I admit I haven't seen the current Jumbotron in a while, but I don't know if it's truly that much larger in terms of space taken up. It's a stupid tech spec thing. It certainly wouldn't take up 3.75x more space. I'm pretty sure it only takes up incrementally more space and they're screwing around with some maths to make it sound cool. Like if you had 10 toppings options in your burger, unique combinations of 3 toppings is 1,000 (10 x 10 x 10). You have 10 toppings options for 1 hamburger. Not 1,000 permutations of 10 items creating 1,000 unique burgers.
Visual size comparison of a 65 inch 16x9 display vs 55 inch 16x9 display
www.displaywars.com
For instance, 55" vs 65" TV goes from 1292 square inches to 1805 square inches. Raw values 65" divided by 55" inches is about 1.18x difference but from an area comparison it's around 1.40x.
55" to 110" is 5170 screen area vs 1292 or about 4x. But that's if you use TV ratios. If the jumbotron is allowed to be taller than wider than normal TV/projector ratios, then the jump in size isn't as high.
The current Jumbotron IIRC also is suspended from long bars from the ceiling. If those are removed, the new one doesn't need to go lower and you can increase screen height to increase screen area.
Also, IIRC, the corners of the current jumbotron weird which creates a sort of octagon shape instead of a cubed one above? (or at least maybe the images are not properly bezel to bezel?) A perfectly cubed one like the video above that has screen going edge to edge, there's probably already an increase in screen width if occupying the same space.