New Stadium - Should of gone the whole hog.

[Jamblow]

If Vlad had gone for the 42,000 option would they come? Could we have been a real third force. Who knows?

[Eggo]

If Vlad had gone for the 42,000 option would they come? Could we have been a real third force. Who knows?

 

 

 

Of course..a new stadium guarentees instant success,just look at Leicester City as an example:p

[Charlie-Brown]

It's a good question - some of the crowds for games at Murrayfield show our attendances could be a lot higher & certainly for category A games in the SPL were more away tickets could be sold as well.......depending on the teams fortunes when the time comes then the season(s) at Murrayfield could teach us a lot about our crowd potential in the modern era.

[PTBCAL]

Do I detect a feelgood factor returning?

[Commander Harris]

Of course..a new stadium guarentees instant success,just look at Leicester City as an example:p

I think Leicester, and others such as southampton, actually show how right it is that we have remained at tynecastle. There have been several clubs that have moved from their tradition homes to new purpose-built stadiums and they are almost all struggling now. Stoke city are probably the exception but many have struggled when moving from their spiritual home.

[neave]

If the 2005/6 season was allowed to continue along the same vein until it was disrupted, and if that progress was then matched and genuine attempts were made to build upon it, I reckon we would've been looking at an average attendance (i.e. for all SPL games) of around 25,000 by 2010 had we moved to Murrayfield at least temporarily.

[Eggo]

I think Leicester, and others such as southampton, actually show how right it is that we have remained at tynecastle. There have been several clubs that have moved from their tradition homes to new purpose-built stadiums and they are almost all struggling now. Stoke city are probably the exception but many have struggled when moving from their spiritual home.

 

 

Agree 100%

[Ray Winstone]

Definitely prefer that we have decided to stay at Tynecastle.

 

It is costing enough just to put up the one stand - never mind a whole stadium.

[Charlie-Brown]

I think the reason Leicester & Southampton and some others have struggled has very little to do with their stadiums and more to do with adjusting to the big expansion then contraction that comes with falling out of the Premiership & then scrapping in the Championship - Leicester also had to cope with a period in Administration. Losing important players & managers has also had detrimental effects - both clubs attendances remain remarkably high considering.

[Commander Harris]

I think the reason Leicester & Southampton and some others have struggled has very little to do with their stadiums and more to do with adjusting to the big expansion then contraction that comes with falling out of the Premiership & then scrapping in the Championship - Leicester also had to cope with a period in Administration. Losing important players & managers has also had detrimental effects - both clubs attendances remain remarkably high considering.

possibly, maybe I'm just a romantic but I do think the home form of these clubs, particular southampton, has suffered greatly since their move.

[Charlie-Brown]

possibly, maybe I'm just a romantic but I do think the home form of these clubs, particular southampton, has suffered greatly since their move.

 

I think that possibly / probably a factor too CH but both these clubs have had to adjust to the massively different economic circumstances between the Premiership & Championship and failure to regain their EPL status has obviously had negative effects all round for finances, players, managers, fans etc.

[Rods]

I think we should move to 20,000 only.

 

Maybe its the pessimist(sp)in me.

[Buffalo Bill]

The plan IS to expand to around just under 40,000.

 

Welll, more of a pipe-dream than a plan; but a plan none the less.

 

Teams that finish 8th don't build 40,000 seaters.

 

But a good club might.

 

 

Buffalo Bill

 

.

[jamboinglasgow]

The plan IS to expand to around just under 40,000.

 

Welll, more of a pipe-dream than a plan; but a plan none the less.

 

Teams that finish 8th don't build 40,000 seaters.

 

But a good club might.

 

 

Buffalo Bill

 

.

 

I agree, it may be a painful long time for it to happen but I think hearts are better doing it this way to get to 40,000. Get 23,000 then see if demand may increase then increase it to more then up till 40,000. I know that there are plans to increase the roseburn next and from what I gather there has been some groundwork with the council with this (such as sorting out the issue of the school) so that either while the main stand is built or being built they will seek the next stage of planning.

 

Just upgrading to 40,000 at once is stupid as there will be alot of empty seats at first.

 

A successful long run team is needed for 40,000 fans to turn up every year.

[Buffalo Bill]

I agree, it may be a painful long time for it to happen but I think hearts are better doing it this way to get to 40,000. Get 23,000 then see if demand may increase then increase it to more then up till 40,000. I know that there are plans to increase the roseburn next and from what I gather there has been some groundwork with the council with this (such as sorting out the issue of the school) so that either while the main stand is built or being built they will seek the next stage of planning.

 

Just upgrading to 40,000 at once is stupid as there will be alot of empty seats at first.

 

A successful long run team is needed for 40,000 fans to turn up every year.

