New Stadium

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
ArmadilloSackRace said:
I imagine Stoke City (1863), Aston Villa (1874), Everton (1878), Manchester United (1878), West Brom (1878), Sunderland (1879), and Manchester City (1880) would probably argue with that, but if you discount a third of the Premier League then you're right, we are the oldest club
Click to expand...

Whoops! I meant the oldest London Club in the League!
 
Anthony Beale said:
Firstly, Wilson, i'm going to start with you. Its not the capacity per se thats the issue. We have one of the oldest grounds in the country (probably, haven't checked. Don't feel the need too.) Fact is, its outdated, and for the reason you've suggested.
You can't keep adding shit on top. Its like Buckaroo. We've expanded, updated etc all we can and we're at tipping point. We've got an old tiny little stadium and it just doesn't befit the club. I'm sure we have one of the smallest pitches in the league. If we're to compete, stay at the top and stay relevant, we need to maximise the earning potential of our assets. The stadium is our biggest asset and currently theres fuck all else we can do with WHL than play football. And i know people will say "well i don't care about anything else its our ground i just want football, etc etc" but if having One direction start their world tour in the 60'000 capacity white hart lane 2.0 means more money for the club, thats money that isn't coming out of our pockets. (Well, unless you choose to go to the one direction gig of course.)
Essentially what I'm saying is, Yes, we can knock down the east stand and rebuild. And the north. and the South. And the West. But then, thats actually far more expensive than it is just just build a purpose built state of the art stadium.

Which leads me on to my next point. We're not planning for 10 years here. Or 20. Our current stadium has lasted us over a hundred years. (well, sort of. We've had the same stadium like triggers had the same broom). So For all those in the "yeah but we won't sell out a 60'000 stadium every game so whats the point" camp. The point is, well A: quite obviously, the more seats there are the more we have the potential to earn. But also B: what about in 50 years time when 80 million people live in London alone. (give or take...) and even West Ham are getting crowds of 50'000 to their shitty games let alone the good ones. The population is increasing and that means more people are gonna want to attend. Id happily sit in a stadium with 15'000 seats sitting empty for 10 games a season, for the next 20 years. If it means we can get all this shit out of the way now and be ready. Imagine if things did start to go well! We don't want to be the shitty tin pot club in the champions league that only allows 5000 away fans because our ground is so fucking small.

A bigger ground will mean we can avoid situations like Benfica earlier this year where i was up in block J surrounded by portuguese fans.

Finally, to all the doubters. All those saying this is happening because the stadium is going to get built. The fact its gone to a CPO doesn't mean it might not get built, it means the land is basically 99% ours now, we just have to agree on a fee. I can't see any reason why all involved would want to delay this. The sooner it happens, the cheaper it will be.
Click to expand...
You mean there's people on here that wouldn't??
 
jimmyriggle said:
Apparently our offer to them was enough to pay for relocation, new land nearby and the cost of planning permission. However, they would still need to pay for the cost of building a new place of business and to do this would need to take out a big loan. It's money they don't have and you an see why they'd fight it.
Click to expand...

Where did the rumours of this come from someone just makes it up posts it and it becomes folklore
(and I know Jimmy you are just quoting)
Also where are all the new stadium doomsayers suddenly went up their own arse
when the club makes a statement on the new stadium?
:adeohshit:
 
I see Archway's twitter retweeting Woolwich comments all day.
I know they're entitled to due process/legal right regarding the CPO objection, but if they're still in talks with the Club, can they not just find a solution to this issue which has dragged on for several years at this stage?
 
jimmyriggle said:
Apparently our offer to them was enough to pay for relocation, new land nearby and the cost of planning permission. However, they would still need to pay for the cost of building a new place of business and to do this would need to take out a big loan. It's money they don't have and you an see why they'd fight it.

This might have been done already but the club should have just offered them the contract to fit out all the catering outlets (their speciality) and four lifetime season tickets for the family. At least then the money they get from the club isn't just falling into a black hole.
Click to expand...

The blue bit is twitter bullshit and i don't know why it keeps getting quoted. Clearly not true.

The green bit is a fair point but its presuming Archway have been amicable throughout. For all we know Enics offer to Archway was fair and reasonable to begin with the their reaction was a straight "fuck right off".

I dont blame Archway for doing what they can to get what they can but i feel its gone too far now. Perhaps they're being funded though... If you were a rival club you wouldn't want us moving into this new stadium would you. It'd be pretty easy to chuck archway some money to be cunts about it... just saying....
 
They could play in Vilnius in the Lithuanian National Stadium. It was begun in 1987, but they SWEAR it'll be done by 2016. That's basically a Sainsbury's in the background...
IFXx2ap.jpg
 
Éperons said:
They could play in Vilnius in the Lithuanian National Stadium. It was begun in 1987, but they SWEAR it'll be done by 2016. That's basically a Sainsbury's in the background...
IFXx2ap.jpg
Click to expand...

I like it. We can do what they did at Traitor's Gate too and have the current hate figure of the season beheaded and their head's put on the rebar. Although judging by how hate filled it can be at home most games we'll need to apply for expansion after a couple of weeks
 
Anthony Beale said:
The blue bit is twitter bullshit and i don't know why it keeps getting quoted. Clearly not true.

The green bit is a fair point but its presuming Archway have been amicable throughout. For all we know Enics offer to Archway was fair and reasonable to begin with the their reaction was a straight "fuck right off".

I dont blame Archway for doing what they can to get what they can but i feel its gone too far now. Perhaps they're being funded though... If you were a rival club you wouldn't want us moving into this new stadium would you. It'd be pretty easy to chuck archway some money to be cunts about it... just saying....
Click to expand...
:gallashmm:
 
Barnet FC , why not play at Barnet. Let the players experiance a bit of grass root football conditions. Fill the ground with the most loyal Spurs fans (for noise) and a couple hundred away fans (seen to be fair). Once you get rid of the posh lot , there would be a good 5000 supporters ready for the challenge. We would win every game , I'm sure.
 
MrS said:
Barnet FC , why not play at Barnet. Let the players experiance a bit of grass root football conditions. Fill the ground with the most loyal Spurs fans (for noise) and a couple hundred away fans (seen to be fair). Once you get rid of the posh lot , there would be a good 5000 supporters ready for the challenge. We would win every game , I'm sure.
Click to expand...
: ostrich:
 
Anthony Beale said:
The blue bit is twitter bullshit and i don't know why it keeps getting quoted. Clearly not true.

The green bit is a fair point but its presuming Archway have been amicable throughout. For all we know Enics offer to Archway was fair and reasonable to begin with the their reaction was a straight "fuck right off".

I dont blame Archway for doing what they can to get what they can but i feel its gone too far now. Perhaps they're being funded though... If you were a rival club you wouldn't want us moving into this new stadium would you. It'd be pretty easy to chuck archway some money to be cunts about it... just saying....
Click to expand...

I think we know by now that ENIC are not the type to make a 'fair and reasonable' offer for anything haha.

I love your conspiracy theory but I doubt it has a shred of truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom