The Kraken

Bridge put in a transfer request to engineer his move to a Champions League credible club (and for the massive amounts of extra cash, of course).

Correct again, it will guarantee future stars will not be tempted away when the likes of Arsenal, Man Utd, Man City, and the traditional "big clubs" come calling.

Indeed you're 100% correct. As I said, now we're in the Premier League players such as Bale, Walcott and Oxlade-Chamberlain will always stay with us until they are 24, 25 instead of leaving in their teens.

Ah ok then, it'll be pretty easy if that's all it takes. Sunderland have got Martin O'Neill now, and he's a very good manager. So they should be hitting Champions League heights next season.

Liverpool weren't even a Champions League club and he legged it from Sunderland as fast as he could. Chamberlain had no desire to stay with us for any longer than he had to, in order to get to an established top 4 side. But it'll be different now we're in the Premier League, players like Chamberlain, Walcott and Bale will be much more inclined to stay with us until their mid 20s.

Sunderland have a 49K stadium. They have wracked up millions in debt chasing the Champions League dream, yet have still never finished higher than 7th. What will we do differently to them to assure our own success?

I think it would "Adam Rarrana"

I'd suggest you've over-exaggerated how many will go to less games. There will be many more, even on here, who will attend more (and there's a good deal of threads that confirm this). There will also be many more parents who will take their kids to watch games against the bigger sides, and like it or not, many more people who will choose to go and watch Saints just because they're playing against the likes of Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs etc etc. The whole notion of the "prawn sandwich munching" elite taking the place of "real fans" is a bit absurd.

An interesting quote: It was made by Blackburn's owners.

We've had a couple of variants on the red and white stripes (rank xerox, hummel) which show that moving away from traditional red and white stripes isn't necessarily a bad thing, though I do prefer to see Saints side in the stripes. And the 125 year kit was IMO a great idea and nice little nod to our history. Changing the whole kit just for money purposes, and therefore effectively making the nickname of the club redundant, is a step way too far though. You'd just as well do an MK Dons and up sticks to a more prosperous part of the country, as you're effectively ripping the previous heart and soul out of the football club.

This is a point I've seen discussed before, and why I think the notion of a "JCL fan" is a bit ridiculous. Attendances typically go up the more successful a team is. Not because the club just suddenly attracts brand new customers (although this is true to a small extent). But the bulk o fthe increased attendance will come from those who are already fans, who have probably been to watch games before, but are now attracted to attend on a more regular basis. That's how we need to increase attendance; by encouraging fans to attend more often. Talk of increasing the catchment area etc just miss the point IMO.

Our ground is in a great location. While we have no way of knowing for sure, I absolutely think that having an out of town stadium would have a detrimental effect on attendances. And I think the transport links to St Marys are actually very good, compared to many other clubs. There are a few railway stations within reasonable walking distance, plenty of bus routes, all the parking that a city centre affords, plus a park and ride system. I certainly think that there is, within the next few years, enough potential to investigate whether we should increase the stadium to a capacity up to 40K. It's certainly worth looking at, which of course the club will conitnue to do. But (IMO anyway) I think that a city-centre ground is paramount to keeping attendances high.

No it doesn't, it really doesn't.

I think its the fact that he's resorted to making things up that says it all.

If he can replicate what Grant Holt had done this season, he'll have had a brilliant campaign. No reason to see why he can't.

As said before; despite throwing millions of pounds in wages every year at the solution, Everton have finished 4th once and failed to get to the Champions League. Villa haven't finished that high in near on 20 years. and sunderland have never finished higher than 7th, despite having a 49,000 seat stadium. In fact they've gambled (and failed) so much on players & wages that they are now having to significantly scale back to avoid their crippling debts. Just because an ambitious chairman says what he would like to achieve for the club, I don't take it as gospel that we'll actually do it. Getting us to the Premier League again was a very good achievement, but not beyond the realms of possibility. I admire the optimism, I doubt the realism of the statement.; whoever it comes from. Besides, how many chairmen of other clubs have come in and promised the earth? Just saying it doesn't make it so, and until I see the type of investment required to make it a distinct reality I'll remain a cynic. Without wishing to go round in circles, the whole new financial regulations are being put in place to make sure this type of investment can't actually happen. Good for you if you want to believe we've every chance of being a Champions League regular. Please don't try and convince me though, I just believe otherwise; that if we grow from where we are now we could be a club like Everton who are above mid-table Premier League and might, just might in one year or two challenge for a top 4 spot. And I'll happily admit I was wrong if it turns out to be the case that you and Cortese were right all along and we become a part of the top 4 elite. Until then, I won't be expecting it. You do what you like though and keep reaching for the stars.

Claiming that we have a bigger fan base than Everton despite having an average attendance some 6,000 fewer than their's is a new classic, to be fair :lol:

Unless I've been reading incorrectly, the Nicola Cortese I've seen has consistently said that the aim for Southampton is to be run as a sustainable enterprise. In other words, we will live within our means and not rely upon a rich sugar-daddy to throw good money after bad at us. We are seeing some investment in the training ground, and I wouldn't rule out at some point some investment in the stadium to bring it up in capacity. What our owners will not do, in the case of Chelsea and Man city, is run up enormous debts on the playing side year after year. Take away Abramovic's (and before him Matthew Harding) propping up of the club and you have a club the size of Everton, Villa, Sunderland. Without that investment, that's where they'll return to. And I don't see Cortese being as liberal with the purse strings as Abramovic; hence why I think its a pipe dream to emulate Chelsea. Can't believe I had to justify that, to be honest. I'd have thought it was fairly clear. Guess not.

No they didn't, they averaged 28K in the third division.

It doesn't actually; it shows that comparing a set of statistics from nearly 10 years apart is completely meaningless, really.

And as MLG has told you, despite spending all that money their fans have obviously got a bit disillusioned with life outside the top 4 and crowds have dwindled to 32K. shows how difficult it will be to generate crowds above that level, surely?

I've already said; there's absolutely nothing wrong with having that as an aim. Every club will surely set out with the ambition of trying to win every game they play in, which is as it should be. And I'm sure Cortese will want to achieve as much as he can as a club owner, and will put in place measures for us to grow and improve. The point is the expectation level of where we can get to. And for all the desire of finishing in the top 4 its a fantastically difficult thing to; not just now, but even if we can prove we need to expand and can consistently fill a 40K stadium further down the line. Nothing wrong for aiming at the likes of Sunderland, Everton, and aside from this year Villa as a potential of where we can possibly get to.

In LGTC's post, only about 3 or 4 above yours, that's exactly what he's suggesting.

If you only supported sides that had a chance of winning the title, there would be quite a lot fewer sides in the Premier League. We've won 1 major trophy in over 125 years of existence; if winning things is the be all and end all I'd suggest supporting Saints isn't the right idea. Sadly, the Premier League is, for a number of teams, a making up the numbers exercise in terms of actually winning it. No shame in admitting that. The club will still and try and win every game they play, and that's the point of supporting it.