New Stadium or Revamp Old Trafford

[ZupZup]

I think if we have enough land adjacent to Old Trafford, to build a new 100k seater stadium, that is what we should be doing. It’s time to move forwards and whilst I still love the existing ground with all its faults… I don’t think refurbishment is the answer to future proof the best club in the world.

If we had to knock down Old Trafford to build a new ground… I can’t say I would enjoy the idea of ground sharing in the interim.

 

[Hughes35]

Honestly, the only answer to this is "which ever is most cost effective to get the desired end result"

if it costs 1Billion to upgrade the current stadium so it seats 100,000 fans, has all the best hospitality, looks good and has anything else needed like a retractable pitch etc but it costs 2billion to do the same in a new stadium then the answer is a refurb.

If the train track means a refurb is more expensive, we can get grants from the government for a new build so that swings costs the other way, we should build new.

Really this should be the only way of looking at it. Things like ground sharing should only be a consideration if the business prospects are very similar.

 

[Lentwood]

New stadium. I am not sure how practical simply 'revamping' Old Trafford would be. I'm no architect, but OT doesn't follow the same sort of structural design as modern-day 'super stadiums' and there must be a reason for that.

 

[TsuWave]

Don’t know how to articulate this, but if we do build a new ground I hope they keep the “closer to the pitch” thing that OT has compared to say Arsenal’s Emirates or West Ham’s London Stadium

 

[UpWithRivers]

Whilst I love traditions and history, I also believe that if you get stuck in the past you can kill your future. We need to move on to a new future. We should be the center of excellence. The center of innovation. The center of progress. We don't want to be the Wembley of the North. We want to be the best fkn stadium in the country by a mile. And thats not just capacity. But everything. From facilities to sound, to feel (eg closer to the pitch) to everything.
Do whatever it takes to make that happen.

 

[neon_badger]

Any government funding should be directed towards the community, if a new stadium is to happen I'd like to see the old stadium, or parts of it, or even just the land used for something like an academy/college/University. You could split it into something like sports science /media / broadcasting/catering/ hospitality/building maintenance etc.. with a view to helping local people gain work in the new stadium, club infrastructure or even just in Manchester itself, the city is growing too fast, gentrification is edging towards Old Trafford via Hulme, Ordsall and Salford Quays. I know I'm probably living in a socialist dreamworld, but I'd hate to see the original Old Trafford land sold to developers so they can build more swanky apartments with dodgy money under the 'leveling up' pretence.

 

[giggs-beckham]

Honestly, the only answer to this is "which ever is most cost effective to get the desired end result"

if it costs 1Billion to upgrade the current stadium so it seats 100,000 fans, has all the best hospitality, looks good and has anything else needed like a retractable pitch etc but it costs 2billion to do the same in a new stadium then the answer is a refurb.

If the train track means a refurb is more expensive, we can get grants from the government for a new build so that swings costs the other way, we should build new.

Really this should be the only way of looking at it. Things like ground sharing should only be a consideration if the business prospects are very similar.

It's not just about initial outlay, as a new stadium would generate more income over time.

 

[JeffFromHK]

Rebuilding a new stadium at the same site and call it "old trafford" (keeping all the names of Stretford End, Sir Alex Ferguson Stand, etc) would be nice.

 

[diarm]

A new stadium is only palatable if it is something unique. It needs to reflect the area and the history of the club and old ground.

It can’t just be another shiny bowl like Spurs or Arsenal have.

 

[Hughes35]

It's not just about initial outlay, as a new stadium would generate more income over time.

Maybe I wasn't clear on that. I mentioned overall business prospect later on but should have been clearer.

Although a new stadium only generates more income that a refurb if it's better than a refurb (In theory). If you do a proper refurb it should match a new stadium spec and also bring the same income.

 

[FrankDrebin]

Well United seem to want the 'best in class ' so that obviously means a new stadia too and, much as I love OT, its very dated now.

 

[Plant0x84]

That’s a great photo! I’d forgotten how much of the original 1973 stand had survived; the additions completely transformed its appearance.

Just goes to show, if we could do something like this to the Sir Bobby stand, rework the whole roof/facade and renovate the other stands we get ‘Old Trafford’ on the same site and a state of the art stadium - like the Bernabeu.
Will be interesting to see which way it goes.

