New Stadium or Revamp Old Trafford | Aim is to build 100k seater stadium

[Plant0x84]

It was a one tiered fully enclosed bowl, exactly the same as the other one tiered fully enclosed bowls that came after it. The building itself was soulless.

Disagree entirely, though I understand the logic of your position.
For me, and I suspect many others, The pitch being the same one is symbolic. The original central tunnel from the dressing rooms is still there today. The stands might have been new, but they were in the same place as the old ones so the Stretford End was still the Stretford end to those using the ground regularly for example. These things matter, no matter how sentimental you may feel they are.

 

[redflash]

I think they should base new stadium design on the existing stadium adding in all the bits they want to make money off while keeping the shape and feel of OT.

I get the need for a new stadium and the restrictions on developing the old one but I'd love it if the new could be similar in characteristics to the old. Maybe that's just me

 

[Redplane]

I think they should base new stadium design on the existing stadium adding in all the bits they want to make money off while keeping the shape and feel of OT.

I get the need for a new stadium and the restrictions on developing the old one but I'd love it if the new could be similar in characteristics to the old. Maybe that's just me

That probably won't happen. The reason OT and other older stadiums are the way they are is because they grew and expanded organically. When you build a stadium anew and already know the capacity you want to end up at the modular/piece meal build makes little sense from anything from engineering to financial reasons. Anfield may be one of the few places that has been able to retain some of the existing layout but its again piece mealed and not all done at once.

 

[DarkLord1984]

Though I can see the need for a new stadium, the concept of demolishing OT is pretty hard for me to get my head around due to the history.

 

[JonesyUk]

Sentimentality has no place in the modern game. Arguably it's never had a place.

What absolute nonsense. You can make a rational argument for replacing the stadium, but if not for sentimentality, you'd be supporting City this week, then whoever wins next week/month/year. Why do people support clubs like Hartlepool or Southend if not sentimentality? Without it, you'd just follow the who ever was the latest and greatest.

We've all got our reasons for following our club, whether it comes from local/family ties or just falling in love with the kit as a kid - but its sentimentality that keeps you bound to that team, not rational logic.

Ultimately, sentimentality is what the game is all about, and a clubs history is intrinsic to it.

 

[euv2]

I'm surprised how quickly they appointed Foster + partners as designers for the stadium district, this means they already have a pretty good idea of what they want inside the complex. They seem pretty set on having a COSM Manchester for screening all away games/other sports, I wonder what other buildings they will prioritise inside the complex. Foster + partners look set to be appointed as architects for the stadium too, they will unveil a rough/early concept when they announce their decision in December. My main wishes are for a rectangular shaped exterior shell and not dwelling too much on the past with all the red brick and go too far in that direction like the Lucas Oil Stadium, Manchester is where tech moved forward with the industrial revolution, the new stadium should reflect that. The only things that need preserving are the Munich clock, tunnel and statues.

 

[Redivy]

Would love one of those stands that Spurs have, one massive stand with no tiers

New stadium is the way to go, it’s on the original OT site and I’m sure they’ll be a design in place that resembles a modern OT

Exciting times

There are some low hanging fruit for the club when designing a new stadium:

1. Keep fans close to the field
2. A huge single tier stand

And in terms of giving it a "soul" that really comes down to how quickly the team can win a few trophies. If the team manages to go on a long unbeaten run at home, and win a PL, you'll suddenly have the new stadium labelled as a fortress.

 

[lex talionis]

I recommend we boldly go with a new stadium, but would love to see Old Trafford kept in some way.

 

[kaku06]

We have to have the same entrance tunnel walking onto the pitch. I would be hard for me to digest players coming out of middle of a stand at old Trafford.

Also, the same kind of elevated platform/seats for players preferably in red bricks please.

Not to mention the Munich tunnel and the clock.

One more thing, keep the fans closer to the pitch just like now and keep the oppo fans in the upper stand somewhere just like now.

Other than that, do whatever you want to do and make it not only absolute world class but a fecking marvel.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

We have to have the same entrance tunnel walking onto the pitch. I would be hard for me to digest players coming out of middle of a stand at old Trafford.

Also, the same kind of elevated platform/seats for players preferably in red bricks please.

Not to mention the Munich tunnel and the clock.

One more thing, keep the fans closer to the pitch just like now and keep the oppo fans in the upper stand somewhere just like now.

Other than that, do whatever you want to do and make it not only absolute world class but a fecking marvel.

