New Everton Stadium - Hill Dickinson Stadium

Says the bloke who decreed yesterday that basically any Blue who didn’t agree with him should be lobbed out of the club...somehow.....as him and his troupe of super Blues knew what was best for the club...

You hypocritical idiot
I said my opinion falls within that of the majority, which the polls back up.

Carry on with the slurs, though. Making yourself look real big here.
 
Why the Obsession with other teams stadium capacity? It must only be because of ego and nothing to do with design. What matters is what's best for EFC. The truth is nobody knows what the right capacity should be, but if the intention is to have a "crowd on top of the players" intimidating atmosphere, than the best way of achieving that is having a sold out ground every week.

So if the choice is, having the biggest or one of the biggest capacities, but with 5,000 empty seats every game or a lower capacity with a sold out baying crowd every home game I know which I would prefer.

Almost everyone agrees that steep stands and closeness to the pitch are design essentials to create the Intimidation factor. However that's only going to work if the ground is packed. If there are loads of empty seats it defeats the point of the stadium design.

Do posters on here advocating for 60,000, 62,000 or 65,000 capacity stadiums seriously think we will get that every home game and so fulfilling the stadiums design criteria? I'm not criticising I'm just asking the question. As a layperson and a blue for over 50 years, taking my rose tinted glasses off, I must admit I don't think so.

I may be wrong but my personal opinion would be to go for a 56,000 to 58,000 capacity stadium which would be packed out every home game with an incredible atmosphere and the worst place to visit by any away team.

Not an attack by the way as 58k would probably be fine for the vast majority but you've said to go for 56 to 58k which would be packed out every game, so what is an extra 2k on top? Even if they didn't sell you are talking about the equivalent of 2 rows left empty at the top and back of the stand where it would barely make any appreciable difference to the atmosphere or how it looks from TV.

Even 5k empty seats would be no problem, we have gotten 33k crowds at Goodison, and I wouldn't say it looked bare and percentage wise 60 - 5 is going to look better than 40 - 5. I would bet that some of the games that had lower gates had a better atmosphere than some of the full houses as it all depends on is the crowd and also the team up for it, so it's not all about being sold out.

I just fail to understand why people would elect to have a smaller stadium unless we can't afford it. What we build now will probably more than likely remain the same bar from a few superficial changes for the next 100 years. We are not only basing what we can get now but what we could get if we started winning things. We would not extend it if we started being successful, by the time they left it enough years to agree to do something we would be back on the slide as a team and even if we did have the gumption to do it with all those apartment blocks being built around Nelson dock someone would find a way to stop it due to blocking of light etc. Or we would allow people to build close to it on both sides to gain an extra few quid so we would be eventually hemmed in like we are at Goodison. This is a once in a hundred year deal, build it to what we attain to get not what we think is right for right now. The first 25 years will be painful whatever but the 75 or so thereafter it is all gains, it would be folly to think we would have to pay out a shed load more just after we get straight to extend it to what it should have been in the first place. (That's if we go for something silly like 50k)
 
yeah in the 1940's and 50's when there was nothing else to do, in 1985 when we won the league with probably the best team in our history we only had 2 attendances in the league of over 50k, the derby and the qpr game when we won the league, and if i remember rightly we got presented with the league championship trophy the following Wednesday night against West Ham with barely 31,000 in the ground. realistically that is where we are in terms of attendances, and before i finish ask yourself this, How many times would we have sold over 50,000 seats this season?
At Restricted views Goodison probably none
At a brand new USM Dixie Dean stadium at Bramley Moore Dock , probably every league game
 
Why the Obsession with other teams stadium capacity? It must only be because of ego and nothing to do with design. What matters is what's best for EFC. The truth is nobody knows what the right capacity should be, but if the intention is to have a "crowd on top of the players" intimidating atmosphere, than the best way of achieving that is having a sold out ground every week.

So if the choice is, having the biggest or one of the biggest capacities, but with 5,000 empty seats every game or a lower capacity with a sold out baying crowd every home game I know which I would prefer.

Almost everyone agrees that steep stands and closeness to the pitch are design essentials to create the Intimidation factor. However that's only going to work if the ground is packed. If there are loads of empty seats it defeats the point of the stadium design.

