The Game Future NRL Stadiums part II

[newc18]

I wouldn’t. Gotta think of the future. 80,000 is the bare minimum.

The AFL crowd obsession is rubbing off on you lol. We honestly don't need a huge ass stadium.

Much for the same reason as the NFL are building smaller stadiums, I want the stadiums the NRL use to follow suit. Fan experience and sight-lines should come before the amount of seats a stadium holds.

 

[Wb1234]

Looks like png chiefs will be playing their nrl games at santos stadium after all

Hubert Murray may get upgraded later to a much larger capacity

 

[Growthegame]

The AFL crowd obsession is rubbing off on you lol. We honestly don't need a huge ass stadium.

I barely recognise the FLA’s existence. You have brought this up out of no where.

Much for the same reason as the NFL are building smaller stadiums, I want the stadiums the NRL use to follow suit. Fan experience and sight-lines should come before the amount of seats a stadium holds.

My opinion also has got nothing to do with American markets or sports.

 

[Steel Saints]

I'd be happy with 70,000, just make it a state of the art rectangular stadium.

Nah, the same capacity 80,000, but in rectangular form. You also need to consider population growth too.

 

[T-Boon]

The AFL crowd obsession is rubbing off on you lol. We honestly don't need a huge ass stadium.

Much for the same reason as the NFL are building smaller stadiums, I want the stadiums the NRL use to follow suit. Fan experience and sight-lines should come before the amount of seats a stadium holds.

What are those reasons?
If it is that they have realised that 70k is better for fan experience and sight lines then I am 100% on board. That is the main thing. If super bowls can be played at 70k stadiums (also champions league finals) then it is a fine capacity.

 

[newc18]

I barely recognise the FLA’s existence. You have brought this up out of no where.

You sound triggered by that comment lol. It was a joke mate.

Nah, the same capacity 80,000, but in rectangular form. You also need to consider population growth too.

Even with population growth, how many games are getting 80k? I would much rather that money get spent on making the stadium world class with a roof over adding more seats.

What are those reasons?
If it is that they have realised that 70k is better for fan experience and sight lines then I am 100% on board. That is the main thing.

From my understanding:
- Cheaper to build.
- Keeps the stadium looking fuller for majority of games.
- Better sightlines and overall experience for all spectators.

I think it's the same reason Brisbane Olympic Stadium went with 63k for the capacity. 60-70k seems to be the sweet spot atm.

If super bowls can be played at 70k stadiums (also champions league finals) then it is a fine capacity.

100% This 'have to play finals in the biggest stadium' is an AFL mentality. I would much rather see it rotate as long as the host city has a stadium 60k and above.

 

[Growthegame]

You sound triggered by that comment lol. It was a joke mate.

Not at all.

 

[Growthegame]

Should never have a fully enclosed roof either. Should cover as much seating as possible like Commbank & Allianz.

 

[newc18]

Should never have a fully enclosed roof either. Should cover as much seating as possible like Commbank & Allianz.

Agree to disagree. I bet if you went to Vegas you would change your mind pretty quickly.

 

[Growthegame]

Agree to disagree. I bet if you went to Vegas you would change your mind pretty quickly.

I’ve been.

 

[newc18]

I’ve been.

You obviously weren't impressed then?

 

[Steel Saints]

You sound triggered by that comment lol. It was a joke mate.


Even with population growth, how many games are getting 80k? I would much rather that money get spent on making the stadium world class with a roof over adding more seats.


From my understanding:
- Cheaper to build.
- Keeps the stadium looking fuller for majority of games.
- Better sightlines and overall experience for all spectators.

I think it's the same reason Brisbane Olympic Stadium went with 63k for the capacity. 60-70k seems to be the sweet spot atm.


100% This 'have to play finals in the biggest stadium' is an AFL mentality. I would much rather see it rotate as long as the host city has a stadium 60k and above.

Accor's biggest issue isn't due to not having a roof, or the capacity of the ground. It's the shape of the stadium, which doesn't benefit any of the rectangular codes.

