Expand the stadium? The poll

[SemperEadem]

2 hours ago, Ted Maul said:

 

Having a 40,000 seater would put us in the same category as the next group down  from the 'elite', and can only be a good thing. We would fill it regularly in this division.

If we price tickets well.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

3 hours ago, Bristol fox .... said:

I was hearing at the last game of the season that work to increase the stadium will start this winter building up the outside of the east stand just like liverpool did, then at the end of 2017/18 season the roof is to be lifted off, also the gas site that the club purchased opposite the east stand is to be made into a multi storey carpark. 

Round and round and round we go  

[Gerard]

7 hours ago, Ted Maul said:

Just get it done, the construction costs will be peanuts in today's game- there's zero risk of financial ruin like last time.

 

What's the worst that can happen? We go down and have the top tier closed? That's no issue, the capacity will be there for the next time we get promoted- look at the demand for season tickets before the 2014/15 season.

 

Having a 40,000 seater would put us in the same category as the next group down  from the 'elite', and can only be a good thing. We would fill it regularly in this division.

 

Stand still and fall behind.

 

If we're happy to stay in this division on 32,000 crowds then we'll pay for that small time thinking somewhere down the line.

[Winsum]

Club has opportunity to transform itself , leave the ground at 32,000 then the club is satisfied

to stagnate . The fans see through this and 32,000 will be more than enough.This year will be the 

year that decides this

[purpleronnie]

Even though I doubt they'll do any expansion, it is a bit odd our capacity is smaller than Derby's.

[Ted Maul]

5 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

Even though I doubt they'll do any expansion, it is a bit odd our capacity is smaller than Derby's.

We've both got traditionally similar sized fanbases, and similar sized stadiums.

 

Derby have done well to fill their ground in the Championship though- they're reaping the benefits of selling cheap tickets & even giving them away a few years ago. It's what we should be doing- get the next generation into the ground, and they will come back for life. The current capacity isn't allowing us to do that.

[Ashley]

6 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

Even though I doubt they'll do any expansion, it is a bit odd our capacity is smaller than Derby's.

Derby extended their ground as well with one corner not being built when they originally built the ground - why? ours has had a capacity decrease of about 250 in the past 3 seasons. Derby is what 1,100 bigger than ours?

[Bob Weasel Fox]

11 hours ago, Ashley said:

This.

 

I've said it before on here. But if people honestly want to us move forward as a club we need to expand we could easily fill the ground plus you've got a catchment area of what MK to Stoke, the other side of bormignham to the other side of Petberborough that's a massive area for a potential future fan base if we do well in the League, cups and Europe(potentially) again... 

I agree Ashley 

 

come on City get it done  

[fleckneymike]

We won the Premier league with 32k. 

 

Liverpool haven't. 

Aston Villa haven't. 

Sheff Weds haven't. 

Sunderland haven't. 

Newcastle haven't. 

Spurs haven't. 

 

I could go on. 

 

Its the size size of your trophy cabinet not the size of your stadium that counts. 

[yorkie1999]

9 minutes ago, fleckneymike said:

We won the Premier league with 32k. 

 

Liverpool haven't. 

Aston Villa haven't. 

Sheff Weds haven't. 

Sunderland haven't. 

Newcastle haven't. 

Spurs haven't. 

 

I could go on. 

 

Its the size size of your trophy cabinet not the size of your stadium that counts. 

And apart from sheff weds, I'd say all of them are seen as bigger clubs than us.

[fleckneymike]

2 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

And apart from sheff weds, I'd say all of them are seen as bigger clubs than us.

Good for them. Have they won the premier league? Liverpool aside, when did they last win a trophy?

[yorkie1999]

22 minutes ago, fleckneymike said:

Good for them. Have they won the premier league? Liverpool aside, when did they last win a trophy?

I'm not saying that, I'm saying that it seems to be bigger clubs are determined by the size of their ground and their following

[AmarteyAndChill]

1 minute ago, yorkie1999 said:

I'm not saying that, I'm saying that it seems to be bigger clubs are determined by the size of their ground and their following

Well, only teams who never win anything ever speak about their attendances etc. Newcastle for example. But I would love us to expand to 42k. 

[fleckneymike]

7 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

I'm not saying that, I'm saying that it seems to be bigger clubs are determined by the size of their ground and their following

I'd say bigger clubs are determined by what they win. 

[yorkie1999]

9 minutes ago, fleckneymike said:

I'd say bigger clubs are determined by what they win. 

Age old argument though, to me Newcastle are a bigger club than we are, and spurs

[SemperEadem]

Derby also have a full end standing, respect for that. That alone surely appeals enough to the vocal support lot.

[fleckneymike]

1 minute ago, yorkie1999 said:

Age old argument though, to me Newcastle are a bigger club than we are, and spurs

Shame they've won **** all in front of so many people. 

[Stadt]

It's only fans who care about the size of a club, Bournemouth are a tiny club but players would much rather sign for them than say Leeds or Villa. 

[Ted Maul]

Sure, there are examples of smaller clubs outperforming bigger ones- we're the sixth most successful club of the PL era despite being around 20th (although that's another debate) in terms of overall club size.

 

We're an exception rather than the rule though. If clubs with 30,000 seaters regularly won trophies, then fine- you could make a case for further success in the current capacity. However, generally, all clubs will eventually regress to the mean- I.e. end up roughly where their natural position lies. Villa, Sheff Wednesday and Leeds will one day be PL clubs again. Bournemouth, Stoke, WBA and ourselves will eventually be relegated again.

