The stadium myth: new grounds won’t rescue your club – or your city

From a distance Everton’s new 52,000 seat home, a steel and glass bubble plopped on top of a sturdy brick base has the aspect of a giant escape pod ready for launch. The more buffed, dazzling, screen stuffed and hyperactive these new stadiums appear, the more they seem to embody not reinvestment in the communities they represent but liftoff from them.

Incredibly biased journalism — especially the description of the ground that has I would consider to be an amazing feat in engineering, considering how it’s been built on a dock?

Definitely a feat of engineering. Apparently the Uppr South Stand is as steep as they they could legally make it without breaking regulations.

The 4th Grace. Welcome to our city.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/apr/29/football-soccer-stadiums-everton-nfl

Call me paranoid but I don't think The Guardian likes us.

I wouldn’t use his paper to wipe with in any of the toilets 50 meters away. 🐀🐀💩💩💩😡😡

But this question had me thinking back to the newer US stadiums I've been in — and which Dan Meis's design inevitably draws on:

Are we traveling towards a world of blandly perfect stadium engineering, where every stadium looks and feels the same, and every fanbase is funneled towards the same set of game-day habits and enthusiasms?

Of course there's a list of key ingredients the new stadium must include, but at the same time, there are elements that make each stadium unique.

As far as it being some great feat of engineering, Tony, the construction elements were all pretty standard, I'm afraid. It was 50 years ago that I worked on a job where we built a huge embankment entirely out of sand pumped from the seabed. The Dutch have been doing it for even longer.

And dynamic compaction of that sand creates a superb foundation to build on — completely contrary to the garbage they drummed into every kid in school, based on a total myth in the Bible that says you can't build on sand.

The main premise seems to be that the traditional working class game has been taken over by global corporates and that is a bad thing. Unfortunately, that cat was let out of the bag with the creation of the Premier League… so, regardless of your view, it is too late to change course now.

The paranoid cynic in me feels that this is only an issue for this writer now that Everton are (belatedly) joining the party, with a chance to compete again. Could be wrong, though.

The writer's point is that new stadiums rarely bring prosperity to the cities or areas where they're built. But all the other examples he cites were built largely on public money -- local bonds and local taxes -- and generate little real return. Most of them do turn out to be more boondoggle than boon.

But I read somewhere that public money accounts for only 2% of the cost of BMD. This writer pounds away at our stadium without making that crucial distinction. And that's bad work.

As a football fanatic, it was the most confusing mix of emotions to have the Minnesota United stadium — one of, if not the nicest MLS stadium in the country — be built just steps from my home. A newish team to the top tier in America, pre-game parties at my place and a tipsy walk to and from the place to cheer on my local club.

Mind you, no American football teams have the history and feeling of community ownership seen throughout the world — and hence why our lack of passion for the sport means we still don't produce a national team that's competitive at World Cups, even if we're progressing — so our fan base was always going to be a good dose of hipsters with little knowledge of the sport and wealthy suburban families.

We fill the stadium most matches, and the supporters end does a decent job singing most of the match. But my point is the game here was always going to be a bit sanitized, and hence why I bleed Everton blue despite having a professional club a stone's throw away.

And so, despite all the positives, and as a local season ticket holder, if I could go back and do it all over, I'd have fought more to have them build the stadium somewhere else.

Why? Because, like the author said, economic regeneration from stadiums is a myth, always has been. It's done nothing for our community, aside from the jobs to build the stadium and a handful of low-paid concessions jobs 17 days a year. Sure, a couple pubs benefit on match day, but that's it.

Eventually some housing and a hotel and some restaurants will pop up, but nothing more and probably less than what would've occurred with smart urban planning not encumbered by trying to make our sleazy billionaire owner happy, since he bought the land around it and has stifled development at every turn that's not to his liking.

And like the author said, all it really does is enrich the owners who don't give two shits about us fans, who pay 3 times the cost of a beer to cheer on our average squad. Obviously every situation is different, as with Everton, the alternative was Goodison and there's no universe where it would be acceptable for the club not to exist. In Minnesota, it was build the stadium outside of the city or move to another state if somehow that couldn't happen.