Accor has a delicate balancing act of week to week games, but also a stadium that is capable of attracting major events. If it drops down to 70k and MCG increases to 105k, then that would be a sizable advantage for the G to get major events over Accor.

Since the 2000 Olympics, it has hosted RWC, Asian Cup, WWC and pretty soon another RWC. In the summer months, it becomes a concert venue, where it either sells out, or gets huge attendances.

Point is having a stadium of 80k is a necessary evil. And of course having it rectangular would hugely improve fans experience.

 

[newc18]

Accor's biggest issue isn't due to not having a roof, or the capacity of the ground. It's the shape of the stadium, which doesn't benefit any of the rectangular codes.

Accor Stadium has a number of issues including location, sightlines, and fan experience. Location you unfortunately can't change unless you move it, but the other two can be improved.

Accor has a delicate balancing act of week to week games, but also a stadium that is capable of attracting major events. If it drops down to 70k and MCG increases to 105k, then that would be a sizable advantage for the G to get major events over Accor.

Do you think So-Fi Stadium has issues getting events, or Tottenham Stadium? If you build a world class facility that is one of the best in the world, then events want to come. If Sydney built a 70k Allegiant Stadium type of venue, it wouldn't have an issue getting major events.

Since the 2000 Olympics, it has hosted RWC, Asian Cup, WWC and pretty soon another RWC. In the summer months, it becomes a concert venue, where it either sells out, or gets huge attendances.

Which is why a roof is important. They nearly had to cancel one of the Taylor Swift concerts in Sydney due to a storm.

Point is having a stadium of 80k is a necessary evil. And of course having it rectangular would hugely improve fans experience.

If cost was no issue then an 80-90k venue sounds great. The problem is stadium costs have gone through the roof and I would much rather the money go towards making the experience as amazing as possible compared to how many people it can hold.

I'd be curious how much more it would cost to build a 80k or 90k venue compared to a 60-70k?

 

[reanimate]

Accor's biggest issue isn't due to not having a roof, or the capacity of the ground. It's the shape of the stadium, which doesn't benefit any of the rectangular codes.

Accor has a delicate balancing act of week to week games, but also a stadium that is capable of attracting major events. If it drops down to 70k and MCG increases to 105k, then that would be a sizable advantage for the G to get major events over Accor.

Since the 2000 Olympics, it has hosted RWC, Asian Cup, WWC and pretty soon another RWC. In the summer months, it becomes a concert venue, where it either sells out, or gets huge attendances.

Point is having a stadium of 80k is a necessary evil. And of course having it rectangular would hugely improve fans experience.

Dropping to 70k also would rule Australia out of getting a FIFA World Cup in the future, unless an 80k+ rectangular stadium gets built elsewhere, which is highly doubtful.

We need at least one premier rectangular stadium in the country with a capacity of 80k+.

 

[Steel Saints]

Accor Stadium has a number of issues including location, sightlines, and fan experience. Location you unfortunately can't change unless you move it, but the other two can be improved.


Do you think So-Fi Stadium has issues getting events, or Tottenham Stadium? If you build a world class facility that is one of the best in the world, then events want to come. If Sydney built a 70k Allegiant Stadium type of venue, it wouldn't have an issue getting major events.


Which is why a roof is important. They nearly had to cancel one of the Taylor Swift concerts in Sydney due to a storm.


If cost was no issue then an 80-90k venue sounds great. The problem is stadium costs have gone through the roof and I would much rather the money go towards making the experience as amazing as possible compared to how many people it can hold.

I'd be curious how much more it would cost to build a 80k or 90k venue compared to a 60-70k?

There has been articles where Suncorp could be upgraded to 65,000 ahead of the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. Now Brisbane's population is roughly half of Sydney. So Sydney's largest stadium will only have 5,000 more?

Tottenham stadium opened in 2019, So-Fi in 2020. Now we are not sure when Accor gets any work done. Unlikely in this decade as we are already in 2025. So you look at the 2030's.

