clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Spurs and Chelsea could share Wembley in 2017-18

New, comments

This isn't anywhere near certain, but signs are indicating a deal could be made to keep Spurs in London.

Phil Cole/Getty Images

Spurs need a new home in 2017-18 while they tear down White Hart Lane and build a new stadium in its place, and the Daily Mail suggests it very well could be Wembley Stadium.

Wembley has always been at the top of the list for Spurs' home away from home, not least because it is in London and hence not far from White Hart Lane, but the FA has always been highly resistant to the idea of a club team ground-sharing at Wembley due to traffic issues and number of hosted events during the year.

That is, until Chelsea came along. The Blues are also looking at building a new stadium over the course of three years and are practically throwing money at the FA for use of Wembley. That puts them in direct competition with Spurs during 2017-18, but apparently when you throw money at the problem a lot of doors can open.

According to the Mail report, the FA would stand to make about £55m in fees (assuming two years of Spurs tenancy and three years for Chelsea) over the course of the three years, and as long as attendance is held to under 50k fans, there aren't any regulations that would restrict the number of events per season. Arranging the Wembley schedule so that Spurs and Chelsea don't play home matches on the same match day wouldn't be especially difficult, and with White Hart Lane only seating 36k fans, restricting home matches to "only" 50k doesn't seem like it would be problematic.

Oh, and the FA would make a boatload of money. See? Everybody wins.

Wembley is, of course, one of three options that Spurs are looking at, in addition to stadium:MK in Milton Keynes and the Olympic Stadium. Each option has its advantages and disadvantages: stadium:MK is outside London and has the added effect of being Football League pariahs MK Dons' home stadium, and the Olympic Stadium would mean a ground-share with West Ham, who have been entirely uncooperative thus far. Spurs have yet to formally announce which option they prefer, or even which seems the most likely.

I do, of course, find it highly convenient that the FA were adamantly against allowing Spurs to use Wembley until Chelsea came in with their big three-year deal and then, hey, Bob's your uncle. But whatever. If this means that Spurs can stay in London while the NDP is finished, that's undoubtedly the best possible deal for local Spurs fans. Hopefully they'll find a way to make it happen.