Options on the Olympic Stadium move

Discussion in 'The New Stadium' started by chrissivad, Jan 13, 2011.

What would you do?

  1. Give Up on English Football

    3.9%
  2. Surport a nother English Team

    0.7%
  3. Only Attend Away Games

    2.8%
  4. Grudgingly Surpost Spurs

    12.4%
  5. Happily Surposr Sprus

    80.2%
  1. Rout-Ledge

    Rout-Ledge Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,887
    Ratings Received:
    +6,131 / 175 / -47
    pfff. Another way of putting it could be 'the club will have filtered out the stubborn as mule fans that put postcodes before genuine chances of furthering the clubs success'. Both are equally generalizing, and don't hold weight. I'd support the team equally in Stratford in the Europa League as I would at WHite Hart Lane in the Champions League. Where do you pigeon hole me?
     
  2. steve

    steve Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,389
    Ratings Received:
    +1,596 / 38 / -9
    As a selfish sod who's only concerned with travelling time. At some point please try seeing both sides....then you won't be so easy to pigeon hole .....
     
  3. Rout-Ledge

    Rout-Ledge Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,887
    Ratings Received:
    +6,131 / 175 / -47
    The whole point of my argument was that there is no definitive argument either way...re read what I wrote
     
  4. Samson

    Samson Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,154
    Ratings Received:
    +337 / 64 / -25
    Maybe that was too strong. Perhaps it would be better put that the club had decided that a seat at the top (top) table is worth a lot of heritage and history. That's the only thing that can possibly excuse us moving to Stratford. And it's a trade-off the vast majority of fans will approve of, as the Bale poll demonstrates, and the reaction of fans at clubs with sugar daddies shows. But it's a trade-off that once made, can't be taken back.
     
  5. bones82

    bones82 Member

    Messages:
    106
    Ratings Received:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    £250 Million vs £450 Million is a compelling argument.
    Why spend an extra £200 million for a similar sized stadium, with worse transport links?

    It has been suggested that the Mayor encouraged Spurs to bid for the Olympic Stadium, are we doing him a favour taking over the Olympic Stadium? Another Millennium Dome isn't wanted.
    Does the Mayor of London not care about Tottenham?

    However taking the best thing out of Tottenham is going to leave a massive void in one of the poorest parts of the country, is the government going to fund regeneration in Tottenham on it's own? Or wouldn't it be wiser to work with Tottenham redeveloping the area?

    ".. it was more than a little unfortunate that government did not line up a football anchor for the stadium back when construction begun.
    Firstly, the £533m construction cost of the stadium is clearly expensive even by the Premiership's standards and even taking into account the contamination and infrastructure works needed. I am told that Arsenal's splendid Emirates stadium project cost around £390m including major infrastructure works while Tottenham is understood to be budgeting £250m to build a new stadium at Stratford.
    The reason that the Olympic Stadium is so expensive is in part because it needs to be able to be scaled back to a 20,000 seat athletics stadium post Games if that is what the market demands. Do not ask me why but that apparently has made the stadium quite expensive to construct technically."
    http://www.estatesgazette.com/blogs/olympics/2011/01/spurs-stadium-plans-raise-uncomfortable-questions.html
    So if Spurs do demolish this £533 million pound stadium, it's been a total waste of tax payers money, as a lot of that cost was so that it could be scaled down afterwards.

    My preference is to stay in Tottenham, but of course I can see why the club would want to save 200 Million pounds.
    I hope some public money becomes available to narrow that gap, or even more public money will be required later to redevelop Tottenham without the help of Spurs.
    Certainly more than the £40 Million pound saving of public money by choosing the Spurs bid over West Hams bid.

    I wonder what sharing the stadium with music concerts is going to do for the turf?
    Ideally you wouldn't chose to move your stadium outside of your fan base and into the fan base of another club, especially when they are bidding for the stadium too.

    Therefore I'll "Grudgingly Support Spurs" if they move to Stratford (It makes commercial sense)
    But I'll be pissed off with the government for wasting lots of money on a scalable stadium that wasn't required, and be demanding to know what their regeneration scheme is for Tottenham having had the Mayor of London suggest Spurs bid to move to Stratford.
    Maybe if they hadn't have wasted it on the stadium, and West Ham had planed to move there from the beginning, there would be money to redevelop Tottenham!
     
  6. KingKay

    KingKay Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,396
    Media:
    4
    Albums:
    1
    Ratings Received:
    +13,963 / 266 / -53

Share This Page