MCG has been done in stages in the past, and it may be the case with Accor. So hypothetically a fully developed Accor could be done by the 2040's. Which means you are building a stadium that will be used towards 2070's or 2080's.

With Accor or Stadium Australia, we need to think long term, and not what is happening currently in 2025.

 

[Wb1234]

There has been articles where Suncorp could be upgraded to 65,000 ahead of the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. Now Brisbane's population is roughly half of Sydney. So Sydney's largest stadium will only have 5,000 more?

Tottenham stadium opened in 2019, So-Fi in 2020. Now we are not sure when Accor gets any work done. Unlikely in this decade as we are already in 2025. So you look at the 2030's.

MCG has been done in stages in the past, and it may be the case with Accor. So hypothetically a fully developed Accor could be done by the 2040's. Which means you are building a stadium that will be used towards 2070's or 2080's.

With Accor or Stadium Australia, we need to think long term, and not what is happening currently in 2025.

Should be 100k

As long as the lower two bowls/tiers are built like Suncorp that’s 80 percent of games covered

Nosebleeds will always have average views but sell for origins / grand finals / dogs Good Friday

Just build the stands steep from the sidelines that’s accors biggest problem is how flat the stands are and how far away from the playing field at some sections

Accor could be 100k now if the stands at either end matched the sidelines ones in terms of levels

 

[newc18]

There has been articles where Suncorp could be upgraded to 65,000 ahead of the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. Now Brisbane's population is roughly half of Sydney. So Sydney's largest stadium will only have 5,000 more?

Tottenham stadium opened in 2019, So-Fi in 2020. Now we are not sure when Accor gets any work done. Unlikely in this decade as we are already in 2025. So you look at the 2030's.

MCG has been done in stages in the past, and it may be the case with Accor. So hypothetically a fully developed Accor could be done by the 2040's. Which means you are building a stadium that will be used towards 2070's or 2080's.

With Accor or Stadium Australia, we need to think long term, and not what is happening currently in 2025.

Once again, there comes a point where it's financially just not worth adding more seats. There were talks about the Brisbane Olympic Stadium being around 80k capacity but they decided on 63k due to costs. You don't just keep adding seats and use population growth as an excuse.

The NSW government doesn't have a limitless budget. They will want value for money in any project they build. My point is I want to see the spectator experience to come first over how many seats it can hold. 10 times out of 10 I would pick a SI-FI or an Allegiant over a Wembley or MCG.

 

[newc18]

Should be 100k

As long as the lower two bowls/tiers are built like Suncorp that’s 80 percent of games covered

Nosebleeds will always have average views but sell for origins / grand finals / dogs Good Friday

Just build the stands steep from the sidelines that’s accors biggest problem is how flat the stands are and how far away from the playing field at some sections

Accor could be 100k now if the stands at either end matched the sidelines ones in terms of levels

Good luck finding the funding for that.

Also I would not want to be a supporter of a team playing games there. If you think Accor is a ghost town for regular season games, imagine an extra 20k seats lol.

 

[Yosemite Sam]

Any rebuilt Stadium Australia would have a capacity of 80 to 90k. The capacity will never be reduced. Sydney and Australia needs a large scale rectangular stadium. Anything under 80k is too small.

There is also absolutely NO NEED for a roof to ever be built on a stadium in Australia.It is such a waste of money and defeats the purpose of playing an outdoor sport.
The only exception would be Canberra.

 

[Wb1234]

Good luck finding the funding for that.

Also I would not want to be a supporter of a team playing games there. If you think Accor is a ghost town for regular season games, imagine an extra 20k seats lol.

Not if the lower two bowls are full and designed well

Accor is ok when 40k are in and that’s with an awful design for league games

Previous stadium proposals have talked about club mode

Dogs look like that’s their long term stadium. Even a 40k stadium as proposed in Liverpool could be too small for them long term.