New Everton Stadium

[toffee66]

On capacity I should add that I have recently been involved via a major consulting firm in some financial assessments for NFL who are exploring whether smaller stadia that lose the upper tier(s) of typically costly to build cheap seats would be more effective for a number of existing franchises and some potential expansion cities in college with lower core urban populations.

The data strongly favours 40-50k designs as optimal for some current/potential locations vs. more typical NFL 60-70k, particularly when the public purse will not open to Finance a large chunk. The financially optimal solution is not always the biggest.

Dan Meis talked a lot about that and I suspect we are more Cincinnati Bengals than Dallas Cowboys in our realistic commercial potential, even if we do not truly want to admit that.

 

[Dixieslaces]

Jesus, the bedwetting in the thread, over what "might" be a "poor" atmosphere is absolutely nuts!

As I said previously, the Spurs mate who is an ST there, says the atmosphere is amazing, we all heard it on the TV the other night but he also stated it can be like library too.

So, there's your answer.

It WILL be amazing and memorable when we want it to be.

It WILL also be dead as a Dodo on some days.

It's a fact of life, it's not always what we want it to be but we maje the best of it.

Get on board with it, it's happening and it WILL be an Iconic, Waterfront Landmark, long after i have left this life, I will miss Goodison, massively but conjecture over what may and may not be is simply a waste of energy.

I expect it to Bounce on many occasions, I want it to Bounce on every occasion but my expectations will be dictated by what we witness, that is what will dictate any atmosphere.


UTFT

 

[johnjoeefc]

On capacity I should add that I have recently been involved via a major consulting firm in some financial assessments for NFL who are exploring whether smaller stadia that lose the upper tier(s) of typically costly to build cheap seats would be more effective for a number of existing franchises and some potential expansion cities in college with lower core urban populations.

The data strongly favours 40-50k designs as optimal for some current/potential locations vs. more typical NFL 60-70k, particularly when the public purse will not open to Finance a large chunk. The financially optimal solution is not always the biggest.

Dan Meis talked a lot about that and I suspect we are more Cincinnati Bengals than Dallas Cowboys in our realistic commercial potential, even if we do not truly want to admit that.

Cincinatti bengals is a little bit harsh mate. I would say seattle seahawks is a fairer comparison.

 

[Gardocki]

Surely you can understand the disappointment on here though. We were all expecting a state of the art, atmospheric cauldron of blue noise which would be a ground breaking phenomenon.

It's now sounding like they ditched the original plans and have settled for some cheaper alternative which would be a very slight improvement on Goodison In capacity and probably loses the atmosphere of Goodison. For me I'm pretty gutted but not surprised because this is what they do isn't it.

Surely if your going to build a new stadium that your expecting to last 100 years or so, your going to do the very best available worldwide at the time of building like Spurs have done. Now people are saying hopefully it will be nearly as good the Allianz stadium or comparing our next home end to the Aston Villa Holte end. Really?

One of the massive coups about wanting to stay up and going forward was this sparkling brand new state of the art stadium we are all desperate to move into. But with this new underwhelming news regarding the stadium it's made the future look pretty bleak and uninspiring.

Come on Everton strive for better for once

The stadium is fantastic. I hadn’t changed in the last few months. People are just bed wetting on here and you are biting.

 

[ste d' indica]

Now I’m picturing it with retractable spikes like in the fight between Flash Gordon and Prince Barin

 

[ste d' indica]

I quite like going to different parts of the ground, its one of the few advantages of not having a season ticket. Not been in the Park end or top balcony for a while though because, ... well just because.

Yeah, I always let my seat go for early cup games and sit somewhere else, I've watched games from every stand and most parts of Goodison.

 

[Bluerover]

Was watching and have to say the noise generated was very loud, even the commentators were stating it, although i think it may have been a snidey jibe at us lot due to the coverage we have got from Leicester etc, they cant have us being the best!! This may alos be my Blue Tinted specs too as it was loud and im sure not ALL the media hate us????
Impressed with Spurs stadium to be honest, looks and sounds great.

Shearer wass glowing about the team and the fans. I can't remember him being so positive about us before.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Overlapping stands would mean the lower tier would have to be further away from the pitch and a lot shallower.

The opposite of what is needed to create a Bear pit atmosphere.

Also, with a change in safe standing regulations the capacity can jump up to the late 50 - early 60k.

All on the same tight, intimate footprint. Which means - intimidating atmosphere.

The club have got it right.