I get what you mean, but the Busby teams came out of the centre of the main stand not the current tunnel. Agree about the fans need to be near the pitch. Think that is why a lot like Spurs stadium. Like their one tier stand, as long as has been mentioned they do not plonk corporates right in the middle of it. Put the really noisy fans in there, safe standing and lots of singing and flags. Put away fans right up in the gods somewhere out of sight.

 

[Escobar]

I recommend we boldly go with a new stadium, but would love to see Old Trafford kept in some way.

Ineos Old Trafford and everyone moves on.
It is a myth that new stadiums are soulless, as others have said they can be amazing too if done right

 

[Bogga]

Since I'm told Manchesters suffers a bit from precipitation (bit of irony here), could/should we have a retractable roof? What rules are there regarding that?
I googled a bit and saw that there aren't loads of stadiums that have this. Bernabeu, Cruyff Arena and some german teams stadiums, but Tottenhams new doesn't have this.

Would there be any benefits from not having this? If we were to build it, what are the rules if/when we could have it open or closed?

 

[Malons]

A roof that covered the pitch would benefit other events at stadium more than anything else. Football should be played outdoors and if it rains, it rains. Music acts may be more likely to book the venue all year round if it has a roof on though. Possibly wouldn't get many artists wanting to play there in November if there wasn't a roof.

It'll depend on whether they think a roof will inspire enough business to justify the cost. But all clubs that have one should be banned from closing the roof and covering the pitch on the basis of its raining a bit.

 

[MancunianAngels]

Ineos Old Trafford and everyone moves on.
It is a myth that new stadiums are soulless, as others have said they can be amazing too if done right

It's not that new stadiums are soulless per se it's that they're often used to grentrify a clubs fanbase and increase ticket prices meaning that they often appear soulless.

This is all done in the name of progress but very few clubs have genuinely progressed since "upgrading" their stadia. I'm not counting city because their success is down to a lottery win.

Arsenal were two years on from an invincible season when they moved to the Emirates but its taken 17/18 years for them to look like genuinely challengers again.

Let's be careful what we wish for. I look forward to more threads on here in a few years moaning about the lack of atmosphere and the cost of attending matches

 

[Malons]

The chance of Ineos giving themselves sponsorship naming rights to any new stadium are slim to none.

Why would anyone turn down a 9- figure sponsorship income in order to slap their own name on it for free?

If brand awareness is their concern there are better ways of doing it without turning down eye watering sums of outside investment.

 

[Mullet_Man]

Is that placeholder stadium in same position of the current OT?

 

[Havak]

Let's be careful what we wish for. I look forward to more threads on here in a few years moaning about the lack of atmosphere and the cost of attending matches

These things have been issues for a long time and will still be regardless of whether we build a new stadium.

Atmosphere will return if we are successful, I don't think these necessarily coincides with a stadium being new.

Ticket prices are too much and I wouldn't be surprised if we see increases at the current stadium before a new one is built. They could create some good PR by actually slightly reducing ticket prices if we have 16k~ more seats and additional private boxes (and can host more events on top of just the Super League Grand Final). Of course a reduction is unlikely, but the overall point still stands.

Atmosphere at Old Trafford has been questioned for years and ticket prices aren't getting any cheaper. These are not reasons to be concerned about a new stadium.

 

[ErikElevenHag]

I'm surprised how quickly they appointed Foster + partners as designers for the stadium district, this means they already have a pretty good idea of what they want inside the complex. They seem pretty set on having a COSM Manchester for screening all away games/other sports, I wonder what other buildings they will prioritise inside the complex. Foster + partners look set to be appointed as architects for the stadium too, they will unveil a rough/early concept when they announce their decision in December. My main wishes are for a rectangular shaped exterior shell and not dwelling too much on the past with all the red brick and go too far in that direction like the Lucas Oil Stadium, Manchester is where tech moved forward with the industrial revolution, the new stadium should reflect that. The only things that need preserving are the Munich clock, tunnel and statues.

You need a designer on board for option selection. Without the input of a designer you don't know that anything that you're proposing is viable.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

These things have been issues for a long time and will still be regardless of whether we build a new stadium.

Atmosphere will return if we are successful, I don't think these necessarily coincides with a stadium being new.

Ticket prices are too much and I wouldn't be surprised if we see increases at the current stadium before a new one is built. They could create some good PR by actually slightly reducing ticket prices if we have 16k~ more seats and additional private boxes (and can host more events on top of just the Super League Grand Final). Of course a reduction is unlikely, but the overall point still stands.