But other than preserving the legacy of the club, and of course generating revenue to build the club in Everton's case, there's a lot not to like and a lot of bullshit served up by ownership that deserves criticism like much of what the author shared.

Mike G., that's a fair point about private financing, but our stadium was mostly built with private dollars, and I would've rather that important location been used for something else and that $25 million in public infrastructure money be spent elsewhere.

And it's also about being honest about what people should expect when these stadiums come along, because it's often not what it's cracked up to be.

A futuristic design surrounded by the magnificent original dock walls, with the hydraulic tower on the plaza about to be converted to a bar.

I always thought the design was clever. To me it looks like a ship facing towards the Irish Sea and the brick surroundings resemble the dock buildings common along the city waterfront. Historical reference and the future all in one. Re-development of the area will happen.

For different reasons, look at the transformation of Salford Quays near Manchester.

If you want bland stadiums that all look the same, think Middlesborough, Sunderland, Derby, Leicester and Southampton. Same stadium, different signage.

To the defense of Jesus, building a house directly on sand is generally not recommended as it can lead to structural issues due to the sand's instability and tendency to compress and shift. Sand, especially dry sand, has air bubbles that can compress under the weight of a house, causing uneven settling and potential damage. Additionally, sand can be susceptible to erosion and water movement, further destabilizing the foundation.

Don't question the prophet man, he's a blue.

Ask a supporter where he sits and you might get an answer along the lines of... Top Balcony, Gwladys Street end of the 'New Main Stand'... and we'll all know where he means. All the while forgetting that this 'New Main Stand' was started around the time The Beatles split up.

Yep, back then when you could still dig in your pocket and find a 12-sided threepenny bit, or a big copper penny dated 1843 with that young lass Victoria on the back... That's why we needed a new ground.

'Build it and they'll come' as is said; well, we have and, eventually, they will.

Another saying is 'If you can't find anything good to say, don't say nowt'. RS Media hack.

Albeit, our recent ownership/management and "know-how" are a very worrying 24 carat oxymoron to me.

Not given to anyone on suicide watch.

File under "paper for lousy chips"!

I am no engineer but going by this presentation I think you are correct. My head was spinning by the time I got 30 minutes into it.

The engineering starts about 12 minutes in.

John Sargent Lecture: Dock filling for the new Everton stadium project at Bramley-Moore Dock

As identified by posters above, since the advent of the Premier League, a number of things have happened – one of which is attendances have risen. Most new stadiums were built primarily to increase capacity (and especially that of premium seating). Everton is no different. At the same time, other events are being held at some stadiums – boxing, concerts etc, that bring much-needed revenue to both the clubs and the hosting city. Everton is no different.

Arguably Tottenham's new stadium is the pinnacle for the UK – with a price tag to justify that label. Even though they are in the less salubrious London Borough of Haringey, they have a huge premium offering, and a brewery within the stadium that can pump out 150k pints per match (especially when the Blues are in town). Chelsea will do something spectacular, and Arsenal are well established – all in London.

Everton had to strike a balance with their new stadium. Form over function, cost vs aesthetics. It was stated before work started that the finishing would be "mid-range" – managing expectations of a fanbase I don't think was particularly concerned.

There's been many bad examples. Derby's Pride Park, to keep costs down (in a project beset with corruption) simply lifted the design of Middlesborough's Riverside Stadium and have an almost identikit stadium in different colours.

I've not had the chance to see the Everton Stadium up close, but have spoken to plenty who've been to the test event. Transport and access issues aside (as they will surely be ameliorated), the overwhelming verdict is that what we have is a considerable upgrade, in almost every aspect. That's all that matters.

I always like to read from different media sources, regardless of their political leanings, as I prefer to stay open-minded.

But I fell out with The Guardian years ago when, along with their New York Times partner, they put national and international security at risk with their publication of the Snowden leaks.

Some would call it freedom of the press or freedom of speech… investigative journalism. Others would call it irresponsible. I understand the former, but I know my own view. They should have refrained and handed him in.

So I have no respect for anything that particular media publication has to say.

Back on point, when you get to visit the Everton Stadium, you won't help but be blown away with your first look as you enter through the dock walls. As much as Goodison has it's memories and unique charm that we will always remember, the new house is unique in its setting and magnificence.

