Matthew Le God

Punk

Stronger

tbf He joined Pompey as a youth player and was later let go. I'm sure he is delighted to have a second chance to play at Fratton Park, having spent a number of years trying to do just that, even if he is a Chelsea fan.

Rugby

Boots

As I've said before, many fans are casual and simply don't care in the same way many on here do. The prospect of Premier League football is what attracts them in. Many of those that had season tickets/membership/regular match goer in the Premier League years aren't interested in League One/Championship football and don't go to many games. They flood in at the first hint of success, hence why the Walsall game sold out ahead of matchday. Just because he said it, doesn't make it true. Whether that game had 24k (as it did) or sold out with 32k, it didn't make a difference to the survival of the club. The club needed an investor, the extra money those 8k would bring wouldn't have plugged many holes. The match in terms of the clubs financial survival was pointless. Look back the season before to 2007/08 and you will see the club sold out the Sheff Utd game, the fans knew that the club could stay up on the last day. In 2008/09, it was out of the players hands if they stayed up or not and out of the fans hands if the club survived or not and thus less appealing to the casual fans.

Every penny didn't matter, most fans knew that. If Saints didn't have a buyer it didn't matter how many turned up to the stadium against Burnley. Just short of 24k is a huge figure all things considered (administration, 2nd tier Saints team that was awful vs a 2nd tier opposition, impeding relegation to the 3rd tier).

I'm glad you approve Glasgow.

Why strange? Clubs have those that are obsessed and hardcore, and those that are casual and in many ways "glory hunters" only there in the good times. The club was never going to be saved by fans going to those post admin games and generating money, the club was entirely dependant on outside investment. Also the three post admin/pre Liebherr games at St Mary's... vs Charlton 27,228 vs Palace 23,220 (on a Monday) vs Burnley 23,927 (not 21k as you said) A number of Premier League teams would be delighted with those figures, let alone a club that was in administration and about to plunge into the 3rd tier.

We have been through this... There is a huge difference between a match towards the top of the Premier League with Saints full of internationals and Premier League players, and one with Saints on the verge of relegation in the Championship with an awful squad. Football clubs have hardcore support who turn up no matter what (within reason) and thus that only turn up in the good times. Thus matches after administration happened had huge attendances considering they were Championship matches for a very poor side.

As clubs in the future will be dependant on breaking even at minimum, they need to increase as far as they can their revenue streams in order to compete. If Southampton were in the Premier League last season they would most likely have been 12th in terms of average attendance. Many clubs are also looking at increasing capacities in the short to medium term, so by standing still and not increasing above 32k Saints would fall behind and drop lower than 12th. There is a reasonable correlation between attendances and footballing success. Cortese clearly has higher ambitions than 12th and thus will require a stadium capacity increase to match these ambitions.

Cortese has already said they have been in discussions with the council and have plans for what they want to do. He said 15 months ago it was too early to really look into it. It is now 15 months later, I'm not saying things have progressed much more, but it is no longer the "now" that Cortese was talking about in March 2010.

The opening post of this thread... A number of posters being negative just because the majority of the last 25 years it has been rubbish supporting Saints has drained the life out of this thread. I'm the positive one saying there are strong signs that 32k isn't big enough. It isn't me being the "fun hoover" as DellDays puts it. He should be looking closer to home.

That isn't what I said at all.

So what would this thread be about if I wasn't in it? You think that the stadium doesn't need expanding, doesn't that suck all the fun out of the thread?

You were the one that said... Even though the "right now" you were talking about was over 15 months ago. In any case who said the plans would need to be accelerated? A comment that it was "too early" in March 2010 doesn't been the plans have been accelerated if the club looks closely at it in June 2011. That could always have been the plan for all we know.

If my posts irk you that much, why don't you block me?

I wasn't responding to you.

I pointed out to you that interview that interview is now 15 months old and the club has since been promoted to one division below the top flight. "Too early" then (15 months ago), but may not so much apply now or relatively soon.

But unlike us, they know for sure if the club will see investment over the coming years (and to what level). Investment in the team and success on the pitch will bring in the crowds, Saints have never been above a mid table team in the Premier League and even then it was only briefly in consecutive years. If the owners know that they will be funding for successful Premier League campaigns it is worth investing in infrastructure for the long term now. Jez Moxey at Wolves even made the statement that now is the ideal time to make such investments due to the costs being lower. Wolves decided to make the redevelopment of their stadium go ahead this summer regardless of relegation as infrastructure is for the long term and will benefit the club.

My question was in response to this post by you... Thus you thinking just because Saints are newly promoted they shouldn't plan and build for things they don't need right now. So yes it is relevant and you took my post out of the context it was written in. Which was after all a response to you claiming the club won't plan ahead and act on things it doesn't at the moment need but may in the future. This can be applied in the same way to a stadium improvement.

A fool makes statements like that when he can't counter a point put to him. How can you consider attendances of 80 years ago more relevant than those of the nearly 20 years building upto their move into the Stadium of Light?

Answer the question. I bet you wouldn't have thought it likely. But it has happened.

Did you think in the summer of 2009 when Saints were a League One side on -10 points that by 2011 Saints would have a state of the art training ground under construction that wouldn't look out of place at a Champions League side and category one academy? How confident would you have been in 2009 that it wouldn't happen? Yet it has...

You were talking about history, yet few of their support today ever went to the stadium in the times of huge crowds. The recent history of sub 20k crowds and sub 10k season tickets in the nearly 20 year period (or generation) before they moved to the Stadium of Light an 40k averages carries far more weight and relevance.