Atmosphere at Old Trafford has been questioned for years and ticket prices aren't getting any cheaper. These are not reasons to be concerned about a new stadium.

Exactly, there is no atmosphere because we are not very good and there is almost a sense of apathy in the crowd. Get the team firing on all cylinders and the atmosphere will naturally lift. If they have any sense encourage the ordinary fans to go, not rely on tourists and corporates,

 

[Catt]

You can't be this stupid. You want rid of the leaks in the roof? Remove the roof.

 

[Utd heap]

Exactly, there is no atmosphere because we are not very good and there is almost a sense of apathy in the crowd. Get the team firing on all cylinders and the atmosphere will naturally lift. If they have any sense encourage the ordinary fans to go, not rely on tourists and corporates,

The atmosphere at OT now is better than it was in the latter Fergie years. There's been loads of good initiatives led by supporter groups meaning we now have a huge increase in youth ST numbers, and exec sections moved from the Stretford End elsewhere. Rail seating in J stand, TRA in West Lower, Utd sanctioned atmosphere section above the tunnel. Etc etc.

 

[stevoc]

It's really not. In 1994 it was four new stands built. They weren't the same stands from 1910, nor the rebuild after the war, nor when Busby managed and Babes played there, nor when the Trinity did. Ship of Theseus/Trigger's broom stuff, it's not the same ground, despite being on the same spot, that's just logic. Our sentiments make it different for us because we're diehard United fans. It's just emotion not grounded in fact.

You need to look into the history of the ground mate. There weren't 4 new stands built in 1994.

Who said it was the same ground as 1910 though?

It was a one tiered fully enclosed bowl, exactly the same as the other one tiered fully enclosed bowls that came after it. The building itself was soulless.

You're completely and utterly blinkered by your United fandom if you think otherwise. This soul is intagible and it means different things to different people but you have to admit it's about the memories, the matches, the moments, the players, the fans and the managers. It's not about the building in the slightest.

Well yes mate the entire concept of the soul is intangible.

No non-United fan would describe that new bowl in 1994 as anything else.

You mention that Arsenal fans think the Emirates is soulless now. Give them a few titles and see how they feel. They've won the square root of feck all since they moved there, their trophy wins have been at Wembley, no wonder they think it's soulless because they've not done anything memorable in it. If we had done feck all in OT for 114 years we'd probably feel similar for a good chunk of that time, then it'd evolve because over time it grows.

And new Wembley has soul. There have been countless memorable moments since it opened, for United and otherwise. It doesn't have the same soul as old Wembley but that's purely down to time. Let it stand there as long as the old ground did and see if it has less soul.

Sentimentality has no place in the modern game. Arguably it's never had a place. We should never look back because otherwise we get left behind. Right now we're a giant living on past memories and it's damaged us for over a decade whilst football has become unrecognisable ever since. We need to move forward and that means a new stadium with hundreds of thousands of fans and players and managers and victories and losses and all the rest contributing to the 'soul'.

Manchester United and the reason it's so loved across the world was built on the romanticism.

 

[Utd heap]

Atmosphere at Old Trafford has been questioned for years and ticket prices aren't getting any cheaper. These are not reasons to be concerned about a new stadium.

Weird comment - ofcourse they are as these issues are likely to be exasperated?

We had about ten years of ticket prices barely moving, and in that period loads of fan led atmosphere initiatives (see my post above).

 

[stevoc]

I think @matherto means the shape, a few stadia copied OT circa 94 back in the 90s and they all looked generic. I suspect everyone's got a different interpretation of soulless. I don't like Wembley, Emirates...even Fosters Lusail stadium but I think Spurs's new gaff is great.

Not sure that he does mate.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

The atmosphere at OT now is better than it was in the latter Fergie years. There's been loads of good initiatives led by supporter groups meaning we now have a huge increase in youth ST numbers, and exec sections moved from the Stretford End elsewhere. Rail seating in J stand, TRA in West Lower, Utd sanctioned atmosphere section above the tunnel. Etc etc.

At least they are aware of the issues and are trying to address them.

 

[astracrazy]

I'm surprised how quickly they appointed Foster + partners as designers for the stadium district, this means they already have a pretty good idea of what they want inside the complex. They seem pretty set on having a COSM Manchester for screening all away games/other sports, I wonder what other buildings they will prioritise inside the complex. Foster + partners look set to be appointed as architects for the stadium too, they will unveil a rough/early concept when they announce their decision in December. My main wishes are for a rectangular shaped exterior shell and not dwelling too much on the past with all the red brick and go too far in that direction like the Lucas Oil Stadium, Manchester is where tech moved forward with the industrial revolution, the new stadium should reflect that. The only things that need preserving are the Munich clock, tunnel and statues.

