Scum fans changing their tune

topgoon · Post by **topgoon** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 12:49 am

The filth staying put is best thing for us and the worst thing for them.

If they stay put, it will cost them too much to redevelop that cesspit and they will spend far too much money there not to mention a couple of years of reduced revenue whilst they redevelop that cesspit.

The council/TFL won't improve the infrastructure so it will still be a nightmare to get to and it will completely f**k up their plans to increase corporate revenue.

In the OS they get really good infrastructure, good train links, lots of space for revenue and merchandising, and direct access to a gold mine of corporate revenue....They will be a 10mins from Canary Wharf.

Not to mention they will be free to develop the cesspit into new flats and retail, so making money from 2 sites....lots of money which will allow them to more than compete with us.
And don't forget their board, unlike ours, aren't afraid to invest properly in their squad.

If we want those *word censored* to stay forever in our shadow we have to join that filth in saying No to Stratford as much as it goes against our nature.

chunkyandy · Post by **chunkyandy** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:57 am

North Londons all ours
North Londons all oouuurrrssssss
FUCK OFF TO STRATFORD
North Londons all ours

augie · Post by **augie** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:05 am

When is this fcuking decision being announced ?

Am sick of looking and listening to *word censored* from both sides of the argument spew bullshit about it on ssn

Post by **HashKads** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:05 am

augie wrote:When is this fcuking decision being announced ? Am sick of looking and listening to c**ts from both sides of the argument spew bullshit about it on ssn

I read in the Standard yesterday the recommendation is anytime this week.

Post by **flash gunner** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:13 am

kingjayson1 wrote:
augie wrote:When is this fcuking decision being announced ? Am sick of looking and listening to c**ts from both sides of the argument spew bullshit about it on ssn
I read in the Standard yesterday the recommendation is anytime this week.

Recommendation this week but final decision wont be made till April so a few months of this shit yet

the playing mantis · Post by **the playing mantis** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:28 pm

anyone who wants them to move to stratford is misguided and thinking very short term.

just read the cracking point by topgoon. its spot on. however funny it would be them moving, in financial terms and thus (with there board) footballing terms if they move they will, short and long term, be in a far superior position to us, due to the points made by top goon.

if they move to stratford, they will be on a more than equal footing with us financially,which will mean them moving even closer to us on the pitch and most likely overtaking us. if they stay they are fucked (at least they wont be able to improve much more and wont be able to move to the next level). if they move somewhere else it will not have the massive benefits of the stratford site, and would also cause them to be fucked (but not as much as staying)

rigsby · Post by **rigsby** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:31 pm

if they move to stratford, they will be on a more than equal footing with us financially,which will mean them moving even closer to us on the pitch and most likely overtaking us

tbh they've spent fuck loads more than us for years.

As much as it would be hillarious for them to move (they wouldn't be Tottenham anymore would they?) Its still diabolical that wankers in charge of clubs can just uproot a football club.

the playing mantis · Post by **the playing mantis** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:39 pm

yeah just imagine how much more they will spend if they have the sort of income we have coming in though!!

RoscommonGooner · Post by **RoscommonGooner** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 1:39 pm

the playing mantis wrote:anyone who wants them to move to stratford is misguided and thinking very short term.

just read the cracking point by topgoon. its spot on. however funny it would be them moving, in financial terms and thus (with there board) footballing terms if they move they will, short and long term, be in a far superior position to us, due to the points made by top goon.

if they move to stratford, they will be on a more than equal footing with us financially,which will mean them moving even closer to us on the pitch and most likely overtaking us. if they stay they are fucked (at least they wont be able to improve much more and wont be able to move to the next level). if they move somewhere else it will not have the massive benefits of the stratford site, and would also cause them to be fucked (but not as much as staying)

Agree with yourself and topgoon. Initally I was all for them moving but when you think about the cold hard facts (money), them moving could/would take them to the next level with all the extra income it would bring in.

bunch · Post by **bunch** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:00 pm

Leaving aside our gooner worries about the emergence of a stronger rival in the new Olympic Stadium, I think the Spurs bid is the best one.

1. No public money
2. They will make a success of it attendance wise, even if they don't sell out every game like us they mostly will
3. Stong athletics legacy in a place where athletics has a traditional home

Negatives for the West Ham bid are:
1. they require a public money loan - what happens if they go tits-up. We'll have spammers bleating on in the media for Newham to let them off paying
2. Football and athletics don't mix in the same stadium and proof can be seen all over Europe
3. I think this will lead to it being touch and go that the spammers will make a success of it. What happens if they are playing shite football in the Championship and attendances in a 60k stadium drop to 20k or lower. It will become a downward spiral of poor atmosphere and poor attendances

The positive for the Wesstam bid being touted by them and their supporters is the promise made to leave an athletics legacy at the Olympic stadium. But no-one wanted to bid for the original plan of a reduced 25k stadium so that's why they looked at football clubs. But football and athletics don't mix - proven elsewhere that it hits atmosphere and attendances which woudl risk the spammers going TU and more public money being spent.

I guess my major criteria is that it shouldn't cost the taxpayer any more than this Olympic folly has already. So Spurs is the best choice on that basis.

xDAVEYx · Post by **xDAVEYx** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:08 pm

i'm sorry but i don't buy this running track in football grounds stuff. of the 3 best atmospheres i have ever experienced in football, 2 of them were in former olympic stadia opened in 1936 and 1910. the distance from the playing surface has bugger all effect on atmosphere!

marcengels · Post by **marcengels** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:26 pm

xDAVEYx wrote:i'm sorry but i don't buy this running track in football grounds stuff. of the 3 best atmospheres i have ever experienced in football, 2 of them were in former olympic stadia opened in 1936 and 1910. the distance from the playing surface has bugger all effect on atmosphere!

which grounds, mate?

1886 · Post by **1886** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 5:40 pm

MK Gould wrote:Any club that moves from a 38,000 to 60,000 capacity stadium and fills it - especially at our prices - is bound to have a bit of a watered down atmosphere. You not been to Old Trafford lately? Hardly a hotbed of passion.....

Spuds moving to a 60,000 won't be any different - and very difficult to see them sell out as regularly as we do....

On the subject of haringey....Spuds really couldn't have picked a worse time. You really think that the council are going to risk the wrath of the residents to give Spuds a bung? Don't think so, and why should they if Spuds do lose the Olympic Stadium bid! I think we win either way. They fuck off to Stratford and get a cheap (well, reasonably cheap) stadium or they stay where they are and have a Â£450m millstone around their neck !!!

Exactly, can't decide which way I want their bid to go yet though.

xDAVEYx · Post by **xDAVEYx** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 6:53 pm

marcengels wrote:
xDAVEYx wrote:i'm sorry but i don't buy this running track in football grounds stuff. of the 3 best atmospheres i have ever experienced in football, 2 of them were in former olympic stadia opened in 1936 and 1910. the distance from the playing surface has bugger all effect on atmosphere!
which grounds, mate?

rome and berlin. you could argue that the game in rome, being a champions league knock out affair, was bound to have an edge to it, but the game in berlin was a 2nd tier league game, absolutely outstanding and the team i was 'supporting' were down 2-0 after 20 minutes

MK Gould · Post by **MK Gould** » Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:32 pm

I would even be prepared to suffer a few years of them being more successful than us if it meant them fucking off to Stratford.

Short term pain, long term gain - for us. Almost 100 years after moving from Woolwich to Islington they still give us stick for it..... So we may shortly be seeing something happen that even our grandkids and great grandkids will be singing about!