Do posters on here advocating for 60,000, 62,000 or 65,000 capacity stadiums seriously think we will get that every home game and so fulfilling the stadiums design criteria? I'm not criticising I'm just asking the question. As a layperson and a blue for over 50 years, taking my rose tinted glasses off, I must admit I don't think so.

I may be wrong but my personal opinion would be to go for a 56,000 to 58,000 capacity stadium which would be packed out every home game with an incredible atmosphere and the worst place to visit by any away team.
As one of the advocates for over 60k, here is my reasoning:

In the early 90's Man Utd got lucky with a perfect storm of a good manager and a young team of stars. They went on a run that has seen them since amass 11 league titles and numerous other trophies. During that period they have constantly upgraded their stadium, as the demand matched their success. If I remember correctly Old Trafords capacity was 40k odd at the beginning. They are now looking to go above 80k.

Now say we get just as lucky. We find a decent manager, and thanks to our financial backing, get in some stars. We go on a run of success that sees us win numerous stuff over a 10 year period, and we find ourselves equals to Man Utd. How restricting and short sighted is a 50k stadium going to seem? We'll just find ourselves in a similar position to the one currently facing City and Chelsea. The flip side of that is we don't. We never improve our lot and stay it this level forever, making a 60k seem excessive. I know which scenario I'd prefer us to be moving towards. When I talk about ambition, that is where I'm coming from.

I know currently 60k would be excessive. I also know building a 60k stadium will not bring success, only the team and manger will. I also agree that a 50k will make no difference in us achieving success. But if we don't aim to be the best we can be at everything we do, then what is the point?

Up until the 90's this football club was at the forefront of English football, from being the first purpose built stadium, to the first to fit under soil heating. We are the only English club to have hosted a World Cup semi final. That's how great Goodison used to be. That all stopped with building of the very short sighted Park End, and since then we've become also rans. We just make up the numbers theses days. Why not make this new stadium the start to propel ourselves back to forefront of English football? Aim big, make a statement, make people take us seriously again.

Building a 50k stadium just seems like the Park End all over again; an opportunity to do something great being passed by for the cheaper, better than what we had anyway, alternative.
 
so, the questionnaire was about finding out how to spin a smaller stadium to the fans. Intimidating - iconic - a bit of blue and white decoration. 45,000.
 
Not until they are guaranteed supplies of chicken
KFC without the chicken just doesn’t taste the same

Unless we have an order of 60,000 chickens Every two weeks then there'd be no point. We'd have to sell obstructed from the KFC seats. Doesn't bare thinking about.
 
So people want us to match "our peers", yet seem to think our peers are City, Chelsea and the like, when our peers are currently Burnley 21k, Leicester 32k and Bournemouth 11k.

But the Etihad is ONLY 55k
Stamford Bridge is ONLY 41k
Anfield 54k
White Hart Lane 36k
Emirates 60k
Old Trafford 75k

So if we built it at 55k we could match or better 4 out of 6 of the top teams in the league.
 
So people want us to match "our peers", yet seem to think our peers are City, Chelsea and the like, when our peers are currently Burnley 21k, Leicester 32k and Bournemouth 11k.

But the Etihad is ONLY 55k
Stamford Bridge is ONLY 41k
Anfield 54k
White Hart Lane 36k
Emirates 60k
Old Trafford 75k

So if we built it at 55k we could match or better 4 out of 6 of the top teams in the league.

??????? Old trafford 75k ???????
 
So people want us to match "our peers", yet seem to think our peers are City, Chelsea and the like, when our peers are currently Burnley 21k, Leicester 32k and Bournemouth 11k.

But the Etihad is ONLY 55k
Stamford Bridge is ONLY 41k
Anfield 54k
White Hart Lane 36k
Emirates 60k
Old Trafford 75k

So if we built it at 55k we could match or better 4 out of 6 of the top teams in the league.
I don't want us to match anyone.

What happens though, if say 10 years down the line we are successful again. We sell out every home game, and have a season ticket waiting list?
 

Similar Threads

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top