Neville has already said this will happen in an athletic article

 

[tomaldinho1]

The atmosphere at OT now is better than it was in the latter Fergie years. There's been loads of good initiatives led by supporter groups meaning we now have a huge increase in youth ST numbers, and exec sections moved from the Stretford End elsewhere. Rail seating in J stand, TRA in West Lower, Utd sanctioned atmosphere section above the tunnel. Etc etc.

Yeah I don’t agree at all that it’s about being good or not, I’d argue being good actually makes your match going fans ‘worse’ from an atmosphere perspective given ticket prices creep up and more tourists come. There’s nothing wrong with that, the latter is a huge part of being a modern day football club but the best atmosphere isn’t about having the biggest ground or winning the most trophies.

St James Park I would say used to be nailed on as best home support and they won F all. Anfield since they started winning things/being good has gone downhill massively, feel like they only get up for big games whereas OT has got much better as you say.

 

[decorativeed]

I really don't know why I bother reading this thread.

Another four pages added since I last looked, another 89 mentions of 'soulless bowl' another 70 mentions of it needing red bricks to fit in with a local area where the majority of the buildings are less than 20 years old and are largely glass and steel. Another 11 posts talking about how there's a railway line behind the South Stand which is problematic and another 13 saying that it's not a problem at all, despite 30 years of us not developing it at all while every other stand has been rebuilt pointing to it being a problem.

Add another 16 amateur renders of the land the club own with a plot for a new 100,000 seater stadium superimposed over it that's the exact same size as the cramped 75,000 seater stadium we currently have, and 8 posts mentioning Trigger's broom, and it starts to feel very pointless.

 

[Utd heap]

I really don't know why I bother reading this thread.

Another four pages added since I last looked, another 89 mentions of 'soulless bowl' another 70 mentions of it needing red bricks to fit in with a local area where the majority of the buildings are less than 20 years old and are largely glass and steel. Another 11 posts talking about how there's a railway line behind the South Stand which is problematic and another 13 saying that it's not a problem at all, despite 30 years of us not developing it at all while every other stand has been rebuilt pointing to it being a problem.

Add another 16 amateur renders of the land the club own with a plot for a new 100,000 seater stadium superimposed over it that's the exact same size as the cramped 75,000 seater stadium we currently have, and 8 posts mentioning Trigger's broom, and it starts to feel very pointless.

Can I make a suggestion mate?

Don't click on it.

 

[decorativeed]

A roof that covered the pitch would benefit other events at stadium more than anything else. Football should be played outdoors and if it rains, it rains. Music acts may be more likely to book the venue all year round if it has a roof on though. Possibly wouldn't get many artists wanting to play there in November if there wasn't a roof.

It'll depend on whether they think a roof will inspire enough business to justify the cost. But all clubs that have one should be banned from closing the roof and covering the pitch on the basis of its raining a bit.

A football ground that is home to a professional top flight team usually doesn't allow artists to play in November regardless of the weather, as it disrupts the main activities that the stadium is built for. Concerts are for the summer/off season.

 

[decorativeed]

Not sure that he does mate.

That's how I've read it. That it being a 'generic bowl' does not necessarily require it to be soulless.

Also, reading this thread, it's clear that Old Trafford is different things to different people. Some can't imagine the players coming out of the tunnel into the centre of the pitch, even though that's exactly what they did when I was a kid and for 70 years before that.

For a lot of people older than me, the grounds lost that 'soul' when they became all seater and alcohol was banned in the stands. A lot of people's feelings are based on the nostalgia felt for the time they first went to the ground or watched on TV and nothing more than that in many cases.

 

[Melville Red]

Since I'm told Manchesters suffers a bit from precipitation (bit of irony here), could/should we have a retractable roof? What rules are there regarding that?
I googled a bit and saw that there aren't loads of stadiums that have this. Bernabeu, Cruyff Arena and some german teams stadiums, but Tottenhams new doesn't have this.

Would there be any benefits from not having this? If we were to build it, what are the rules if/when we could have it open or closed?

Not with modern grass, I mean I remember the mud baths and then the pitch covered in sand, now regardless of the weather pitches throughout the season resemble the first day of a season.
As for other events been held there, a bit of rain never did any one any harm and just think of the cost.

