'get it reset to the culture of mufc having the best stadium in the world'
Talk about shoe-horning unnecessary buzzwords into a sentence.
Old Trafford revamp/could be torn down and rebuilt according to Glazer plans
- Thread starter GE
- Start date
'get it reset to the culture of mufc having the best stadium in the world'
Talk about shoe-horning unnecessary buzzwords into a sentence.
I am surprised that the phrase is still being used without ironical subtext.'get it reset to the culture of mufc having the best stadium in the world'
Talk about shoe-horning unnecessary buzzwords into a sentence.
He's right, though.
The land around Spur's ground was more restrictive than the space at Old Trafford, they had to buy the trading estate around it and the CPO dispute went to the high court. The complexity of the space was the reason why they closed the stadium and played at Wembley for a period of time. For Old Trafford the space around W3 car park is where they'll most likely build, and infinitely easier on planning process than the Spurs stadium.
So torn on this.
On one hand old Trafford is a authentic stadium with so much history and soul.
on the other, it’s falling behind and in bad condition. It’s also been a difficult place for us over the last 9 years... part of it feels like we need to rebuild something different.
Will it be the same if it’s totally rebuilt? I’m not sure. Can’t they expand it and modernise it? Rather than totally rebuild ?
On one hand old Trafford is a authentic stadium with so much history and soul.
on the other, it’s falling behind and in bad condition. It’s also been a difficult place for us over the last 9 years... part of it feels like we need to rebuild something different.
Will it be the same if it’s totally rebuilt? I’m not sure. Can’t they expand it and modernise it? Rather than totally rebuild ?
'get it reset to the culture of mufc having the best stadium in the world'
Talk about shoe-horning unnecessary buzzwords into a sentence.
Is buzzword considered a 'buzzword'?
This. I got a lot of abuse from other posters for saying this is a PR exercise with no substance. People were defending them telling me it takes years to plan this kind of thing etc.
I could plan to build the Taj Mahal and Eiffel Tower all day long but if I don’t have the funding to do it then it’s all absolute bollox. Anyone who understands our finances knows that we are already 600m in debt and have significant commitments required to continue competing.
The Glazers haven’t invested 1p into the club, I am positive no sponsor is stupid enough to contribute anything close to the funding required. Why would a sponsor invest more money into a club than the owners, our club is on the decline and it just wouldn’t make sense.
The only way we are getting a new stadium is if the Glazers sell. I am expecting lots more stories like this to come out while they try to pacify fans to buy themselves more time while they sell more shares/look for a buyer.
That's good to know. But that car park is still in between railworks yard and Bridgewater. Do the Glazers own the car parks immediately surrounding OT?
Then the other question is, if United have to be displaced, where do they play their home matches? RM played theirs at their training complex when Bernabeau was under some construction. Leigh Sports Complex where the women play wouldn't be bad and the club would probably need to invest in that stadium to be more PL and European compliant.
It'll be like the new Yankee Stadium construction more than a decade ago where the new grounds were built adjacent to the old stadium. I'd assume matches will resume play at Old Trafford while construction is ongoing.
I've changed my mind (this was obviously what was holding the Glazers up so now I've given them my approval they'll speed up the process).
I don't mind a new stadium provided that it isn't just some boring cauldron. If it somehow kept the design of the existing stadium, albeit modernised, then I'd love it. I'm not saying that it should be identical but I'm thinking about when you compare the DB5 that James Bond used to have in the 60s, and then they show off the DBS in Casino Royale. It still looks like the same car but now it has modern lines and, at one point, Eva Green leaning over inside it with her big stonking norks nearly popping out. That's what I want to see in the New Old Trafford; big stonking norks.
I don't mind a new stadium provided that it isn't just some boring cauldron. If it somehow kept the design of the existing stadium, albeit modernised, then I'd love it. I'm not saying that it should be identical but I'm thinking about when you compare the DB5 that James Bond used to have in the 60s, and then they show off the DBS in Casino Royale. It still looks like the same car but now it has modern lines and, at one point, Eva Green leaning over inside it with her big stonking norks nearly popping out. That's what I want to see in the New Old Trafford; big stonking norks.
A historical arena being torn down on the command of the glazers would be a monumental mistake. They'd have our new arena look like an NFL stadium.
Real only got away with playing where they did because of COVID.
I suspect there’s only two ways to do it for us.
1) Build the structure up as much as possible around OT, put the seats in and play there whilst knocking the requisite bits of OT down in the process - Spurs, Benfica, etc type approach.
2) Build a completely temporary 60k stadium - Qatar WC or original 2012 Olympics route.
I would expect the best route is to built a brand new 90,000 seater stadium using real football architects that can prioritise the atmosphere and visibility for fans. It would be part of wider "sports village" type regeneration. I mean, that is what needs to happen. For the Glazers to do it, it would either have to be funded through a massive tax payer contribution, a sponsor, or a billion pound loan. Either way, whatever they do will be built into whatever their exit strategy is for the club. Old Trafford is knackered by modern standards. If you were to keep the existing shell, you'd have to build up the south stand, and then complete gut rehab the rest of the structure, including a new roof. They will do whatever is cheaper.
Nobody in their right mind would use "cash on hand", even if they had it in bucketloads.
That's not how such large scale projects are financed and carried out.
Spurs stadium took 11 years from the formal official announcement of the "go ahead", to the opening day.
It took 4 years to build.
.
Last edited:
Just to reiterate what has been said in the press reports, using information given by the club and from comments earlier in this thread....
If a new stadium is chosen, United will not need to temporarily relocate their home games.
