I wouldn't see how it would be in the interest of CFG to name our stadium the exact same as Man City's
Stadium Name?
- Thread starter CP_Scouse
- Start date
http://online.wsj.com/articles/mls-where-do-we-go-from-here-1417710613
Saw this article with an image of a new stadium being planned in Minnesota. Looks very unique and that's what NYCFC should do incorporate some unique feature. The last thing people should want is a "McStadium" and I'll use Southampton, Leicester, Middlesbrough, etc as examples. The thing is there may be so much focus on the location that the design may be an afterthought. Of course there may be certain restrictions on the shape, etc as well I can certainly imagine it being a very compact stadium. Not under 30,000 by any means just very compact.
Saw this article with an image of a new stadium being planned in Minnesota. Looks very unique and that's what NYCFC should do incorporate some unique feature. The last thing people should want is a "McStadium" and I'll use Southampton, Leicester, Middlesbrough, etc as examples. The thing is there may be so much focus on the location that the design may be an afterthought. Of course there may be certain restrictions on the shape, etc as well I can certainly imagine it being a very compact stadium. Not under 30,000 by any means just very compact.
Yeah, I think altering the shirt sponsorships would be a step too far. It wouldn't even get as far as a legal dispute I think. As much as clubs want to be in Champions League, if UEFA tried that the clubs would tell them to go pound sand, take theiir balls and go home.
I'd be surprised if Etihad didn't at least have right of first refusal. They might call it Etihad-NYC or some such so there wouldn't be two places with the exact same name but I definitely expect it to be Etihad something-or-other.
Ironically, the stadium in Melbourne may actually serve to make this less likely in New York. The Etihad Stadium in Melbourne is actually the home stadium of Melbourne Victory, the bitter rivals of Melbourne City. For this reason, it's arguable that trying to create a network of "Etihad Stadium"s all sharing the same name would be counter-productive, since the one under the control of a rival to CFG would stick out like a sore thumb and devalue the entire thing.
There is no way the stadium won't have a corporate name. I'm totally fine with that. That's just how it is in America (with the exception of a few famous stadiums in the NHL, MLB and NFL). There will be the actual name of the stadium and the name that the fans refer to as. We have a few like that in the Bay Area. SAP Center where the Sharks play is known as the Tank. When the Niners played at 3Com Park, everyone still called it Candlestick. The Quakes new Avaya Stadium will probably be referred to as the Epicenter.
Similar threads
