timnufc22

I say that with a view to selling one of Wilock or Longstaff and with Anderson & Miley very much in the frame to start games in midfield. I've do really like Wilock and hope he can get over his injuries - if we keep him and sign players we need without FFP hindrance then great. I just feel he is better further forward as a no10 but I know he was great last season carrying the ball from deep. I'm more thinking going the other way.

I'd be considering Ross Barkley. While its taken some time, he seems to have matured. His touch and passing is great, he looks to be a lot stronger now and can tackle. I think he could slot into the no6 (we need that alternative for Bruno) or no8 role's easily and would add that extra control in midfield we probably need at times. Wouldn't be against also buying an experienced defensive midfielder who's happy to be cover and be a tactical option off the bench or for particular games here and there. Then I'd be looking to sell Wilock unfortunately who I've rated but the injuries are too much and I think he can be too hit and miss. Joelinton__Bruno__Tonali Anderson__Barkley__Miley/Longstaff

I like red numbers on a white patch/square if the kit is quite minimalistic, which it what it was at times in 70s/80s. But with other bright colours on the sleeves through noon, the PL logo and a third colour to the strip, the bright colour of red also thrown into the mix can then feel too much imo. I think if there's no third colour to the kit then fine, otherwise I think black or white numbers are best, which are nostalgia for me tbf. White numbers on stripes would be absolutely readable and fine but if adidas go for the money making scheme of a patch to encourage us to get names and numbers then that's a shame, but not the end of the world if done with a bit of subtly. Personally I'd have no issue if they did the 98' shield every time, think its a good compromise. I hope the adidas shoulder stripes are white (or black) - the adidas logo and those stripes combined with our black and white stripes are just the perfect combo. If the adidas shoulder stripes are grey it may look ok but it'd be a missed opportunity. Don't mind grey, blue or gold as a third colour for trims etc.

Man City will not win everything forever, it might be a long cycle but their cycle will come to a close at some point, likely when Guardiola leaves. Having this confidence, as repetitive as it might be, I probably prefer them to win the league to prevent Klopp & Arteta from lifting the trophy. I don't want their pathetic behaviour to be rewarded and obviously Klopp's leaving after this season anyway.

And how did Spurs gain that income? I stand to be corrected, but I don't believe it was through a sugar daddy injecting huge amounts of money from nowhere. They made a great managerial appointed (Pochettino) and recruited very well. Their academy produced one of the worlds best strikers. They clearly obtained great commercial deals. Granted they're a London club so I appreciate that is a caveat to this conversion. They hadn't moved into their new stadium so were not generating income through NFL events etc. They were playing at Wembley, where again I stand corrected if they somehow had an event tie-in situation. Their average attendance there was 68k, which is a big boost to what they were used to at WHL, but not a massive amount more than some people are turning their nose up at for a SJP extension (61-62k). I'm not naïve to the task again for us or any other similar sized football club nor to the clear vested interests from certain clubs to stop others progressing. But if we can strike together the right elements, it is possible to break into the top 6 and even top 4. The size of such a task means it would only be that much more rewarding. No pride in the Man City route and it would get boring fast too imo (the Etihad atmosphere attests to this). Howe is clearly a manager players love to play for, he has a special connection with the players and I'm sure word travels in the football world how great he is, especially on a personal level. If he learns the lessons of this season and proves to be our long-term man, I think it can help to attract players, who will know they're in safe hands. If we extended SJP to 61-62k, sorted out the seating arrangements, the place would look and ideally sound stunning and one of the most special & unique venues to play at and would be a great selling point. Swap that with a new stadium if that's your preference. The more we maintain a European place EL/ECL - the more we can increase sponsorship and the more chance we have of cracking top 4 again. If we persist not only can we do it, but we can maintain it for a period I think too.

The idea of the club spending in cheat mode like Man City and Chelsea did is completely soulless and unexciting to me. There should be some middle ground to the rules, but Tottenham got regular top 4 finishes and within a whisker of winning the CL without sugar daddy spending, and this was before the new stadium. It can be done and the idea of anyone shrugging their shoulders muttering its impossible because we can't do a Man City is depressing.

Let’s be real, we play 451 and the striker has no support. Get Anderson further up with Isak, get Murphy off for Barnes and put Gordon RW.

Granted the roof isn't sloped, but if the gallowgate end matched the leazes end, would that not create more of a bowl effect and keep more noise in? Or would the east stand put pay to that?

