St James' Park

[frankpingel]

SOL atmosphere is nowhere near Roker Park for me.

[Dr.Spaceman]

1 minute ago, LFEE said:

Stadium of Light > Roker Park … Bolton‘s Reebok better than their old one. So there’s two off the top of my head.

 

 

 

Burnden was literally wooden and 102 years old upon closure, however the site of the Reebok is awful. It's literally on a retail world type thing. Obviously we wouldn't do that but we may have to "write off" a season in terms of ST holders being able to attend every home game.

 

Removing the 3pm blackout would help.... 

[LFEE]

Just now, Whitley mag said:

I’d add the Tottenham Hotspur stadium that new end behind the goal creates a much bigger noise than anything they produced at WHL.

I’d agree actually. The sound reverberates much better around the stadium.

[frankpingel]

1 minute ago, OCK said:

Did my best to say no to all those whacky American seats that take up like 5 reguarly sized seats. Some absolutely hideous ideas in that questionaire thing. 

Me too. 

[Dr.Spaceman]

2 minutes ago, frankpingel said:

SOL atmosphere is nowhere near Roker Park for me.

 

As has been said earlier in the thread - those "identikit" stadiums are fucking woefully soulless. We wouldn't have one of those, we'd have one of the greatest stadiums in the world. Why anyone doesn't fancy the sound of that is beyond me.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Dr.Spaceman

[LFEE]

Just now, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

Burnden was literally wooden and 102 years old upon closure, however the site of the Reebok is awful. It's literally on a retail world type thing. Obviously we wouldn't do that but we may have to "write off" a season in terms of ST holders being able to attend every home game.

 

Removing the 3pm blackout would help.... 

Don’t disagree with the location but that’s not what the question was in my defence.

 

 

[Dr.Spaceman]

Just now, LFEE said:

Don’t disagree with the location but that’s not what the question was in my defence.

 

 

 

Aye, I'm just chucking my thoughts out at random, as usual.

[OCK]

Imagine not being able to get a ticket, but seeing @leffe wallowing in this: 

 

Or @Mike and @Ameritoon

 

[LFEE]

I asked this question a while a go for maybe a poll.

 

Those not wanting a new stadium are they ST holders and if so would they give up 1-2 years not being able to attend if they went expansion route? 🧐

 

Thats the rarely spoken beauty of a new stadium. No disruption in theory. 
 

Imagine the impact on the team with half a stadium etc whilst construction ongoing. That would effect results… signings etc etc etc.

[ponsaelius]

8 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

In this scenario surely they'd manage it so that we're away for maximum one season.

 

It's physically impossible with a demolish and rebuild. Spurs half built theirs first directly adjacent before demolishing WHL - and even with that it still meant almost two full seasons at Wembley.

 

I don't think we have the physical space to do something similar. It would be 2-3 years.

[Nucasol]

5 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

 

As has been said earlier in the thread - those "identikit" stadiums are fucking woefully soulless. We wouldn't have one of those, we'd have one of the greatest stadiums in the world. Why anyone doesn't fancy the sound of that is beyond me.

 

 

 

I agree, people think we’re just going to get some wanky flat pack special like Sunderland or a 25 year old concept like Arsenal when they first started planning the Emirates. The Saudis will go for the most advanced stadium in the world.

[OCK]

If there's no aquarium full of giant fuck off seahorses being ridden by a magpie, then they can bin every single one of their plans. 

 

EDIT:

I also specifically requested a Greggs inside the stadium, thank you

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by OCK

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Stifler said:

This, also on Leazers Park would be acceptable, and at the worst on the arena site.

 

Like fuck would I be happy with a stadium at Silverlink though, despite the fact that I live around the corner from it.

Arrrrgh!

[Pancrate1892]

29 minutes ago, Nucasol said:

Brick by brick?

Excellent idea. Everyone who completes the survey will be assigned a brick. 

If everyone moves their brick at the same time we can move leazes terrace in about 30 mins.

Don't know what a the fuckin fuss was 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Pancrate1892
Spelling

[Pancrate1892]

20 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

If it has to be a rebuild it has to be on Castle Leazes.

 

I just can't see us being in exile for what would be a couple of seasons of football in order to build on the existing site. 

 

 

 

Where will we move the castle? Is it grade one listed? I've never seen it but I reckon beamish would take it 

[ponsaelius]

They won't say it explicitly but there's only basically four viable options:

 

1. Expand Gallowgate, East Stand and stadium wide renovation. Max capacity probably about 62k. Positives are minimal disruption and retain historic location. Negatives (depending on your perspective) are probably limited in terms of internal improvements and means stadium is maxed out forever in terms of capacity.

 

2. Rebuild on same site. Perceived positives are it is possible to more or less do whatever you want while retaining historic location. Unlimited scope for corporate and offering for hosting other events. Could go to any capacity which desired. Main negative is that demolish and rebuild will mean at least 2 years in exile either at a temporary stadium or another stadium somewhere else.

