Stadium to be 71k.

Danners9

Used in a Squad Rotation System
Joined
Mar 30, 2004
Messages
12,425
#2
San Francisco 49ers using the Spurs training centre this week... hosting the NFL games in London would be a nice little earner.
 

penfold_99

Active Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Messages
631
Thread starter #3
I can see why 71k is needed as every time NFL goes to Wembley they sell out 90K.
I could even see levy thinking about having a spurs NFL team in partnership with AEG.
 

Geyzer Soze

Fearlessly the idiot faced the crowd
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
19,940
#4
It's not so much hosting nfl games, it's more about having a London based nfl franchise I think
 

OmarsComing

Mentally Disturbed Individual!
Joined
Jan 2, 2011
Messages
7,255
#6
I can see why 71k is needed as every time NFL goes to Wembley they sell out 90K.
I could even see levy thinking about having a spurs NFL team in partnership with AEG.
Yes but these are novelty matches that only happen once or twice a season. What would happen when the NFL team isn't doing any good and after 6 of the 16 regular season matches there is no hope in qualifying for the playoffs?
 

absolute bobbins

Vous Êtes Des Assassins
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
9,433
#9
If they're redesigning to incorporate NFL specs all it means is larger dressing rooms (NFL games are technically 43 a side), maybe a couple of rows of seats capable of retracting and better phone/wifi signal.

It doesn't mean we're getting a tenant at the Lane, it doesn't mean we're ground sharing or revisiting a deal with AEG and it certainly doesn't mean we're going up to 71,000 seats, besides, the rumours attributed to a chap at KSS actually said 65,000.

Just remember that Triffic Tottenham is not news and never has been, it's a blog so it's only opinion
 

Spurs 1961

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
3,972
#10
NFL is so boring!

This kind of deal seems to fit the bill with the way sport franchises are going between the two countries
 

jambreck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
3,200
#16
If they're redesigning to incorporate NFL specs all it means is larger dressing rooms (NFL games are technically 43 a side), maybe a couple of rows of seats capable of retracting and better phone/wifi signal.

It doesn't mean we're getting a tenant at the Lane, it doesn't mean we're ground sharing or revisiting a deal with AEG and it certainly doesn't mean we're going up to 71,000 seats, besides, the rumours attributed to a chap at KSS actually said 65,000.

Just remember that Triffic Tottenham is not news and never has been, it's a blog so it's only opinion
Good point about the dressing rooms.

The Keirle info shouldn't be casually dismissed, though. For starters, he's not just a chap at KSS. He's the chap! And the chances are that if he hadn't written an email to that same poster on skyscrapercity a few months ago, none of us would even know yet that KSS are off the job and that Populous are on it.

The 71K talk, by the way, comes from the fact that Keirle specifically said that the stadium that Populous are designing for Spurs (or at least one of the options) would have a capacity of 65K for NFL games.

That would quite likely mean a potential capacity of 70K or so for Spurs games.
 

jambreck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
3,200
#17
NFL is so boring!

This kind of deal seems to fit the bill with the way sport franchises are going between the two countries
If it gets us a bigger and better stadium, far more valuable naming rights and greater revenues from ticket and corporate sales while being able to share the funding and maintenance burden, then it's a no brainer.

A gift horse. Levy would be mad to look it in the mouth.
 

HotspurFC1950

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
4,223
#18
If it gets us a bigger and better stadium, far more valuable naming rights and greater revenues from ticket and corporate sales while being able to share the funding and maintenance burden, then it's a no brainer.

A gift horse. Levy would be mad to look it in the mouth.
It is pure and utter brilliance if true and I certainly hope it is true.
 

Spurs 1961

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
3,972
#20
An average game has 12.5 minutes of actual playing time, that's fucked up
It would be great if we could use our whole squad in a football game. To defend corners bring on every defender we have, maybe with three goalkeepers, and all the tallest players. Have specialists that come on to take corners, free licks, penalties...even take the kick off. Then after a long run the length of the pitch Dembele could come off for a five minute rest etc., etc. I can't remember the stats but I think right now the average time the ball is in play is about 60mins so if we stopped the clock every time the ball was not in play, using these new rules, a game might last about five or six hours
 
Top