Yes, sightline geometry can work like that, however several stadia have overlapping tiers without having to move front rows significantly far back. Yes, if you're going to have 4 tiers and 2 rows of boxes within a restricted height envelope, as at the Emirates, then the lower tier will need to be quite shallow and set back. Spurs did the sightline geometry better and has overlapping tiers without that shallow setback lower tier.

When Simon Inglis wrote about stadium history and design, he said Goodison Park is revered for its great atmosphere on special occasions. What he was refering to was the fact that Goodison didn't really have a large typical home end (or dare I say Kop). It was a complete stadium, with standing and sitting on all sides. Because it was built on a confined site, the club decided to build upwards. The result was a stadium that could hold almost 80k on a site that was smaller than some grounds that held less than 55k. The noise came from all sides. The high stands, though not really conducive for spreading long convoluted songs on those lesser occasions, did form a tight cavernous wall for those reactions to every bad tackle or great pass, generating that famous Goodison roar.

It isn't really about how close the front row is, but how close the average distance is. If by overlapping tiers, the back rows of upper stands are brought forward by 10-20m.... then those sitting in the back row of the opposite stand could be upto 20-40m closer to each other (or over half a pitch width). That in essence is what created the bearpit phenomenon at GP.

 

[anton66]

Jesus, the bedwetting in the thread, over what "might" be a "poor" atmosphere is absolutely nuts!

As I said previously, the Spurs mate who is an ST there, says the atmosphere is amazing, we all heard it on the TV the other night but he also stated it can be like library too.

So, there's your answer.

It WILL be amazing and memorable when we want it to be.

It WILL also be dead as a Dodo on some days.

It's a fact of life, it's not always what we want it to be but we maje the best of it.

Get on board with it, it's happening and it WILL be an Iconic, Waterfront Landmark, long after i have left this life, I will miss Goodison, massively but conjecture over what may and may not be is simply a waste of energy.

I expect it to Bounce on many occasions, I want it to Bounce on every occasion but my expectations will be dictated by what we witness, that is what will dictate any atmosphere.


UTFT

Unreal the comments on here regarding atmosphere. Let’s get the bloody thing built.

 

[jonnyboy316]

Cincinatti bengals is a little bit harsh mate. I would say seattle seahawks is a fairer comparison.

Philadelphia or Buffalo I reckon

 

[Tom Hughes]

Jesus, the bedwetting in the thread, over what "might" be a "poor" atmosphere is absolutely nuts!

As I said previously, the Spurs mate who is an ST there, says the atmosphere is amazing, we all heard it on the TV the other night but he also stated it can be like library too.

So, there's your answer.

It WILL be amazing and memorable when we want it to be.

It WILL also be dead as a Dodo on some days.

It's a fact of life, it's not always what we want it to be but we maje the best of it.

Get on board with it, it's happening and it WILL be an Iconic, Waterfront Landmark, long after i have left this life, I will miss Goodison, massively but conjecture over what may and may not be is simply a waste of energy.

I expect it to Bounce on many occasions, I want it to Bounce on every occasion but my expectations will be dictated by what we witness, that is what will dictate any atmosphere.


UTFT

I don't see anyone bedwetting at all. It's just a basic discussion and if people have slight reservations or concerns about certain aspects, they're entitled to mention them...... or do we all simply accept everything were fed?

When the club was pushing hard for Kirkby and KEIOC and their supporters came on various forums to discuss their concerns. Many people attacked them too for being "amateurs" and "bed wetters" and told them to shut up and just get behind it etc..... Eventually all of their concerns were fully vindicated. They had seen through the hard sell and sales patter...... and one by one the lies were exposed. So let's not be so dismissive of people who might not share your views.

I'm sure the Spurs fan you mention is happy with it, but tbh it is on another level to BMD on several metrics. In terms of atmosphere, they do have the largest home end in the country (almost 50% larger than our south stand), which we wouldv'e matched in the east-west configuration. Unfortunately that and the 3 tier side stands went after the failed commonwealth games bid, but some still have that imagery in their minds. Spurs corporate provision has its own elevated tier with substantially more boxes and lounge space. Their stadium didn't cost 1 billion.... the entire project did, which involved several other buildings and infrastructure works.

 

[muckers]

Yes, sightline geometry can work like that, however several stadia have overlapping tiers without having to move front rows significantly far back. Yes, if you're going to have 4 tiers and 2 rows of boxes within a restricted height envelope, as at the Emirates, then the lower tier will need to be quite shallow and set back. Spurs did the sightline geometry better and has overlapping tiers without that shallow setback lower tier.