 

3. New stadium on the Arena site. As above positives are the scope to do more or less whatever you want. No disruption at all. However complete loss of historic location, and also slightly more peripheral in terms of relationship with the city and transport nodes.

 

4. Build new stadium on Castle Leazes. Again more or less freedom to build whatever type of stadium you want up to any capacity. Although it is in a new location I would say it retains the spirit of the historic location - particularly if connected down to Strawberry place through enhanced/new parkland. No need for any play in exile.

[Nucasol]

1 minute ago, ponsaelius said:

They won't say it explicitly but there's only basically four viable options:

 

1. Expand Gallowgate, East Stand and stadium wide renovation. Max capacity probably about 62k. Positives are minimal disruption and retain historic location. Negatives (depending on your perspective) are probably limited in terms of internal improvements and means stadium is maxed out forever in terms of capacity.

 

2. Rebuild on same site. Perceived positives are it is possible to more or less do whatever you want while retaining historic location. Unlimited scope for corporate and offering for hosting other events. Could go to any capacity which desired. Main negative is that demolish and rebuild will mean at least 2 years in exile either at a temporary stadium or another stadium somewhere else.

 

3. New stadium on the Arena site. As above positives are the scope to do more or less whatever you want. No disruption at all. However complete loss of historic location, and also slightly more peripheral in terms of relationship with the city and transport nodes.

 

4. Build new stadium on Castle Leazes. Again more or less freedom to build whatever type of stadium you want up to any capacity. Although it is in a new location I would say it retains the spirit of the historic location - particularly if connected down to Strawberry place through enhanced/new parkland. No need for any play in exile.

Option 4 please.

[Miggys First Goal]

I get the feeling they're seriously considering the new stadium route, be damned what Mehrdad said.

[Checko]

Just dig out under the existing stadium and lower it enough that we can raise the smaller stands without destroying people's light. Also jacuzzis dammit. Jacuzzis filled with sea-horses for OCK.

[Checko]

2 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said:

I get the feeling they're seriously considering the new stadium route, be damned what Mehrdad said.

I reckon they totally want a new stadium, but they're being sure to be seen to make every effort to try and keep/develop the original first.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Checko

[Sima]

Being in Spurs’ ground for the NFL was an eye opener.  I wasn’t in any expensive seats but the concourses are massive.

[ponsaelius]

The survey is awful mind. There is one cursory mention of improving the atmosphere. Literally everything else is about improving corporate, comfy seats, food and drink, how much you are willing to spend. All stuff I literally couldn't give a single fuck about - but this seems the way it's going to go.

 

Particularly jarring when you consider Mehrdad's comments on atmosphere.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by ponsaelius

[LFEE]

3 minutes ago, Checko said:

I reckon they totally want a new stadium, but they're being sure to be seen to make every effort to try and keep/develop the original first.

 

 

 

Of course they are. It’s working also. Who was it on here who wanted to make a bet with me that they’d only be expanding because they’d spoken to someone close to the owners or the owners themselves? 😆

[Ben]

9 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

They won't say it explicitly but there's only basically four viable options:

 

1. Expand Gallowgate, East Stand and stadium wide renovation. Max capacity probably about 62k. Positives are minimal disruption and retain historic location. Negatives (depending on your perspective) are probably limited in terms of internal improvements and means stadium is maxed out forever in terms of capacity.

 

2. Rebuild on same site. Perceived positives are it is possible to more or less do whatever you want while retaining historic location. Unlimited scope for corporate and offering for hosting other events. Could go to any capacity which desired. Main negative is that demolish and rebuild will mean at least 2 years in exile either at a temporary stadium or another stadium somewhere else.

 

3. New stadium on the Arena site. As above positives are the scope to do more or less whatever you want. No disruption at all. However complete loss of historic location, and also slightly more peripheral in terms of relationship with the city and transport nodes.

 

4. Build new stadium on Castle Leazes. Again more or less freedom to build whatever type of stadium you want up to any capacity. Although it is in a new location I would say it retains the spirit of the historic location - particularly if connected down to Strawberry place through enhanced/new parkland. No need for any play in exile.

Option 4 but with a Wembley way type structure up from Strawberry Place, with bars and stuff lining the walk up 

[Wandy]

10 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said:

I get the feeling they're seriously considering the new stadium route, be damned what Mehrdad said.

 

I said ages ago that Mehrdad would regret saying that about not moving. The truth is that even the owners underestimated the potential of the club.

 

I still say they will try to move the terrace first, moving it deeper into the park. After that they can start the new build by building up the entire east side of the new stadium. They then knock down the Gallowgate or Leazes next and move ST holders from that stand into the all-new east stand. From there, keep knocking down the other stands and temporarily move ST holders from those into the next newly built part of the new stadium.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Wandy