 

[Plant0x84]

Well United seem to want the 'best in class ' so that obviously means a new stadia too and, much as I love OT, its very dated now.

Not necessarily

 

[FrankDrebin]

Not necessarily

I would like a new stadium

 

[Plant0x84]

I would like a new stadium

Fair enough!

 

[redcucumber]

Whilst I love traditions and history, I also believe that if you get stuck in the past you can kill your future. We need to move on to a new future. We should be the center of excellence. The center of innovation. The center of progress. We don't want to be the Wembley of the North. We want to be the best fkn stadium in the country by a mile. And thats not just capacity. But everything. From facilities to sound, to feel (eg closer to the pitch) to everything.
Do whatever it takes to make that happen.

Real Madrid have just done a serious start of the art revamp of the Bernabeu. I'm assuming Old Trafford doesn't have the fundamentals to allow for something of a similar ilk?

 

[astracrazy]

I’ve always generally lent towards a new build for a variety of reasons.

1. We can build adjacent to the current stadium meaning no loss in revenue during the build or rent paid to City or the Manchester council.

2. You could keep the South stand and Munich tunnel as a one stand Reserve/Womens stadium. The East/West and North stands are so new anyway that retains the history and the original pitch.

3. A new stadium would have a better atmosphere, bigger capacity, more opportunity to be earn additional revenue, better facilities for both players and guests, better legroom. Renovating doesn’t solve all of the issues with Old Trafford.

4. A lot of cost that gets thrown in with other builds is the land cost. We’ve already got ahead of that so should save us some money. We also don’t have to face London land prices.

5. Naming rights. While I don’t love the idea of naming the stadium it is less annoying on a new stadium. If the old stadium was retained as a reserve/women’s ground then that could keep the Old Trafford moniker. The new stadium could be the ‘Ineos Theatre of Dreams’ or whatever. Barcelona got $310m for their Spotify deal so it’s not unfeasible we could cover a good chunk of the build by selling the rights.

I've yet to see anything credible how your first point could be done. Every map someone posts with some placement of a new stadium always overlaps it with the train depot. I'm 100% behind a new stadium, a modern take on the current Old Trafford style would be nice, but I could see us having to do a Spurs to do it.

Real Madrid have just done a serious start of the art revamp of the Bernabeu. I'm assuming Old Trafford doesn't have the fundamentals to allow for something of a similar ilk?

But did Real Madrid have any other option but to do a revamp? We have so much land around our stadium we can at least build a new stadium around the current, only maybe having to move out of Old Trafford for a season, if that, depending on the overlap. A new stadium for Madrid would be a complete relocation or moving out of their stadium for years whilst the current is demolished for a new one to be built on top.

 

[NLunited]

Most other teams are building new shiny modern stadiums. Maybe we should go the other way: refurb. Upgrade/add facilities and increase capacity. We can keep all the historic names.

As long as it doesn‘t cost more than starting over new.

 

[tenpoless]

I wonder what would happen to Old Trafford if they decided to build a new one? I get that some old stadiums get demolished and turned into something else but Old Trafford is still functional and will still be functional even a decade from now.

 

[JB7]

No I believe only the Stretford End was demolished in 1992 and the North Stand in 1995. Much of the lower tier of the East Stand is older than that and parts of the South Stand are original from when the stadium was first built in 1910, the Munich Tunnel survived the bombing during WW2 which destroyed a lot of the stadium.

If we're building a new stadium then we should just build it somewhere else and name it something else. Either on the land next to OT or elsewhere. Renovate and repurpose the current OT, retaining the historical parts as a Museum/Youth Stadium/Fan Zone etc.

I didn't think that tunnel was built until long after WW2. I've done some digging online and found pictures of OT in the 60s and 70s with just a pathway along the outside of the South Stand too which seems to support this. The old players tunnel in the South Stand is still the original if that's what you mean?

 

[matherto]

A new stadium is only palatable if it is something unique. It needs to reflect the area and the history of the club and old ground.

It can’t just be another shiny bowl like Spurs or Arsenal have.

