im pretty sure we would move to a new stadium. extending isn't cost effective and the area around st Mary's isn't the nicest.
Yep! The stadium should have been there in the first place but for petty local politics. Liberal Eastleigh, Tory Hampshire and Socialist Southampton - did anyone think they would agree on anything ever let alone a football stadium? Plus Lowe kept moving the goalposts with retail and cinema additions. We might have a better chance with Nicola with his negotiating skills. PS The advantage is that I can charge people a fiver (or even a little more) to park in my driveway on match days. There is space for three cars so it should help ease the cost of a season ticket. I might even get the very lovely Mrs Godders one of those catering trailers so that she can sell tea and sandwiches to help bring in a little extra income.
Not me, just taking the mick out of the NIMBYs that live there. If there even are any - to me it looks mostly like fields and football pitches. My BY, if I had one, would be in Shirley, so probably not much better than the current location...
A meeting to discuss the planned stadium to be built at Stoneham was held in St George's School and I went along. A frightfully well spoken women jumped up and started shouting "We don't want football yobs in our neighbourhood. House prices will fall and there will be fights and vandalism." At that point some people started throwing lumps of turf at Alan Whitehead who was on the platform and gangs of hysterical women started screaming at the club and city representatives who were also on the platform. It all became far more hostile and unpleasant than any football match I have ever been to. The one lesson I did learn though was never get between a middle class tory voter and the increasing value of her house. You'll get kneed in the balls for your trouble.
I still say that they picked a good location for the present stadium, being a former brown field site that has been put to good use. It just isn't big enough and never was, even in the planning. Seeing as Stoneham was going to be 26,000 capacity, I would say thank goodness for those protesters.
I can't see us moving to a new stadium. Firstly, I don't think we would get planning permission, so soon after building and moving to St Mary's. Secondly, Moving stadium is a risky business on the field. We would need to buck the trend to see our team improve on the field after a move. Most sides that have moved to new stadiums, whilst in the Premier League have been relegated at some stage after and that has sent some into admin, as they can no longer meet the payments on a Chamionship budget. Although Arsenal haven't been relegated they have not won anything and have seen their spending power decline with stadium repayments. Thirdly, I believe that there is much more that can be done at the St Mary's site. As has been mentioned, the local authorities would like to see the area around it developed with bars, hotels etc. Although not Saints fans, many visitors to the city could take advantage of the area and take in a top flight football match at the same time. There is also the cruise ship business, tourists on the ships can come and take in a football match as well. There is such an untapped area of opportunity a small outlay in a stadium increase could provide a lot of extra revenue for both the club and City.
From a business point of view the most important thing is the PL and resulting Sky money. Cannot see any reason for the Leihberrs to lay out large sums on money on a new stadium...that hope died sadly with Markus. Things have to be cost effective.
are you not jumping the gun a bit..how can you justify after one season where you scraped home a stadium expansion of what has been mentioned 40,000 and unbelievable 60,000......dont forget you will be one of the favorites in many peoples eyes to go down....now you would not like to be lumbered with an expansion in the championship would you.....wait and see how you progress over the next 5 years until its safe to waste money on a white elephant...
Who's saying this season? Also we're not one of the favourites to go down. It's certainly not impossible but it's not for Swansea, either.
It wouldn't be this season. Its more long term planning. If we are to grow as a club a 32K stadium is too small. The discussion is weather or not it would be cost effective to expand and has then moved to wether a new stadium would be a better option. as far as I can tell no timescales have been mentioned. You have to plan for the future. If you stand still you will go backwards.
If NC decides to keep the stadium at st Mary's they would have to build a station next door. You could then use a park and ride system for huge amount of extra fans for each match. I don't see there being much of an advantage having a new stadium at stoneham because it would just bring the nearby motorways to a standstill.
Very odd post. Saints averaged over 30k last season, as they have every season at St Mary's in the Premier League. If they can sell out a 32k stadium regualry whilst in the bottom half of the Premier League it highlights it is too small. As for Saints being one of the favourites to go down next season, well that is just nonsense! Most bookies have them around 9th, 10th, 11th and a number of them put them above or equal with your team Swansea City. http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/winner Also likely to see some further big spending by Saints between now and the end of the transfer window.
Doubt many people expect us to go down next season if they actually saw us play last season. Technically, we remained within reach of the relegation spots, but in reality (despite my beating heart) there was only a small chance. Not saying it is impossible next season, but we impressed a lot of people (including our own fans). However, there is little chance of Nicola putting us at risk as he probably agrees with you, but only on financial grounds not because he fears relegation.
