Jump to content

Villa Park redevelopment


Phumfeinz

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, thabucks said:

I prefer to see the sun going down on St. Andrews. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

B75VVGLCMAIH2zc.jpg

 

I found this on twitter the other day. This is what we need to do. No more of this new stadium rubbish.

Knock down the North Stand. Build a new 3 tier stand and connect onto the Trinity. Leave the Doug Ellis and Holte free standing. Would take Villa Park up to about 55k. Done.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

It lost a lot of being Villa Park when Doug Ellis ripped down the Archibald Leitch version of the Trinity Road stand.  The new one always looks to me like a counterfeit of the original.  It was an absolutely bizarre decision.

It was a **** ing disgrace. Even supporters of other clubs told me they used to love coming to VP because it was a 'proper football stadium', and they were staggered at what had been done to it. 

I agree that there is a case for a new stadium, but if it is to be on the same site, there is no way it could be built in one close season - which would leave us looking for a temporary ground share somewhere for at least one season. Not a prospect to be savoured. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

North Stand  aside villa park can’t be easily expanded and there will become a point the £ per seat is not financially viable to expand. We would need to buy huge swathes of land to expand the Witton by much due to right to light, trinity is probably at its limits. Holte can’t be easily expanded. Right design and location I’d be ok with moving if we got something like Chelsea’s proposed exterior with the interior I’d say the axed plop stadium which was four separate stands. No cheap identikit!  It’s highly unlikely to happen but as some have pointed out Villa Park lost its soul when the trinity was criminally destroyed for the current monstrosity. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Villa fans from 1920s saw today's stadium, they would be appalled. But the changes were necessary.

We all love Villa Park, but let's face it - Holte End is the only 'lovable' feature right now. 

If we could recreate the magic of Holte End in a different place (i.e. the proposed Curzon Street station) and vastly improve our infrastructure, I am all for it. Our kids will cherish the tales of the old ground and enjoy a modern stadium that brings a much greater commercial benefit to Aston Villa. They will not miss the old Villa Park - they will be proud to have one of the most modern stadiums in the country. 

Alternatively, if we were to knock the whole thing down and build a new stadium at B6 6HE, I would not be against that either.

One condition - it has to remind us of those amazing old windows and red brickwork. Even if it's only an element of it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just feel like we sound like a bunch of old people.

'Remember the wooden seats and when you could smoke on the terrace? Those were the days'

If we can build a brighter future - I am all for it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mjmooney said:

See my comment above - where would we live while it was being built? 

It's a problem, sure. But in the grand scale of things, its only a season in our long history. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

It was a **** ing disgrace. Even supporters of other clubs told me they used to love coming to VP because it was a 'proper football stadium', and they were staggered at what had been done to it. 

I actually don't think the Trinity would look that bad if it hadn't been preceded by the most beautiful structure in football.

It's still better looking than most stands around the country.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Okonokos said:

Genuine question to those of you who don't like the new Trinity. What is it that's so bad about it? I personally think it's a great stand.

It's not the old one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No owner will waste the £400 million plus on a new stadium without just cause. If it what was needed to grow the club than again based on location -central not out at the airport and the right design I’m not against it but also not advocating it . Times move on and and I’m sure if we ever to move it would only be in the right interests of the club long term. Isn’t villa park technically in witton not Aston anyways or am I imagining that ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Okonokos said:

B75VVGLCMAIH2zc.jpg

 

I found this on twitter the other day. This is what we need to do. No more of this new stadium rubbish.

Knock down the North Stand. Build a new 3 tier stand and connect onto the Trinity. Leave the Doug Ellis and Holte free standing. Would take Villa Park up to about 55k. Done.

The DE could be expanded but would involve us acquiring and demolishing those houses for it be be able to be mirrored like the Trinity. Sticking point.

The North would look fabulous if this was done like picture above.

I also like what @NurembergVillan says, in that we could go all modern inside bit keep our red brick founding features on the outside.

Ellis destroying the Trinity and throwing everything in a skip shows how little he gave a toss about the club's heritage. - Most of our honours where won while he wasn't chairman. 

Hopefully that stand will be renamed after someone more deserving such as Ron Saunders or William McGregor!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Okonokos said:

Genuine question to those of you who don't like the new Trinity. What is it that's so bad about it? I personally think it's a great stand.

Did you ever experience the original one ? As @Wainy316 pointed out it is because what we lost compared to  what we gained. Rangers managed to do what Doug wouldn’t . Expand whilst keeping the heritage. It could of been done but the Will wasn’t there . 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, thabucks said:

Did you ever experience the original one ? As @Wainy316 pointed out it is because what we lost compared to  what we gained. Rangers managed to do what Doug wouldn’t . Expand whilst keeping the heritage. It could of been done but the Will wasn’t there . 

I think I went to one game in the original. I was only 10 when they knocked down the original so it was a bit before my time. I get that the new one doesn't look like the original without the old brickwork outside but I still don't think its a bad looking stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, thabucks said:

Did you ever experience the original one ? As @Wainy316 pointed out it is because what we lost compared to  what we gained. Rangers managed to do what Doug wouldn’t . Expand whilst keeping the heritage. It could of been done but the Will wasn’t there . 

The original was fantastic and those round windows.

Rangers stadium is a fantastic example of the Archibald Leitch type construction and they have managed to retain all of their historical features.

I like the inside of the Trinity but the outside of it looks awful.

If we could make the outer like it used to be and that of the current Holte exterior then that would be a good thing.

We are an old historical club. We should celebrate that and be one of the only teams that have these features to compliment our founding history with an iconic yet unique stadium.

 

Edited by AvfcRigo82
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, villabromsgrove said:

I am old, but I know a unique stadium when I see one, and Villa Park is "unique".

Villa Park is an iconic stadium which can be improved and enhanced considerably with an increased capacity while remaining a beacon to the rest of the football world.

Moving from Villa Park would destroy our world renowned heritage, and make us just another ordinary football club. 

I think the fans and the history make it the beacon for the rest of the football world - not a building. 

Don't get me wrong, I would much prefer re-development of VP as I appreciate what our home means. 

But if we were to move, I would not be against it, as the history and the memories will stay with us. 

I come from a city abroad where my home team had to move stadiums. Old one was historic and loved, but very much on the decline and it had to be put down like an old, beloved dog.

The fans now enjoy a brand new stadium and still sing songs about the old days and the old 'hill' stand - the memory and history have not gone anywhere. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm up for redeveloping all the stands minus The Holte. 

One thing I do think though... St James Park in the middle of Newcastle is brilliant. All on the piss in the city, soaking up the atmosphere, go to the game, stroll out of the stadium and youre in the city centre, back on the lash. It's brilliant. 

I would be against moving away from VP and saddened as thats where me and my dad used to go together but that aspect of being in the city centre is very appealing and you'd get more tourism and probably sell more tickets by people strolling past and joining us to watch the game. Creating more casual fans. The club grows. More money, more sponsorship. 

Edited by Lord Willard
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â