 

[Red in STL]

Not with modern grass, I mean I remember the mud baths and then the pitch covered in sand, now regardless of the weather pitches throughout the season resemble the first day of a season.
As for other events been held there, a bit of rain never did any one any harm and just think of the cost.

+ they water the pitch as much as an average thunderstorm would before the game and at half time as well

 

[Havak]

Weird comment - ofcourse they are as these issues are likely to be exasperated?

We had about ten years of ticket prices barely moving, and in that period loads of fan led atmosphere initiatives (see my post above).

I take your point on board but largely disagree.

INEOS are very much taking fan feedback on board, I guarantee one of the first questions regarding a new stadium will be cost to the average punter. I'm convinced they will try to keep prices in line with year-on-year cost increases. It won't land well if they get the majority of people on board and then up prices 20-25% when the thing is built. The way they're going about this process at least gives me some confidence they will do what they can to find the balance.

Basically, I can see why people would think it's a concern but I'd imagine (and like to believe) it will be one of the first things ironed out once budget requirements are finalized.

 

[Escobar]

It's not that new stadiums are soulless per se it's that they're often used to grentrify a clubs fanbase and increase ticket prices meaning that they often appear soulless.

This is all done in the name of progress but very few clubs have genuinely progressed since "upgrading" their stadia. I'm not counting city because their success is down to a lottery win.

Arsenal were two years on from an invincible season when they moved to the Emirates but its taken 17/18 years for them to look like genuinely challengers again.

Let's be careful what we wish for. I look forward to more threads on here in a few years moaning about the lack of atmosphere and the cost of attending matches

What have a new stadium and success on the pitch in common? That makes no sense.
OT is miserable if we play shit

 

[Utd heap]

I take your point on board but largely disagree.

INEOS are very much taking fan feedback on board, I guarantee one of the first questions regarding a new stadium will be cost to the average punter. I'm convinced they will try to keep prices in line with year-on-year cost increases. It won't land well if they get the majority of people on board and then up prices 20-25% when the thing is built. The way they're going about this process at least gives me some confidence they will do what they can to find the balance.

Basically, I can see why people would think it's a concern but I'd imagine (and like to believe) it will be one of the first things ironed out once budget requirements are finalized.

Sorry mate that seems incredibly naive to me - they've come in and had no problem being part of the biggest price hikes to tickets in a decade in year one.

 

[Melville Red]

+ they water the pitch as much as an average thunderstorm would before the game and at half time as well

Will someone think of the water rates?

 

[Havak]

Sorry mate that seems incredibly naive to me - they've come in and had no problem being part of the biggest price hikes to tickets in a decade in year one.

We'll have to see, but I genuinely believe if you are going to a stadium that size then you have to offer affordable seating. I don't doubt we could close to fill it for most matches, but the comparable stadium is the Camp Nou which averages less than 85% filled. They may well increase the price of some higher end tickets but will surely offer more affordable tiers as well to consistently get that extra 26k filled.

Maybe I'm reading into bad publicity too much, but this huge once in a lifetime project resulting in massive price hikes and empty seats seems like a total disaster and would make the whole thing look like a joke. I'll be amazed if they failed at one of the more simple things to get right.

 

[horsechoker]

If it comes down to it, what are the options for a groundshare?

The Etihad - big capacity but would probably be unpopular with all sides but in many ways the most practical.

Bolton Wanderers Stadium - 28k capacity, not too far from Manchester. No idea how easy it is to get there by public transport. Fairly modern so should comply with uefa regulations.

Wigan Athletic stadium - 25k capacity, slightly further from Manchester, should be OK for uefa competitions but like BW stadium it's not a great capacity for the amount of fans United have.

Leighs Sports Village - already used by our women's team but seems to have many occupants and only a 12k capacity.

Gigg Lane - getting down to not great options while remaining around Manchester

Boundary Park - probably scrapping the barrel again now but could be an option if all fails.

Edgely Park - same as above

The silly options

Sheffield grounds - the next few are long shots but if there weren't other options you'd have to consider them.

Cold West Tuesdays Nights in Stoke?

New Everton Stadium - just on the border of doable and I won't even suggest Anfield but if we were to run out of options this might do in a pinch.

Wembley - this would be massively unpopular and could even be prohibited but would bring in massive revenue and have United at a top tier ground.

I probably forgot a stadium somewhere

 

[MDFC Manager]

Is there definitely a demand for a 100k seater stadium (in terms of attendance)? They'll certainly hike ticket prices so I'd rather they build an excellent 85k seater stadium, with potential for further capacity upgrades.