But the old ground is a bowl - it was a shiny one in 1910 when it was built, it was a shiny one in 1994 when it was rebuilt after the Stretford End was finished too (becoming the prototype for all the single tier bowls that came in the 90's for lower Prem/Football league clubs - Middlesbrough, Derby, Leicester, Southampton, Sunderland, etc all are smaller versions of the 1994 version of OT)

Surely if it reflected the old ground it would be a bowl.

Not necessarily

No it does.

There nothing they could do with the existing structure so even if they stupidly decided to build in the same footprint/location then it'd be a new ground. Ship of Theseus stuff.

I think we'll build on the current land and work out the details as we go, could end up with a strangely shaped stadium like Brentford's ground given the shape of the land.

Actually think we'd be better rotating the pitch 90 degrees and moving it northwest a bit and that would give us a better space to make something, but then you'd lose the idea that the Stretford End is that 'side' of the ground.

 

[goalscholes]

Most other teams are building new shiny modern stadiums. Maybe we should go the other way: refurb. Upgrade/add facilities and increase capacity. We can keep all the historic names.

As long as it doesn‘t cost more than starting over new.

As discussed earlier in the thread, their refurb took almost 5 years, cost half the price of a new stadium and only added 4k seats.

It looks great, but it will produce less revenue than a state of the art stadium and will have more ongoing maintainance costs.

 

[RoyH1]

As discussed earlier in the thread, their refurb took almost 5 years, cost half the price of a new stadium and only added 4k seats.

It looks great, but it will produce less revenue than a state of the art stadium and will have more ongoing maintainance costs.

Where do you have his from? It's precisely the reason why they stayed where they are in central Madrid and didn't build in the land they own north of Madrid.. With the central location, roof and the retractable pitch it's projected to be a goldmine for them. Taylor Swift, NFL, NBA, it's all coming there now.

They didn't add a lot more seats true, but they added lots of VIP areas and seating so I suppose they were going for having more tickets for tourists. Terrible for the atmosphere, great for the bottom line.

 

[Blades1889]

From a neutral standpoint, it would be a massive shame to demolish Old Trafford. I’m sure it has its faults but it has a soul and a history that you can’t replicate.

Upton Park, Highbury, Maine Road, White Hart Lane to name a few all now sadly gone and replaced. From the looks of it, Everton’s new ground looks fairly similar to the new Tottenham stadium.

Old Trafford is one hell of a place and for those of you that go regular I’m sure you’d be sad to see it go.

 

[Jeffthered]

I think if we have enough land adjacent to Old Trafford, to build a new 100k seater stadium, that is what we should be doing. It’s time to move forwards and whilst I still love the existing ground with all its faults… I don’t think refurbishment is the answer to future proof the best club in the world.

If we had to knock down Old Trafford to build a new ground… I can’t say I would enjoy the idea of ground sharing in the interim.

There are issues that extend beyond football here. We talk of taking football into the 21st century, then the development of stadia needs to be a part of that discussion. OT can be redeveloped. Why demolish what is still a fantastic stadium, when, with design and engineering, you can re-model? I doubt anything that is built, from new, will be better than the 'new' Bernabeu, or imminent Camp Nou rebuild. Both grounds retained their foundations, and part/demolished the stands. No need to build an OT elsewhere. It would take longer (Planning) to approve and would send the wrong message in my opinion.

 

[diarm]

But the old ground is a bowl - it was a shiny one in 1910 when it was built, it was a shiny one in 1994 when it was rebuilt after the Stretford End was finished too (becoming the prototype for all the single tier bowls that came in the 90's for lower Prem/Football league clubs - Middlesbrough, Derby, Leicester, Southampton, Sunderland, etc all are smaller versions of the 1994 version of OT)

Perhaps I used the wrong word, but they’re not the same. OT is a football stadium - designed and constructed to celebrate football. The stands are close to the pitch - on all sides, it has character and personality and you put any football fan outside it and they’ll immediately know where they are.

Too many modern stadia are just generic, multi purpose designs with nothing to set them apart. Take away the branding and stand outside the Emirates and you could be standing outside any one of hundreds of new stadia around the world.

If we’re going for a new build, I’d like to see the people behind the Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis brought in. A Manchester inspired creation with that sort of imagination behind it could be something special.

 

[matherto]

Perhaps I used the wrong word, but they’re not the same. OT is a football stadium - designed and constructed to celebrate football. The stands are close to the pitch - on all sides, it has character and personality and you put any football fan outside it and they’ll immediately know where they are.

