Packers plan Lambeau expansion

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...work-next-year

Quote:

---

Packers look to expand Lambeau, want to begin work next year

The Green Bay Packers would like to begin construction on expansion to Lambeau Field after next year's Super Bowl, a team official on Friday told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.The Packers are looking to expand the south end-zone area of the historic stadium, which opened in 1957 and was renovated eight years ago. Consultants have told the team as many as 7,500 seats could be added, said Jason Wied, the team's general counsel and vice president of administration.
"I would expect it would take a couple of seasons to do it," Wied told the newspaper. "We obviously want to play through construction. That makes it a little harder to accelerate it."
Wied said the Packers would finance the construction, but no estimate of costs was provided. "We haven't buttoned down all of the financing," he said. "But we intend to do it on our own."
The Packers are surveying season-ticket holders and fans on the season-ticket wait list for input on seating configurations, including several indoor and outdoor concepts that the team says "would be unlike any other concepts currently being offered at other NFL facilities." Among the designs are what has been referred to as a "wall of fans," with steep dimensions bringing all seats closer to the field.

---

don't they mean benches not seats? : )

Quote:

---

would be unlike any other concepts currently being offered at other NFL facilities."

---

already have that with no seats and high school bench seating already..

With a 30+ year waiting list we'd be dumb not to add more seating.

Now if only the Bears would follow suit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Benjamin

Now if only the Bears would follow suit

---

Rather have less capacity and real seats and cupholders over lameblow's cold steel benches that 2 fatties will squeeze you out of your seat esp in winter when all in big coats.... to each his own though... and more endzone benchs with a bad view,its WHY soldier field was changed, to eliminate all the endzone seats with awful views we had in the 1970's to 90's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabears54

Rather have less capacity and real seats and cupholders over lameblow's cold steel benches that 2 fatties will squeeze you out of your seat esp in winter when all in big coats.... to each his own though... and more endzone benchs with a bad view,its WHY soldier field was changed, to eliminate all the endzone seats with awful views we had in the 1970's to 90's

---

I just think it is sad that in one of the largest markets (maybe the largest since no team in LA or NY[New Jersey is not NY]) that we have the smallest stadium and lowest seating capacity (if not the lowest, than pretty close)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Benjamin

I just think it is sad that in one of the largest markets (maybe the largest since no team in LA or NY[New Jersey is not NY]) that we have the smallest stadium and lowest seating capacity (if not the lowest, than pretty close)

---

yeah wish it was a little bigger also- but that was the city, not bears that did that- will also say.. depending on design rather have a lower capacity stadium like Soldier field.. with almost all good views- over stadiums like fed-ex with 20,000+ more seats but 15,000+ are obstructed views where can't see all and need TV's hanging down from the rafter's to see what you have missed.. or so far away if at top you feel in a different county.

Alot more to just saying 'wish it was bigger", and doing it right.. not sure if you ever sat in the old soldier field, where the end zone seats were 1/2 a football field away( and 60% of the seating) and you didn't feel part of the game, to give you an idea how much closer and better the new configuration is, the old concourse( which seats were behind this) is now the back of the stadiums seats.A;ways will be a balance between the 2.. and much rather have 66,000 capacity with large comfortable seats, than 72,000 -74,000 capacity because no seats and all benches. Maybe becuase have been to 25+ stadiums now, have a pretty good handle on the stadiums and +/-'s in person as opposed to "just the numbers"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabears54

Rather have less capacity and real seats and cupholders over lameblow's cold steel benches that 2 fatties will squeeze you out of your seat esp in winter when all in big coats.... to each his own though... and more endzone benchs with a bad view,its WHY soldier field was changed, to eliminate all the endzone seats with awful views we had in the 1970's to 90's

---

The benches are fine as long as you were born with a spine. They're much more comfortable than most of the stadium seating I've sat in. If comfort was such a big issue, Lambeau wouldn't be sold out every single season since 1960.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evernight

The benches are fine as long as you were born with a spine. They're much more comfortable than most of the stadium seating I've sat in. If comfort was such a big issue, Lambeau wouldn't be sold out every single season since 1960.

---

LOL "if" benches "more comfortable" than seats.. there would be 32 stadium with them now,, not ONE.. thanks for the laugh!..lameblow is sold out because nothing else to do in wisconsin, and a family tradition- esp the upper 1/2 of state-only professional sport in town.. not because of benches, sorry

Benches are much more comfortable for the larger fans (larger in size, not fandom) and much more comfortable for those who have seats next to the larger people.

You would be squeezed in tightly in a stadium seat, but not so much on a bench. Much like if you were of smaller stature having to sit next to a larger individual in a stadium seat and having their body overflow their seat onto your own.