Another thing I've mentioned, it's hard to think that, in the not too distant future, there will be a generation that only know Everton at Bramley-Moore Dock. Most people currently under the age of 5, I would say.

Here's to them building their own memories and adding to ours.

I also witnessed the creation of new islands in Maldives dredged from the coral.

All bog standard engineering and don't forget that BMD was filled into an enclosed space so even easier to 'build on sand' as it's restricted.

I also suspect that the major part of the dock infill is under the pitch where there are less loads to worry about.

The whole article is a bit weird. I agree with lots of it from a nostalgia point of view but it's just a really naive view of the world.

New stadiums aren't to blame for the ills of modern football. They are just part of the mechanics. And they might be one of the best bits.

I mean, if we could put a cap on everything in football: ticket prices, merchandise, player wages, transfer fees, TV rights, channel subscriptions, and artificially deflate and then hold the value generated by the game, then fans could pay less to watch football in a decrepit old stadium. Who wins and why?

And we're still getting more and more modern bridges, replacing the old ones, allowing more vehicle movements, and they still just go from side to side. What's the point?

Who reads or listens to their bullshit anyway?

When I drove up for the Arsenal match, I avoided the smart looking new Runcorn-Widnes crossing. To avoid the toll, I opted for what I know, the old Runcorn bridge.

No, the sly so-and-sos now charge you for that too!!

It's only £2.40.

She used to recycle Lidl carrier bags and it wasn't anything to do with the environment!!

The only real thing that comes through the piece is the lack of professionalism and the total cynicism of the author. A Manchester-based hatchet job that was as bitter as sour grapes. Full of throwaway comments based on what exactly?

The Premier League has changed football and its fans. As such, big money has attracted new owners with different aims and expectations of owning a Premier League club. The days of Goodison are gone, the days of owners like Bill Kenwright went with it. Change or die.

It's not a bland concrete stadium built in a Tesco car park in Kirkby. (If it was, I would probably agree with the author somewhat.) It's an iconic stadium, built with fans' input, in a place steeped in tradition; it's ours.

The author must, I assume, appreciate sex and travel...

All we need now is to start building a squad capable of matching these ambitions. It's all about the players now.

That's more like it, Robert, and you're right. Everything is in place now, just get it right where it matters. On the pitch.

Paul, back to my landlady. Being Italy, I was always dubious about her connections when I used to go and pay the rent (cash only). Her husband once got stopped for speeding and was found to be drink-driving.

A few phone calls and the police officers on duty were informed by their superiors that there had been some sort of mistake and he was let to go on his way. True story!!

Jonathan Liew is one of the worst. He openly admits he's not really interested (his own words) about teams outside of the Top 6.

So any club who shows any ambition to challenge the cartel are instantly belittled and laughed at.

I bet you this guy is a Red Shite.

You have some right tales to tell. 😂

As for Everton, their commercial and football business will be forced to bridge the gulf in professionalism that was allowed to exist. My own experience of the commercial end was a endearing joke; as for the football end, read the ToffeeWeb archives, which is beyond a joke. Fortunately, professional owners are in place and trial-and-error change will come.

More funds will become available with the new stadium and it will be properly commercially managed. The stadium company will be profitable within 5 years.

As for the football end, a whole reset is being attempted. Moyes has discovered he has not come back to the Everton of old. He really has not developed his management ability on his travels, reverting to Dycheball (inverted wingers, 4-4-2, hard work, waiting on the right connection attack, limited support play, but in fairness earlier substitutions which are hopefully positive rather than negative), when faced with accountability.

With the remnants of PSR still existing, we will get a few replacement squad players. It is not in Moyes's kitbag, the ability to manage big changes in playing staff. I expect him to be replaced at some stage next season.

So as always, Everton's progress is determined on the pitch and success there will contribute to the stadium, but the stadium will be able to stand alone.

The Docklands development will continue the development of Liverpool City into the new century. But we will always get those uniquely magical moments, like the in disguise Everton flare vendor who sold 10,000 red-coloured flares to Kopites, which went of blue when set off.

Nothing to see here.

Seems fair to judge him once he's got a decent group of players. That might take a while. Personally I think he's very likely to see out next season in full with us.