Too many modern stadia are just generic, multi purpose designs with nothing to set them apart. Take away the branding and stand outside the Emirates and you could be standing outside any one of hundreds of new stadia around the world.

If we’re going for a new build, I’d like to see the people behind the Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis brought in. A Manchester inspired creation with that sort of imagination behind it could be something special.

I'd argue that it looks similar to Estadio da Luz but that's about it for the Emirates. Spurs ground from the outside looks nothing like it and inside it has the one tiered stand behind the goal to differentiate it. I do take the point but I don't think it's as bad as you think. Designers can design whatever they want these days, technology and materials have come on so much that we could have a unique new ground easily, just depends how much money we spend. When the Emirates was built it was definitely the trend but Spurs' ground is part of the new breed.

And I get that people like Lucas Oil Stadium but it feels like when they say they want something like it, they just want that ground and good as it is, it doesn't look anything like current Old Trafford so it takes another point away from honouring the old stadium when we build a new one. There's sadly not that much intrinsic about the way OT currently looks that you could move into a new ground design - the roof is probably the most distinctive point but I don't think we'll do another where it slopes down to the pitch so much and hides how big the ground really is. It has character because it's old and hodge podge in terms of the way it's been built and rebuilt and added to, a new ground couldn't offer that immediately but in 20/30/40 years it probably would.

What exactly would a Manchester inspired creation look like really? An old mill perhaps? Maybe a larger version of Victoria Warehouse? I think Everton (well, the architect) have done a nice job with theirs tbh.

As for it being close to the pitch, FIFA/UEFA rules dictate that a new ground cannot be as close as the old grounds are. There are regulations to adhere to that we only skate around due to OT being over 100 years old. But we can still make it as close as possible and if we had a stand like Spurs do behind the goal then the swell of atmosphere would make everything close in anyway. It needs to be steep and imposing - that's where the Emirates falls down because the first tier is so shallow.

 

[mctrials23]

As long as it doesn't end up like some of the shitty stadiums which have 2 layers of digital billboards at the side of the pitch and then another just before the fans and the fans are about 15m back I don't care.

 

[pacifictheme]

From a neutral standpoint, it would be a massive shame to demolish Old Trafford. I’m sure it has its faults but it has a soul and a history that you can’t replicate.

Upton Park, Highbury, Maine Road, White Hart Lane to name a few all now sadly gone and replaced. From the looks of it, Everton’s new ground looks fairly similar to the new Tottenham stadium.

Old Trafford is one hell of a place and for those of you that go regular I’m sure you’d be sad to see it go.

Yeah I agree. I am very torn. There is absolutely no feeling for me walking out of an entrance and seeing the pitch at old trafford.

 

[JB7]

Perhaps I used the wrong word, but they’re not the same. OT is a football stadium - designed and constructed to celebrate football. The stands are close to the pitch - on all sides, it has character and personality and you put any football fan outside it and they’ll immediately know where they are.

Too many modern stadia are just generic, multi purpose designs with nothing to set them apart. Take away the branding and stand outside the Emirates and you could be standing outside any one of hundreds of new stadia around the world.

If we’re going for a new build, I’d like to see the people behind the Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis brought in. A Manchester inspired creation with that sort of imagination behind it could be something special.

Can't say I've ever felt we are particularly close to the pitch at OT. Certainly not compared to somewhere like Anfield for example and I don't seem to recall being any further away at the new Spurs ground either?

 

[matherto]

As long as it doesn't end up like some of the shitty stadiums which have 2 layers of digital billboards at the side of the pitch and then another just before the fans and the fans are about 15m back I don't care.

Might wanna have a word with FIFA/UEFA

 

[matherto]

Yeah I agree. I am very torn. There is absolutely no feeling for me walking out of an entrance and seeing the pitch at old trafford.

20 years on in the new ground and it’ll be the same.

We love the old place because of the memories and feelings accumulated over time but new memories and feelings can be generated in a much more modern building. It just takes time.

 

[Terry Chango]

Look forward to seeing United fans set a higher average season attendance for the Etihad compared with city fans.

Assuming that we may have to share with them cheats for a season or two.