As I alluded to in another thread, football was faster paced then and frankly a better watch imo. First time passes & crosses, balls in behind, defenders being properly tested but also slick passing too. I take this back to early 2000's. I hate that it's now seen as a cardinal sin to play a ball down the line as oppose to keep passing along the 6 yard box. It leads to so many touches and the game slowing down. The same applies to getting into the final third; unless there's a absolutely clear pass on, players (likely instructed) pass the ball back and switch play in an endeavour to get into the exact same position they were already in on the other flank! And maybe then they'll shoot/cross but then perhaps not and very rarely first time. Defenders see it all in front of them, granted teams push up with a higher line more these days. I do agree with Owen though when he said you had to have more technique in his day; because players looked forward far more, strikers subsequently had a lot of quick balls fired at them and they needed a good touch to hold it or flick it on. I don't feel you got as much space in midfield back then as you do now. When I watch the odd lower league game I see teams trying to play out like Man City and find it infuriating and quite sad. More often than not they're giving the ball away and silly goals as a result. I hope someone breaks this spell soon and we see more variation in style and tactics. Everyone has - used to have - their favoured way of playing but there's no right way and a clash of styles is one of the things which made the game interesting.

You mean keep a sloped roof, but higher obviously?

Gordon was just as effective on the right when I saw him for Everton. I don't like both wingers being inverted, Murphy has shown the benefits of having a natural footer on one side, hitting in-swinging crosses. It's too predicable when players are cutting in on both flanks, but Gordon can still mix it up and drift across at times. Despite how great he's been this season, I can't help but feel that ultimately Barnes will always be more effective cutting in to score from that side. I do think teams are getting too obsessed with over-playing and coming inside all the time. A first-time cross in the final third is still as dangerous now as it was twenty years ago if you have a good striker in the middle. Defenders have it easier these days because it's all in front of them and they can get organised because players take so many touches.

I never liked that they ditched the boxes in the east stand in the first place, so we literally have a template of what you've described, at that time the regular seats were nearer to the pitch (not sure if they went too far to host international games etc). I don't know which version of the stand had the highest capacity. Like you say, could have more room to play with if the previous 'Newcastle breweries' advert 'wall' was smaller and maybe the boxes at the top, with the regular seats going down from there. Think Villareal's stand but other way round.

Just a few other pictures from that page, obviously biased but for me it'd be the best stadium in the UK - as grand as Spurs' but with more of a colosseum feel and less of an Americanised stadium feel and with amazing history attached to it too. Granted Man U will upgrade/rebuild, but the rest wont look at good as this imo, it would be some sight. I totally understand the commercial side but this extension would bring in more boxes going along the Gallowgate so so would be a significant upgrade on a corporate level too. I don't know what's the stopping the club hosting gigs etc like other clubs to claim that money too, surely they can? Granted Spurs' American football games are something they have over the rest with their retractable pitch. But isn't it more fun to go up against the rest with identify and history behind us too? I guarantee a lot of fans will be jealous if they're left with hollow new stadiums. I think Everton's new stadium looks to be a decent attempt at keeping some old school feel but it still lacks a unique or grandiose feel from it looks like so far. Many Man City fans miss Maine Road despite the obscene success. West Ham have moved stadium to somewhere with zero identity - how's that extra revenue going for them? They've dont quite well but nothing game changing. I say all this with the caveat that singing area's need to be arranged going forward.

As a compromise I’d rather go with a new sponsors’ logos on both panelling underneath the tv screens where sports direct used to be (I say both assuming a Gallowgate extension replicates the leazes) aswell as other arenas of the ground (bench, milburn reception) and a sponsored training ground. I know both wouldn’t bring the same money as an official ground name but it would still be a decent chunk.

Whatever happens, it's vital the seating arrangements incorporate more signing/standing sections. If the gallowgate end was extended to match the rest of the ground, it would be a thing of beauty. Some great pictures here someone has posted over the years: https://www.facebook.com/GallowgateExpansion/photos I would miss the sloped roof, but there's no doubting how imposing and intimidating this would be. You could get an additional seats in the L4 milburn/gallowgate corner and along with the new L7 seats you could get an extra 8k seats, possibly 9k who knows. This would take the capacity to potentially 61k. Is there a reason why we don't host more gigs etc for additional revenue? Perhaps there would be more scope with additional inside facilities added to a new gallowgate end? Capacity wise, I think 61k is enough and it's important to keep some element of demand as someone said earlier.