If they are not replaced this summer, the managers at most risk next season are

Postecoglou
Amorim
Potter
Hurzeler
Maresca

Moyes looks pretty safe to me.

If we had spent, like Brighton, £230M on a very talented side that finished 11th, I think we'd be disgusted not to make the Champions League places. Hurzeler will be very lucky to see out next season unless there is a sharp improvement

Jealous wannabe Marxists.

I will name just a few. Le Tissier, Ian Wright, Paul Merson, Zola, etc.

Some of the comments here are clearly from people who are at home with the Daily Mail and The Telegraph (may God forgive them) – and before you scream at me, I read The Times (oh, somebody is yelling already).

Victorian thoughts from a bygone age.

That went well for him, didn't it? File this one under another bitter red gobshite jealous as fuck we're moving into a top-notch arena.

'It was stated before work started that the finishing would be "mid-range" – managing expectations of a fanbase I don't think was particularly concerned.'

Was it?! I don't think any supporters would accept mediocrity. We had enough of that under Kenwright (and in my opinion, Philip Carter, in terms of club ambition).

This structure cost nearly £800M. Tottenham's just over a £1B – but it went over budget, is in London and is 10,000 seats bigger. I certainly hope we are not getting 'mid range'. False economy if so.

The Express somewhere along the way stopped being a centre-left paper and turned into something totally different.

As for the Daily Mail, I liken it to being preached to by your least favourite Aunty.

Aunty Eva Braun?

(Btw, every 'news' paper in Britain is owned or /run by hideous cunts and Private Eye is the only publication that will get you anywhere close to the truth).

Aunty Eva Braun?

(btw, EVERY 'news' paper in Britain is owned/run by hideous c**ts and Private Eye is the only publication that will get you anywhere close to the truth).

Sat level with our backline for a half, I appreciated those two like never before. They were unreal.

I do like Moyes but, on the wages and regime he is under, I expect more, Robert. Im do not see him as being other than a stabilising influence. I am particularly disappointed that he has not developed managerially on his travels and can't believe that he has adopted Dycheball.

The Stage 2 development beyond Moyes is essential and will be under TFG, if their form at Roma is anything to go by. The selection of that manager will be of their criteria and will fit into their strategic plan.

Moyes will survive the Summer, but I think there will be an aim of as little change as possible, but hopefully a step up in midfield playmaking and support play. But Moyes has to be more positive in tactics next season. He cannot resort to Dycheball only, as he is currently doing, with a spurt forward in the second half.

Stage 2 is dependent on TFG's time frame, though I think the pressure will be on when Everton move to the new stadium.

It could be that, in the face of change and accountability, Moyes has decided safety first is the best option for him, but he needs to show signs of being able to win games at the higher level, which he has not done yet and never has done. This demands a more positive driven attitude, than his "knife to a gunfight" thinking. Which he has effectively raised again recently.

Just middle-class people who've moved to the right with age.

Anybody know how true that is?

We don't know how much Moyes is on either. Unless certain posters have seen his contract. We will sign more than a couple of squad players too.

Alcaraz surely can't have signed a deal. He is a Flamengo player on loan until we buy him, or not.

Their owners live in France and wanted everyone to vote to come out of Europe (Brexit), very similar to other big businesses, eg, Dyson, he moved to Singapore.

Regarding the football stadiums, the UK is full of new stadiums, 95% of them have under-performing or downright poor teams.

My thoughts have always been, build a team first, new
ground later or what comes first, the chicken or the egg?

Until we have players that can at least approach the opposition's in skill, we can't expect to turn up and win those big games.

I did think that but I guess it could be pre-dated to 1 July.

The UK hasn't left Europe. It left the EU. Apologies, I get a bit pedantic on stuff like that. There are roughly 50 nations in Europe, 27 in the EU. I know what you are getting at, but I'm a self-confessed Geography geek.

Ryan, a combination of multiple factors. A club in continuous decline over decades of mismanagement. This led to not being able to attract the best players. And then tactics by various managers.

John @52 (again). I've always been of the opinion that, as a football club, if you get it right on the pitch, the rest will follow. Sir Alex Ferguson's Manchester United are a good example.

Looks we are going to have to do it in reverse.

Neither is true, Andrew.