 

[lex talionis]

Aesthetically, I regard Old Trafford as a masterpiece. Its history is beyond words. I was there last 12 months ago and didn’t feel unsafe or see a leaky roof, but is it wiser to spend 800m (and rising, when the next revamp has to be undertaken) every 25 years or 2b in the next five years to ensure the safety and comfort of fans for next century? Probably the latter.

I’m deeply involved historic preservation in California — yes, I know, a contradiction in terms — and I can tell you sometimes constant renovation of a historic building is less desirable than building anew, provided that the new building is designed with character.

 

[moodyred]

We need a 150k seater stadium. Tickets are always sold out.

 

[bosskeano]

Was just in london recently for my first trip there ever wtih a spurs mate on mine who's family have season tickets for one of the suites in teh new stadium....It's pretty fecking impressive and makes for a great day out as you can have a few pints a short walk from teh stadium but inside they have all sorts of places to eat and drink while there. Very clean, modern, technology is brilliant and easy to move in and around once you're inside

A new stadium is definitely the way to go

 

[pacifictheme]

20 years on in the new ground and it’ll be the same.

We love the old place because of the memories and feelings accumulated over time but new memories and feelings can be generated in a much more modern building. It just takes time.

It'll never be where the busby babes played or where I saw Cantona make his debut, or Rooney score against city. It will be a new stadium with no connection to the players and teams that have come before. On the other hand it might have some great facilities!!

Football is losing enough of its history and tradition, if we do anything I would rather it was a rebuild on the same site than some new stadium somewhere else.

 

[sparx99]

Maybe I'm not that modern, but eugh. I almost vomit by just the thought of Theatre of dreams being so obvious connected to a sponsor and also a name that is connected to Old Trafford, where the dreams and history was actually made.

But unfortunately a new stadium probably comes with a price like naming, unless Jim choose to be noble about it.

For FFP reasons, I guess naming rights makes you able to spend more too, right? Bad incentive really, but it is what it is.

Yeah, the naming thing is more tongue in cheek than anything. I just like to throw it out there.

 

[matherto]

It'll never be where the busby babes played or where I saw Cantona make his debut, or Rooney score against city. It will be a new stadium with no connection to the players and teams that have come before. On the other hand it might have some great facilities!!

Football is losing enough of its history and tradition, if we do anything I would rather it was a rebuild on the same site than some new stadium somewhere else.

It won't, but then technically the current ground isn't where the Busby Babes played much beyond the pitch and some of the lower extremities of the first tier is it?

It'll be a new stadium with no connection until we win games there in true United fashion and win titles and have iconic players and new generations get the same feelings we do now.

It's just bricks, mortar, steel and glass at the end of the day, humans attach all sorts of emotions to inanimate objects but it doesn't mean we can't just do it again does it? It's incredible that a stadium has last 114 years in the same spot, really it is but eventually life moves on and we have to be at the forefront if we wanna get back to sitting on our perch as the biggest and best club in the world.

I think as long as we stay on the same plot of land then it's still Old Trafford, your matchday routine is still the same, you still go in the same pubs and you still eat at the same takeaways and so on. Eventually you'll get past the change in much the same way fans did when the old Stretford End was torn down and replaced with a new stand, when the other parts of the ground changed. I really don't see us moving anywhere else in all honesty. Been scouring all around Manchester and cannot spot a suitable location for a new ground so we're tearing the old ground down regardless and building something in it's place. I keep repeating that it'll be a new ground no matter what because you can't add what stadiums need now to the current structure without losing a considerable amount of seats, the entire lower tier would have to be rebuilt for a start and thus any remaining lingering structure from 1910 or the 1960s would be completely gone anyway.

Like getting a new pet that you grow to love just as much as the old pet. It's tough to let go and it's hard not to think of the past when you get to the future but you love it all the same.

 

[sparx99]

It'll never be where the busby babes played or where I saw Cantona make his debut, or Rooney score against city. It will be a new stadium with no connection to the players and teams that have come before. On the other hand it might have some great facilities!!

Football is losing enough of its history and tradition, if we do anything I would rather it was a rebuild on the same site than some new stadium somewhere else.

How does a rebuild on the same site differ from a new stadium built in the car park? It's the same location essentially. The grass dies and gets regrown so the hallowed turf is just our memories.