When Simon Inglis wrote about stadium history and design, he said Goodison Park is revered for its great atmosphere on special occasions. What he was refering to was the fact that Goodison didn't really have a large typical home end (or dare I say Kop). It was a complete stadium, with standing and sitting on all sides. Because it was built on a confined site, the club decided to build upwards. The result was a stadium that could hold almost 80k on a site that was smaller than some grounds that held less than 55k. The noise came from all sides. The high stands, though not really conducive for spreading long convoluted songs on those lesser occasions, did form a tight cavernous wall for those reactions to every bad tackle or great pass, generating that famous Goodison roar.

It isn't really about how close the front row is, but how close the average distance is. If by overlapping tiers, the back rows of upper stands are brought forward by 10-20m.... then those sitting in the back row of the opposite stand could be upto 20-40m closer to each other (or over half a pitch width). That in essence is what created the bearpit phenomenon at GP.

Yes, sightline geometry can work like that, however several stadia have overlapping tiers without having to move front rows significantly far back. Yes, if you're going to have 4 tiers and 2 rows of boxes within a restricted height envelope, as at the Emirates, then the lower tier will need to be quite shallow and set back. Spurs did the sightline geometry better and has overlapping tiers without that shallow setback lower tier.

When Simon Inglis wrote about stadium history and design, he said Goodison Park is revered for its great atmosphere on special occasions. What he was refering to was the fact that Goodison didn't really have a large typical home end (or dare I say Kop). It was a complete stadium, with standing and sitting on all sides. Because it was built on a confined site, the club decided to build upwards. The result was a stadium that could hold almost 80k on a site that was smaller than some grounds that held less than 55k. The noise came from all sides. The high stands, though not really conducive for spreading long convoluted songs on those lesser occasions, did form a tight cavernous wall for those reactions to every bad tackle or great pass, generating that famous Goodison roar.

It isn't really about how close the front row is, but how close the average distance is. If by overlapping tiers, the back rows of upper stands are brought forward by 10-20m.... then those sitting in the back row of the opposite stand could be upto 20-40m closer to each other (or over half a pitch width). That in essence is what created the bearpit phenomenon at GP.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. Overlapping tiers would’ve meant the first row being moved several metres back. A big no-no for atmosphere.

Signal Iduna Park, the most atmospheric stadium in Europe, Doesn’t have overlapping tiers as they wanted the lower tiers to be as steep as possible and the first row as close to the pitch as possible.

Juventus new stadium is similar, no overlapping tiers, close to the pitch and as steep a rake as possible.

 

[AsiaAsia82]

I think we need to recognise that Spurs are in a capital city with a much bigger population and we are in a provincial city (with 2 big clubs) and therefore demand for tickets will be lower, especially with visitors/ occasional attendees.
Saying that I’m happy to be wrong if we sell out every game and still have a ST waiting list after a few years in the new ground.

 

[muckers]

I don't see anyone bedwetting at all. It's just a basic discussion and if people have slight reservations or concerns about certain aspects, they're entitled to mention them...... or do we all simply accept everything were fed?

When the club was pushing hard for Kirkby and KEIOC and their supporters came on various forums to discuss their concerns. Many people attacked them too for being "amateurs" and "bed wetters" and told them to shut up and just get behind it etc..... Eventually all of their concerns were fully vindicated. They had seen through the hard sell and sales patter...... and one by one the lies were exposed. So let's not be so dismissive of people who might not share your views.

I'm sure the Spurs fan you mention is happy with it, but tbh it is on another level to BMD on several metrics. In terms of atmosphere, they do have the largest home end in the country (almost 50% larger than our south stand), which we wouldv'e matched in the east-west configuration. Unfortunately that and the 3 tier side stands went after the failed commonwealth games bid, but some still have that imagery in their minds. Spurs corporate provision has its own elevated tier with substantially more boxes and lounge space. Their stadium didn't cost 1 billion.... the entire project did, which involved several other buildings and infrastructure works.

Their new home end cannot increase its capacity through safe standing, ours can.

We could have a 15k home end, through a change in legislation, which would be far more intimate than theirs.

 

[Tom Hughes]

Their new home end cannot increase its capacity through safe standing, ours can.

We could have a 15k home end, through a change in legislation, which would be far more intimate than theirs.

Theirs was designed for safestanding too. The whole lower section is already set up for it. They also have a super riser half way up to ensure that those seated behind will still have clear sightlines. I think they also have bigger tread depths there than those proposed at BMD, meaning that if the safe standing ratio is increased beyond 1:1, then they will be able to have a higher ratio than us.