 

 

It's telling that the new stand will overlap the Roseburn.

 

But Romanov needs to get a grip first, and then a team second before we start knocking down stands.

 

Buffalo Bill

 

.

[jamboinglasgow]

It's telling that the new stand will overlap the Roseburn.

 

But Romanov needs to get a grip first, and then a team second before we start knocking down stands.

 

Buffalo Bill

 

.

 

couldn't agree more, think we shouldn't knock back the new main stand as the current one need serious work and this will increase our facilities alot, but the team must improve with each season for the other stands to happen.

[davemclaren]

I think Leicester, and others such as southampton, actually show how right it is that we have remained at tynecastle. There have been several clubs that have moved from their tradition homes to new purpose-built stadiums and they are almost all struggling now. Stoke city are probably the exception but many have struggled when moving from their spiritual home.

 

A new stadium isn't a silver bullet but many teams have also moved and gone on to bigger and better things.

[$ilvery_Moon]

I think the reason Leicester & Southampton and some others have struggled has very little to do with their stadiums and more to do with adjusting to the big expansion then contraction that comes with falling out of the Premiership & then scrapping in the Championship - Leicester also had to cope with a period in Administration. Losing important players & managers has also had detrimental effects - both clubs attendances remain remarkably high considering.

 

To be fair Leicester suffered very little from administration. They went into admin before there was the points deduction and not long afterwards they actually won promotion back to the Premier League. Albeit for one solitary season. IMO they cheated their way out of it and have not suffered as much as some clubs that have since gone into admin, or have tried to stave admin off. They had the potential to sort themselves out afterwards with the parachute money but poor decisions at boardroom level have seen the problems remain at 'The Crispbowl'. A part of me for this very reason is very glad to see them in League 1 and suffering.

 

I think Leicester, and others such as southampton, actually show how right it is that we have remained at tynecastle. There have been several clubs that have moved from their tradition homes to new purpose-built stadiums and they are almost all struggling now. Stoke city are probably the exception but many have struggled when moving from their spiritual home.

 

I don't buy this new stadium has a detrimental effect argument. Sunderland have been successful, Bolton, Man City, Reading, Doncaster, MK Dons, Plymouth, Hull, Stoke, Middlesborough, Derby (to an extent) and more recently Swansea have all had success. The lego brick grounds may all look crap and very similar, but the benefits of having a bigger stadium and better facilities are obvious for all to see.

 

If money was available a new stadium would also have been the best idea for us. It's financial mis-management that have ruined Southampton, Leicester, Coventry etc. Sadly it will also be the ruin of us.

[John Findlay]

I would say perharps Arsenal, Bolton Wanderers, and Middlesbrough have been the most successful clubs to date in England who have built new stadia.

 

Darlington perharps being the least successful to date.

 

 

 

John

[davemclaren]

I would say perharps Arsenal, Bolton Wanderers, and Middlesbrough have been the most successful clubs to date in England who have built new stadia.

 

Darlington perharps being the least successful to date.

 

 

 

John

 

Wigan have done ok out of it as well.

[Dirk Diggler]

Good players win football matches.

[davemclaren]

Good players win football matches.

 

They do indeed, but teams with bigger crowds ( and thus stadiums ) tend to make more money to get good players.

[Dirk Diggler]

They do indeed, but teams with bigger crowds ( and thus stadiums ) tend to make more money to get good players.

 

They do indeed.

 

But not every club that moves to a bigger stadium generates a bigger crowd than they had previously.

[davemclaren]

They do indeed.

 

But not every club that moves to a bigger stadium generates a bigger crowd than they had previously.

 

No, but we could...

[jamboinglasgow]

They do indeed.

 

But not every club that moves to a bigger stadium generates a bigger crowd than they had previously.

 

think the best way to look at it is they are mutally linked, a good team brings the demand for increased crowds, so a bigger stadium is created and if the team remains good then income is increased and that can be put into the team to create a great team.

[washniklaw]

Phased bulding, although more expensive, is definatly the way forward for Hearts. It allows you to choose the right time to expand and you can delay decision if required.

 

It also stops you having a huge 'white elephant' of a stadium that no-one wants to go to. If Vlad wanted that he would have just moved to Murrayfield permently.

 

This way of expansion allows for a natural growth of a football club. The seeds are currently being sewn in the Primary schools across the region with Breakfast clubs and Magnificent Seven. In 5/10 time there will be a greater demand because the club is putting in the groundwork to get the youngsters hooked.

 

I've seen children who were unsure become Jambos after they've visited Tynecastle and got their strip. The programmes, again they are expensive, take a long term view but they work.

 

I hope Vlads plan will be to complete the stadium by 2018ish so that the good work done attracting these kids doesn't go to waste.