John #52,

In our case, we had to build a new stadium to increase income to allow us to build a better team. We couldn't afford to do it the other way round.

Up to you as to which is the chicken and which is the egg.

The Old Lady is 132 years young, a bit crumbling and, thanks to many manager changes, is no longer the fortress it once was. Keeping it going is not really a viable option.

We have home games sold out every week, a season-ticket waiting list. We needed a new home, and Dan Meis has designed a stadium to replicate Goodison Park.

The only bug bear for me is the access and egress. I am sure the council didn't think it would actually happen so didn't plan. As someone else mentioned, councils do tend to be reactive.

What really stuffed us was Putin invading Ukraine; Moshri lost his backer and cheap steel. Meanwhile, Usmanov is still sitting happily laughing at us.

But that ground has been covered and raked over quite a few times.

Anyway UTFT and in May 2026 a Wembley appearance.

But against their peers, they're shit. 😂

Back to the news and talk of shit. As most who listen to me on here know, I find my most reliable source my dogs, confiding in them in the build up to matches and debating managerial appointments.

With Ipswich coming up, she curled one off in the centre circle of one of the pitches on the park this morning. I don't know what to make of that.

Goodison was way behind in generating commercial revenue from corporates and the new stadium will bring us new and welcome avenues of income.

That article doesn't address that. (Although I stopped reading half way through, it was that shite!)

But I'll bet you if we had a fire sale this summer, every one of those players, including Harrison, Doucoure, Keane etc, would get contracts with lower-table Premier League clubs. They're just not good enough if we expect to win against the Top 8 by skill rather than luck.

On that note — Soucek? No thanks!

- NewProfile
Was Aaron one of those Liverpool fans who got duped into buying a repackaged blue flare on Sunday?

- straff
hahahaha!

- KratosBeThyName
Highlight of your bitter season

- SergeantDetritus
Nah, that was your faces when Tarkowski equalised ;-)

- Harrogatespa
It was pretty funny and much more measured than firing red flares at the Liver building and setting light to Dixie Dean's statue, or urinating on wreaths laid there to commemorate Evertonians who've passed on

Never heard of him before. I hope not to hear of him again.

You could pay Moyes £10M per week and it wouldn't change anything. The manager's wage doesn't make the players better. Fundamentally, we need better players. It is literally that simple.

At Roma, TFG haven't done anything to suggest they are intent on sporting success. All they have done is achieve much the same as before… but on a much lower budget.

The glass ceiling at Everton has almost nothing to do with the manager and almost everything to do with spending power and access (or not) to Champions League quality players.

Moyes is untried as regards being given a budget, Moshiri's largesses would have played out something the same with him as Manager and he would struggle with a larger squad and definitely playing in Multi Competitions.

He is a good average Manager at best, mid table with the odd fling in a Ueafa competition, which inevitably would result in a lower Premier League placing.

Nice guy, honourable, honest man, who has managed to keep his Management salary going over the years.I would say this is achievement in itself as long as you turn a blind eye to competing in Competitions.

A Club like Everton should be competing in multi competitions and always should have been.

There's an insult on almost every line, I think its fair to say the Gardian doesn't like us.

He got one thing right, the new stadium alone wont bring us success, its the quality of the lads on the pitch that may do that.

So Moyes glass ceiling (which he does have in my view) isn’t what will hold us back in the next couple of years.

Overwhelmingly our ceiling is driven by money and (the closely related point of) player quality.

Seems not all bridges are engineered the same.

Danny #41, I know you're a lot younger than me and since I was a teenager reading the broadsheet Express It has never been centre left, always a tory rag.

That's not to say things aren't happening now, or that things will be reshaped over the next 2-5 years when cashflow is rolling in.

The little metal bridge wasn't strong enough for pedestrians, but handles traffic. That said, you could have walked up to great Howard street, and avoided it.

Exactly, if we don't have attacking players how can a manager employ attacking tactics? Our forwards are DCL, often labelled a Championship player at best when not injured, Broja can't get off the treatment table either, and Beto and Chermiti also Championship level.

Then we have the much maligned Doucoure and Harrison and a few others our fans think are just shit.

And the same fans expect the manager to turn this shower of shit into world beaters?

