Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
People seem to keep talking about relegation and how many fans they'd get in the championship, its laughable, theres essentially no question that if they are relegated they'd be up within a season, 2 at most. Also, they won't be in the stadium till 2014, they are in a "troubled" period which came about 90% due to injurys and not much else, pre injuries almost the same squad finished WELL into the top half of the table, they've still got several long term injuries, Collison was epic in Zola's first season.
Basically championship talk is rubbish, straw man arguments, even if they went down this season they'd be back up WELL before they were due to move into the stadium.
Also, people tend to forget one glaringly obvious thing, West Ham has one of the biggest area's inside the stands as it is, the newest stand is about eleventy billion miles away from the pitch anyway.
As said, though I'm taking it at face value as a fact, when I haven't got proof of it, its said that the furthest seat at the OS stadium under West Ham's plans would be closer than Wembley's furthest seats, and hell, has anyone been to the top tier of the Nou Camp, lol, complaining about the ability to fill a stadium or see the football, sorry, its rubbish, complete rubbish. You think the person right at the back of a 80k seater Spurs stadium won't have the same view as the West Ham fan, you're talking out your backside.
Currently, sitting bottom, West Ham's season average seems to be around 33.5k, with most games being between 32.5 and 34.5k, quite funny that West ham vs Arsenal was one of the lowest at about 32.5k, some fans expected a bad day me thinks.
They have expensive tickets, cheaper tickets will fill more seats, as with most bigger stadiums, the further away the seats, the furthest back will be cheaper, and you'd expect a price drop on the closest seats aswell, they'll quite easily be able to increase capacity, their financial clout will increase quite dramatically aswell which will likely lead to increased buying power and quality in the squad.
This is all ignoring the fact, again, that there were VERY SPECIFIC CRITERIA for getting the stadium.
Just because it won't be the single best football stadium in the world ever, doesn't make it a bad plan.
West Ham's plan = 3 happy clubs, 3 new stadiums, many many sports having improved facilities AND London can compete on an international level for athletics events. Would a 60k seater stadium when going for other international athletics competitions be improved, or worsened by moving to a 25k seater stadium that wouldn't be ready for many many years........
Spurs plan ONLY helped Spurs, did waste a LOT of money and a lot of time, and screws over everyone including their own fans, it was daft from the get go, I don't begrudge them trying, saving 100-200mil on improved stations, predone foundations and tarting up the area, who wouldn't want to save that, but its still a bad plan for London, the taxpayer, all the clubs in the area, the fans, athletics fans, etc, etc.
Basically championship talk is rubbish, straw man arguments, even if they went down this season they'd be back up WELL before they were due to move into the stadium.
Also, people tend to forget one glaringly obvious thing, West Ham has one of the biggest area's inside the stands as it is, the newest stand is about eleventy billion miles away from the pitch anyway.
As said, though I'm taking it at face value as a fact, when I haven't got proof of it, its said that the furthest seat at the OS stadium under West Ham's plans would be closer than Wembley's furthest seats, and hell, has anyone been to the top tier of the Nou Camp, lol, complaining about the ability to fill a stadium or see the football, sorry, its rubbish, complete rubbish. You think the person right at the back of a 80k seater Spurs stadium won't have the same view as the West Ham fan, you're talking out your backside.
Currently, sitting bottom, West Ham's season average seems to be around 33.5k, with most games being between 32.5 and 34.5k, quite funny that West ham vs Arsenal was one of the lowest at about 32.5k, some fans expected a bad day me thinks.
They have expensive tickets, cheaper tickets will fill more seats, as with most bigger stadiums, the further away the seats, the furthest back will be cheaper, and you'd expect a price drop on the closest seats aswell, they'll quite easily be able to increase capacity, their financial clout will increase quite dramatically aswell which will likely lead to increased buying power and quality in the squad.
This is all ignoring the fact, again, that there were VERY SPECIFIC CRITERIA for getting the stadium.
Just because it won't be the single best football stadium in the world ever, doesn't make it a bad plan.
West Ham's plan = 3 happy clubs, 3 new stadiums, many many sports having improved facilities AND London can compete on an international level for athletics events. Would a 60k seater stadium when going for other international athletics competitions be improved, or worsened by moving to a 25k seater stadium that wouldn't be ready for many many years........
Spurs plan ONLY helped Spurs, did waste a LOT of money and a lot of time, and screws over everyone including their own fans, it was daft from the get go, I don't begrudge them trying, saving 100-200mil on improved stations, predone foundations and tarting up the area, who wouldn't want to save that, but its still a bad plan for London, the taxpayer, all the clubs in the area, the fans, athletics fans, etc, etc.
![[J.D.C]](/styles/overclockers/avatars/3.png){kind=avatar}
