Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Be interesting to see how they go about doing anything with East Stand. Difficult to envisage how it can be done without a complete knockdown and rebuilt considering there's next to no scope to expand it's footprint and it's already cramped enough as it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/10/06/newcastle-united-st-james-park-expansion-65000-capacity/

 

They can squeeze an extra tier onto the East Stand, but only if St James' Terrace bites the dust.

 

Just build a new stadium man, it makes much more sense.

He’s done well to knock something up with literally zero new information (apart from - if you’re being very generous - the estimated potential new capacity number).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, SteV said:

He’s done well to knock something up with literally zero new information (apart from - if you’re being very generous - the estimated potential new capacity number).

 

That's not even new info. Mehrdad said himself a while ago that they hoped to expand to 65K.

 

I still think the feasibility study may be used as the reasoning to move/completely rebuild, rather than a modest expansion.

 

On Wednesday the club moved up a gear, you could just feel it, and I bet NUFC gained a lot of new fans that night. Will a modest upgrade to a creaking stadium really cut it, as football enters a new age? Not for me it wont.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Wandy said:

 

That's not even new info. Mehrdad said himself a while ago that they hoped to expand to 65K.

 

I still think the feasibility study may be used as the reasoning to move/completely rebuild, rather than a modest expansion.

 

On Wednesday the club moved up a gear, you could just feel it, and I bet NUFC gained a lot of new fans that night. Will a modest upgrade to a creaking stadium really cut it, as football enters a new age? Not for me it wont.

I’d say a 25% increase on a stadium already above 50k, is a bit more than modest.

 

But it’s a valid point on whether that really allows us to compete (on a stadium level) with the likes of Spurs.

 

The never ending modernisation v history debate I suppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, SteV said:

I’d say a 25% increase on a stadium already above 50k, is a bit more than modest.

 

But it’s a valid point on whether that really allows us to compete (on a stadium level) with the likes of Spurs.

 

The never ending modernisation v history debate I suppose.

 

It's not just about adding capacity though, it's also about adding and improving facilities such as corporate, catering & accessibility, and pitch views too. I don't see how extending Level 7 to Gallowgate and a small, additional tier to the East Stand does that by any significant manner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Doctor Zaius said:

I don't want to move like. No way. 

 

It's the location, rather than the stadium itself for me.

 

The city centre location is non-negotiable, be it on the current footprint, Castle Leazes or the Arena site. But everything else is up for debate, for me anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wandy said:

 

 

It's not just about adding capacity though, it's also about adding and improving facilities such as corporate, catering & accessibility, and pitch views too. I don't see how extending Level 7 to Gallowgate and a small, additional tier to the East Stand does that by any significant manner.

You would think they will desperate to include some additional corporate in whatever they are able to do.

 

Generally, I’d agree with your point though. We’d be sacrificing the ‘quality’ of stadium for location and heritage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Doctor Zaius said:

I don't want to move like. No way. 

 

It's the location, rather than the stadium itself for me.

 

I always feel a bit of an outsider on this topic as a non-local but this is it for me.

 

They could knock down and rebuild the entire thing for all I care. It doesn't feel like so much history lost. Does anyone know the actual oldest part of what's currently in place? East Stand from the '70s?

 

Moving from the land itself though feels different. The closest I've come to acceptance is all the talk of Leazes Park, but feel an agreement should be in place that the old stadium site make up for the loss of green if so.

 

Moving much further just feels like a loss of something in my mind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, wormy said:

 

I always feel a bit of an outsider on this topic as a non-local but this is it for me.

 

They could knock down and rebuild the entire thing for all I care. It doesn't feel like so much history lost. Does anyone know the actual oldest part of what's currently in place? East Stand from the '70s?

 

Moving from the land itself though feels different. The closest I've come to acceptance is all the talk of Leazes Park, but feel an agreement should be in place that the old stadium site make up for the loss of green if so.

 

Moving much further just feels like a loss of something in my mind. 

Sounds daft, but it’s the continuation of history. 
 

The East Stand is connected to the old Edwardian West Stand, as they were both in situ at the same time. And with the East Stand it has been developed to what we now know today. If the East Stand was knocked down, that connection would continue on to the new Leazes and Milburn. Sounds stupid, but there’s something in that continuation for me. It makes it real.

 

Moving just wouldn’t do it for me. Even if it guaranteed my ST back

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d like to hold my judgement until I see a proposal for the arena site.

I think that a new 21st century MercedesBenz Arena on the banks of the Tyne could be mind blowing with the views across the Tyne and the bridges as backdrop. 

 

 

Edited by Exiled in Texas

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, TheGuv said:

Sounds daft, but it’s the continuation of history. 
 

The East Stand is connected to the old Edwardian West Stand, as they were both in situ at the same time. And with the East Stand it has been developed to what we now know today. If the East Stand was knocked down, that connection would continue on to the new Leazes and Milburn. Sounds stupid, but there’s something in that continuation for me. It makes it real.

 

Moving just wouldn’t do it for me. Even if it guaranteed my ST back

 

I guess to me it feels like enough of that connection is still there by it being on the original ground but that's an interesting way of seeing it that I hadn't thought about.

 

It's pretty mad really how many different viewpoints can be taken over this one topic, in a positive way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They should push plans as much as thru can then either be knocked back or the council allow for a major expansion. If knocked back the club can say to the fans it doesn't have a choice but to move, then build an ott 90k stadium for a £bn (which won't count as part of ffp) and sell the naming rights for £100m a year. It's one massive way to navigate around ffp, and the fans won't be precious about the renaming of SJP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dokko said:

They should push plans as much as thru can then either be knocked back or the council allow for a major expansion. If knocked back the club can say to the fans it doesn't have a choice but to move, then build an ott 90k stadium for a £bn (which won't count as part of ffp) and sell the naming rights for £100m a year. It's one massive way to navigate around ffp, and the fans won't be precious about the renaming of SJP.

Stadium and infrastructure now counts towards FFP under UEFA rules, and the Premier League are set to follow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Stifler said:

Stadium and infrastructure now counts towards FFP under UEFA rules, and the Premier League are set to follow.

 

Since when? Can't find anything on that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Doctor Zaius said:

I don't want to move like. No way. 

 

It's the location, rather than the stadium itself for me.

 

5 hours ago, TheGuv said:

Sounds daft, but it’s the continuation of history. 
 

The East Stand is connected to the old Edwardian West Stand, as they were both in situ at the same time. And with the East Stand it has been developed to what we now know today. If the East Stand was knocked down, that connection would continue on to the new Leazes and Milburn. Sounds stupid, but there’s something in that continuation for me. It makes it real.

 

Moving just wouldn’t do it for me. Even if it guaranteed my ST back

 

Aye, has to stay there, for me. We might get a bigger stadium elsewhere but if I walk to that spot one day and it's not there I'll be devastated. Just feels so perfect. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...