc. I'll bet it's fucking minimal

[joeyt]

This is going to play havoc with Leazes parkrun

[Choppy Chop Chop]

I worry for the Swans, Geese and ducks 

[Superior Acuña]

No roof, don’t think they should even be allowed. The weather is part of the game. 

[Myleftboot]

What about naming the stands. Definitely think there should be the ‘Sven Adult Book End’.

[El Prontonise]

Going to be fantastic to get rid of the Sir John Hall stand.

 

Tory, racist cunt.

[LFEE]

1 hour ago, Holloway said:

I do wonder how much consideration they'll give to enhancing the atmosphere/ fan experience with the likes of a big standing section etc. I'll bet it's fucking minimal

Last year it was said they are using Dortmund as one of the models for our club in general so I’d imagine they will of been impressed with the yellow wall.