 

What we need to ensure is that we build as much as we can so our 'natural standing' minimizes the risk of that happening. When this group of players start to move on, we've got much more chance of signing quality replacements as a club with upward ambition and a 40,000 seater, over just another middling club who play in a 32,000 capacity ground and whose sole ambition is to stay up- clubs like that are ten a penny.

[davieG]

Little old Leicester City with all the luck going win a fairy tale Premier League. Ah so sweet.

 

That sums us up in the eyes of the football world.  

[CosbehFox]

10 hours ago, fleckneymike said:

We won the Premier league with 32k. 

 

Liverpool haven't. 

Aston Villa haven't. 

Sheff Weds haven't. 

Sunderland haven't. 

Newcastle haven't. 

Spurs haven't. 

 

I could go on. 

 

Its the size size of your trophy cabinet not the size of your stadium that counts. 

To me it goes beyond all the making your club bigger stuff, it's just about making sure local, young people get to see their club play. At the moment it's bit of a process for anyone without a season ticket to get tickets. 

 

Im still baffled as why we haven't at least put planning in. That process will take three months (at least) and then we have three years to build. 

[yorkie1999]

9 hours ago, fleckneymike said:

Shame they've won **** all in front of so many people. 

It is, but footballers want to play in front of big crowds, probably the reason why we struggle to sign big name players, the biggest player we have ever signed was Cambiasso and it was a major coup, if he'd gone Newcastle or spurs, no-one would have batted an eyelid.

[fleckneymike]

3 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

It is, but footballers want to play in front of big crowds, probably the reason why we struggle to sign big name players, the biggest player we have ever signed was Cambiasso and it was a major coup, if he'd gone Newcastle or spurs, no-one would have batted an eyelid.

If he'd have gone to those clubs he'd have still won **** all. 

 

Players go where they they get paid the most; they couldn't give a shit how many seats a ground has. 

 

The best players want European football, that's why we got one more season out of Riyad and Kasper and that's why we didn't attract any significantly better players because we weren't likely to be playing regularly in Europe. 

[Bob Weasel Fox]

2 hours ago, Ted Maul said:

Sure, there are examples of smaller clubs outperforming bigger ones- we're the sixth most successful club of the PL era despite being around 20th (although that's another debate) in terms of overall club size.

 

We're an exception rather than the rule though. If clubs with 30,000 seaters regularly won trophies, then fine- you could make a case for further success in the current capacity. However, generally, all clubs will eventually regress to the mean- I.e. end up roughly where their natural position lies. Villa, Sheff Wednesday and Leeds will one day be PL clubs again. Bournemouth, Stoke, WBA and ourselves will eventually be relegated again.

 

What we need to ensure is that we build as much as we can so our 'natural standing' minimizes the risk of that happening. When this group of players start to move on, we've got much more chance of signing quality replacements as a club with upward ambition and a 40,000 seater, over just another middling club who play in a 32,000 capacity ground and whose sole ambition is to stay up- clubs like that are ten a penny.

Excellent post. 

[Fox92]

2 hours ago, Ted Maul said:

Sure, there are examples of smaller clubs outperforming bigger ones- we're the sixth most successful club of the PL era despite being around 20th (although that's another debate) in terms of overall club size.

 

We're an exception rather than the rule though. If clubs with 30,000 seaters regularly won trophies, then fine- you could make a case for further success in the current capacity. However, generally, all clubs will eventually regress to the mean- I.e. end up roughly where their natural position lies. Villa, Sheff Wednesday and Leeds will one day be PL clubs again. Bournemouth, Stoke, WBA and ourselves will eventually be relegated again.

 

What we need to ensure is that we build as much as we can so our 'natural standing' minimizes the risk of that happening. When this group of players start to move on, we've got much more chance of signing quality replacements as a club with upward ambition and a 40,000 seater, over just another middling club who play in a 32,000 capacity ground and whose sole ambition is to stay up- clubs like that are ten a penny.

I don't get this "eventually go back where you belong" stuff. The only clubs with consistent top tier football are Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton and to a lesser extent Spurs and Chelsea. Only money would make me put Manchester City in that category too now. Villa are a big club, the biggest outside the PL, and I'd never have thought to see them relegated.

 

... But that's it. All other clubs just jump between divisions. It's unfair to put WBA and Stoke in the same category as Bournemouth. Stoke and WBA are similar clubs to us in terms of jumping between tiers 1 and 2 - WBA even more so given their success of winning tier 2 and the odd domestic trophy (a great FA Cup record).

 

Attracting fans has is all about now. If young kids want to pick a side (without parents influence) then naturally they'll go for a successful side. There's no way a kid would go "ohh yeah they have a good history so I'll go with them even though they're an average Championship side now" surely?

 

But as always you've also got to consider population. We're in a great position being a one club City - naturally we should get 40,000 a week. Same applies to Leeds and Newcastle. But for clubs like WBA it's difficult being in an area where you've got other clubs of similar size and then a bigger club in Villa (though I can't imagine people from the Black Country choose a club from the City of Birmingham). We would sell out an expansion of our ground (or should do given the size of Leicestershire and the fact we're the only professional side) but relegation would see people filter out like always. Yeah our average attendance has always been good but I can remember going every week between 05-08 and they'd be large spaces in the ground. There are big grounds around the country where stands aren't even opened - look at Leeds, Wednesday, Port Vale etc.

 

We need to be at a point where we've got a turnover of good players, a good youth system and where we look for good managers so we can build to be stable. In recent years Southampton have been excellent at this. The only thing they have been missing is a trophy.