Old Trafford would still be available to full capacity, whilst construction took place on the adjacent site.
United already have the land.
Rebuilding the current Old Trafford would entail a significant loss in match day revenue for 2, 3 or more seasons.
It would also extend the build time, if home games were played there during building work. Again, costing more money.
A major refurbishment of the ground and replacement of the South Stand, would also affect match day revenue, over several seasons.
It would also limit the scope to incorporate additional revenue generating facilities, compared to a "clean sheet" design.
Cheaper in the short term, but limiting future potential income growth and limiting the ability to compete financially with the largest clubs in world football.
Do we want Utd to be left behind in the weeds, not only in footballing success, but in the financial stakes and supporter base as well ?
.
If a new stadium is chosen, United will not need to temporarily relocate their home games.
Old Trafford would still be available to full capacity, whilst construction took place on the adjacent site.
United already have the land.
Rebuilding the current Old Trafford would entail a significant loss in match day revenue for 2, 3 or more seasons.
It would also extend the build time, if home games were played there during building work. Again, costing more money.
A major refurbishment of the ground and replacement of the South Stand, would also affect match day revenue, over several seasons.
It would also limit the scope to incorporate additional revenue generating facilities, compared to a "clean sheet" design.
Cheaper in the short term, but limiting future potential income growth and limiting the ability to compete financially with the largest clubs in world football.
Do we want Utd to be left behind in the weeds, not only in footballing success, but in the financial stakes and supporter base as well ?
.
Yes the tax payer will love that. Who owns the stadium then? Who contributes to upgrades in the future?
It could be torn down and not rebuilt, not saying it will be but it could be
Oh that’ll never happen. But it is the US model. And it’s the sort of thing the Glazers would need to actually move forwards with it.
Owners can finance part of the build with their own capital or capital that they raise. There are certain tax write offs that are worth it if they put a significant amount of their own money.
And you're looking at the entire concept/vision, I'm just mentioning the actual financial, building development, and construction phase...that doesn't take 11 years. It can take a few years for an existing venue to be remodeled from financing to new build development to actual construction.
One way or the other, the current stadium has to be demolished if they want to develop the ground around any stadium in the current area.
It's a ton of money....I'd say all in, for the size of OT and the development of the surrounding area to become a year-round complex with retail, commercial, residential homes...it'll be well north of 2 Billion quid and 4 years at least to complete.
It's a ton of money....I'd say all in, for the size of OT and the development of the surrounding area to become a year-round complex with retail, commercial, residential homes...it'll be well north of 2 Billion quid and 4 years at least to complete.
I've been afraid to say it for years so I'm glad Neville has come out with it. Old Trafford has had it's day and needs replacing with a state of the art modern stadium.
Can we rebuild it after we've improved and won the league ? Otherwise funds will go towards the stadium and we'll sink further into oblivion.
That is part of the reason why I'm against it. Those feckers have no clue about historical value of such a monumental sports venue while John W. Henry understood the need to keep Anfield alive albeit expanded in a different way.
Serously, that's the Glazers' fault for not doing what had to be done to do minor renovations at Old Trafford in the first place. FFS, the 2000-2006 design is not supposed to be out of date already.
Last edited:
We could globetrot for a couple of years as well. Play home games across in the US or Middle East. Would be fantastic
Does Old Trafford really hold that much historical significance? Most of the stadium is only 25-30 years old. I can’t imagine there was much opposition when we built the North Stand.
There just seems to be this weird thing where if we rebuilt the four sides of the ground separately that’s ok even though it is to all intents and purposes just as much as new stadium.
IF and it’s a big IF this is actually to happen I suspect that if a new stadium could be built next to Old Trafford, enabling games to be played at full capacity while construction is done, then that’s where their thinking would be, that way they don’t lose out on match day revenue and that seems to make sense to me.
The post started off intriguing, drifted into horrid Clarkson territory and ended up veering down a cul-de-sac of tits.
Well done sir
Yeah good post. The current stadium will always have the railway and canal hemming it in.
Something like this would work
https://www.google.com/search?q=met...Q&biw=1194&bih=715&dpr=2#imgrc=-DdU_pxo7WvcyM
https://www.google.com/search?q=met...Q&biw=1194&bih=715&dpr=2#imgrc=-DdU_pxo7WvcyM
I'd keep the South Stand and rebuild the rest in phases over the next decade. The South Stand has a lot of historical significance.
And it's basically the biggest stumbling block we have...
Can't help but love the history behind it. This way we'll have a new stadium and keep the most historical part. It won't happen but we can dream.
With the price of steel and energy right now, I wouldn't be surprised if they find it's the right time to put the project on hold.
Agreed, its not happening any time soon. Personally i doubt anything material happens under the parasites, short of a bit of a limited 'refurb' of current ground.
Like triggers brush in fools and horses
That was a classic.Like triggers brush in fools and horses
That's 100% how it should be done, it's how Old Trafford got as big as it currently is after all. Would take 4-6 years but probably the best way to do t so the team doesn't have to move.
If there is one stadium we should design after, it’s the Indianapolis colts one which is posted a couple of pages back but even better. Completely mesmerised me and won me over. Never saw a stadium like this. feck these soulless modern stadias that look like toilet bowls. I want a new stadium with soul of old Trafford and the design like the colts one would not only be unique but it looks cool as feck and ironically screams Manchester. It’s like going back in time , like a blend of the past and future.
Let's design the ground in the shape of the club crest
Looking at Google, isn't the point of that the roof? How would that sort of design be translatable to a new Old Trafford?