Aside from a perhaps provocative headline placed above a photo of Bramley-Moore Dock, I didn’t find anything overtly negative about Everton – or favourable toward the ‘big six’ or the RS. The article’s main point, as I read it, is that while new stadiums may excite fans with the promise of better teams, they’re justified more broadly by claims they’ll regenerate deprived areas. But in practice, that regeneration tends to be limited – and often non-existent. The article notes this is especially true in the US, where federal law allows local governments to issue tax-exempt bonds to finance such projects.

The Guardian has a US edition, and I think this piece was primarily aimed at that audience. Everton’s stadium was likely referenced simply because it’s the next major project due to open, offering a current example to frame the argument.

According to the Guardian, Aaron Timms lives in New York and writes about the ‘business of soccer’. That suggests he’s approaching the issue from a North American perspective – not as some southern-based RS media fanboy.

I was impressed with the stadium and it is unique in design.

It is only just over 2 miles from Goodison and has an L5 postcode. I don't know which area it constitutes, but L5 to me includes the Everton, Kirkdale and Vauxhall areas, so I hardly think it's a million miles away from our roots.

Once the reality that we couldn't realistically redevelop Goodison kicked in, I don't know what the alternative would have been.

It's 30 years too late after the failed Kings Dock and Kirkby proposals.

Way back then, if we were going to move, I suggested the land of the old Speke airport. Okay, partly biased as it's were I originate from, but for the purists, it sits within the city boundaries, it has direct access to the motorway network, national and Mersey rail in South Parkway and an international airport. Plenty of land for parking too.

It might not have sat well with the traditional north end support base, but it would have made sense to me.

Just as we made Goodison an iconic stadium in her day, this is one. Big capital? Maybe so, but that is the nature of the game and we have to move with it to keep up. We did in the 60s as the famed Mersey Millionaires. It won't change our hearts or souls.

It's not the first time we've moved. Technically, this will be our 4th ground.

1878. The originals.

I'm going to disagree with Ray and say that John's post is an absolute moanfest from someone who seems stuck in the past and wants to stay there.

If you don't move with the times you stagnate and eventually die!

not being rude, but I am old( ish)

you may be on your mobile as well., but for the love of whatever, please try using paragraphs.

I really can't be arsed reading your post as it is just a wall of words.

The biggest catastrophe was the day that weasel Kenwright got his hands on the club.

We’ve never really recovered

Secondly Ray we have to accept that the "plan" isn't/wasn't to keep costs down, and won't be the plan going forward.

We can't plead for low prices at the cost of advancement financially and professionally.

It's a sign of the times and there's no way we can stop it.

You have to accept change or bail out, harsh but true.

And to want to remain how we are and where we are, to me, is selfish. It's fine for those of us who've been lucky enough to see us win titles and trophies but the younger supporters who haven't deserve hope and a sustainable successful future.

They ARE the future not us!

The Everton Stadium is good with me.

Brian @93. I have said I would like the stands named Goodison, St Domingo's, Prince Rupert and St Luke's.

Don't name them after former players, managers or chairmen.

We can do that with lounges or even on the concourses. I noted at Chelsea on Saturday, the bar I went to get served at was name "Roberto's Bar". Others were named after players and people associated with the club.

I don't think we should have Bill's Bar, even though it may help with the queues at half time.

We can't choose the name I know, but I like Waterfront Stadium, or simply Bramley Moor Dock.

Apparently still a split ownership between Manchester City Council and Manchester City.

They paid half the cost to convert it into a football stadium, but still a steal for their reported £20M contribution.

West Ham however got theirs for about a pound. Wild speculation as I don't know, but they got it on the cheap, with the restrictions that came with it, making it the soulless stadium it is.

I take your points they are well researched.I do feel that mismanagement of players whether by recruitment, contracts and management of them at the Club has reduced quality. Quality reduction is via lack of measurement, poor service level agreements between departments at Everton because of no accountability and self serving structure orientated to self preservation rather than real deliverable performance.

TFG will be a Quality Management orientated regime, Toyota was one.of the first Companies to implement Total Quality.Managenent.Which was the bases of Japanese Industrial Expansion.I don't think Moyes is up to such Management and he as regressed in the face of it.