Do you think we should get a new stadium 1.Where 2.What capacity 3.If you can put some pictures of what you think it should look like ie use paint and do a quick sketch or put a stadium that is already built and edit it or post whatever you want
People are talking about the huge Earls Court exhibition site a few minutes walk from Stamford Bridge which might be coming up for sale. A new larger stadium could probably be financed from the sale of the current site which is in a highly desirable area of West London.
I wish King Roman was in it for the long haul, but he isn't. Their's no way he will stick around long for a new stadium.
Yeah Earls Court is one option, but I'd rather the club went down every possible avenue before they even considered a move away. It just wouldn't feel right not going to the Bridge.
I think if Chelsea were to build a new stadium it should in the range of 55-60k. You never want to overbuild because then you will lose tons of money on not selling out every match. Plus, I'm sure it is a damn fortune to build a damn park bench in the West End; let alone a massive football stadium.
Actually, you'd better disregard my earlier post. While researching the size of the Earls Court site I discovered that: The famous exhibition centre at Earls Court will host the Volleyball competition in its entirety in 2012. The venue will hold up to 18000 spectators. On the London 2012 (Olympics) site: http://www.london2012.org/en/ourvision/sport+and+venue+information/list+of+all+venues/Earls+Court.htm Still, it's my preferred choice if we HAVE to move because a) It's near Stamford Bridge b) It's large enough to build a 70-80 thousand seater stadium if CFC could afford it c) It's already got great transport links d) ...I use Earls Court station on match days already to avoid the congestion at Fulham Broadway (and the walk does me good! )
"Build it and they will come" Also don't forget that the current restrictive ticketing arrangements are keeping a lot of people away from matches.
Building a new stadium is sacreligious and wrong. Chelsea has no need to move from the Bridge. If they were to move it would surely be not in West London as Earls Court is more central London. Chelsea is Stamford Bridge. Plus there's a little problem called the "Chelsea Pitch Owners".
Have a look at a map. 10 minutes walk at maximum - even at my great age! Trust me, my family have lived in that area for 4+ generations, Earls Court is still in West London. A move from Stamford Bridge to a larger site has many advantages including ground capacity and transport links. The other site that has been mooted in the past is the current Feltham Stadium at the Glebelands, Feltham, Middlesex (near Heathrow Airport). Now I am against that site for different reasons. I used to live near there and that is a very rough area indeed.
The current site presents a few expansion problems with the hotel and the railway line behind the West Stand.
No, a new location is out of the question. Roman is 39/40 investing very heavily, cash no debt, in the infrastructure of the club, best training ground complex in the world and finally in creating the best youth system, every good young player from 5 up according to Sir Rednose , Has stated he plans to own Chelsea until he can pass it to his son some day, hopefully he will have better sense than Robert Carlos by then , ; knowing assertions that he is in it for the short term aside For what it is worth talking to several employees of the club last month the new plan is to build a bridge from behind the Mathew Harding Stands over the railroad tracks and perhaps a new station as lack of sufficient egress in case of an emergency or evacuation is the main block to the desired expansion of 10-20000 seats.
in my oppinion i think that we shouldn't have built that massive mosterossity that is the hotel and they could have expanded including more seats i mean they stand that has the hotel would be two or even three times as big as it is now and also we have the money The North stand is quite small (Compared to the west and east stands) why not expand that one
What's the point? Maybe when there is a much larger fanbase that are willing to pay for tickets but currently the 45k of the Bridge is enough.
They need to sort ticket prices out beforehand I think, before the can even consider expanding the stadium.
I agree. I think the previous owner was thinking not enough long term vision wise concerning the club when they built the hotel. I have never understood why CFC northend was so small. It is fine stadium, in fact, one of the best I have seen, but there is definate room for improvements and growth.
Bates was actually spot on. Notions of Chelsea pulling in crowds of over 50,000 are pie in the sky. Of course, for champions league latter stage games, it wouldn't be a problem, but, when the bread and butter has thousands of empty seats, it would look rather stupid. Bates, if I remember right, can't ever be kicked out of his hotel room. Life time residency written into the sale of the club.
Wow...maybe that would change in a few years? But who knows. I find that fascinating that Bates has a permanent room. Wonder if room service is included?? LOL.
This seems unreasonably pessimistic to me. They sell 42,000 tickets a game as is (in a 42,000 seat stadium), with the highest prices in the world- what further evidence is needed to show they can sell 50k? In a year or two, they could probably be successful with a 60,000-seat stadium. Unfortunately, there's no sorting going to be done here- everything is in order. The ticket prices are the reason Chelsea produce bigger gate receipts than any club (even ones with much bigger crowds).
I have a crazy idea - well not crazy but a real rub it in everyone elses faces idea here! Why not buy Earls Court (or wherever) and build a 60,000 Stadium (with room for expansion) anyway? We don't need to replace Stamford Bridge! We have enough money to have two stadiums... We could divide up Champions League and Cup Games for the new stadium and play premiership matches and Stamford Bridge. In the meantime the new stadium could be used for other events like concerts etc, to make extra money... If we get to the stage where we are always selling out the new stadium then we could consider a permanent move, but I am sure Arsenal fans would have loved to keep Highbury and use it for matches if they could AND have a new stadium... Roman makes like £200m a week in interest so we can afford it so why not? why waste time messing with increasing our current capacity when we can just build a new stadium anyway? This idea is not crazy its actually smart - maybe not in terms of Chelsea paying for it but as Roman would be paying then why not? Im sure we could make a new stadium profitable and still use SB- keeping everyone happy! Yes we will be hated by everyone in the world (you have two stadiums! lol) but we can so lets do it! Roman is already building a new stadium in Russia for the Russian team so lets get going and start it up!
Hey Who you calling rough? I live 10 mins from there now! But untill I was 18 I lived within walking distance of Stamford Bridge. I have great memories of the old stamford bridge but I would not object to moving to Earls Court, like people have said the Transport links are still great and it is a short walk from the present site although I think it would involve a change of Borough from Hammersmith and Fulham to Kensington and Chelsea. But wait Chelsea moving to Chelsea can't be all bad.