Stadium Expansion *APPROVED* Sept ‘22 - Details / Images Released on Planning Site

[CosbehFox]

That Villa picture isn't their academy. Its their foundation scheme where they help out kids from rough estates

[PAPA LAZAROU]

52 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

 

Absolute tosh I'm afraid.

 

Makes the commute easier for players, especially those coming in from the north. They can also buy/rent their nice house near the training ground now rather than 45 minutes away as before. If we're competing against other sound clubs then this will be a factor in picking us over them, as they'll be there 4/5 times a week. The facilities are genuinely world class, how can anyone not be interested or excited to work there? 99% of people will be.

 

Yeah if a big club like Chelsea comes in for a player and it's us vs. them, the training ground won't make much of a difference, but then we'll have to spin playing time and further your career vs. money and potentiall trophies (from the bench) now.

 

None of us could have predicted COVID or maybe they'd have done things slightly different.

Counter absolute tosh I'm afraid. As has already been said the training ground will make no difference to any top player coming here. All the other top clubs have perfectly adequate training grounds, and that is all they are training grounds. No player or his agent is going to be swayed by them. Top players want to know the club's ambition and how much they will earn. Training grounds don't even come into the equation. The money sent on Seagrave should have gone on expanding the ground. 

[PAPA LAZAROU]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

World class training ground is a vanity project? **** me. Every club outside a handful would have your arm off to have the facilities we have. Absolutely perfect conditions to create and improve top class footballers.

We would have been better having a top-class ground for a start.

[goose2010]

1 minute ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

We would have been better having a top-class ground for a start.

why? We have a top class pitch so why do we need a top class ground? The ground we have is fine for the size of the club we are. 

[PAPA LAZAROU]

1 hour ago, goose2010 said:

a vanity project honest at this point reading your posts I'm not sure if you are just out to wind people up.

 

We out of the whole premier league have been one of the best at bringing youth through to the first team squad. 

 

That is what young players will be looking for. They want the best opportunity to play first team football. 

 

Chillwell, Barnes, KDH, Thomas probably the 4 most successful players to come through the academy and if were sold today would raise over 120m with us already having 50m of that from Chillwell. 

 

I cant see how anyone can blame the club for Seagrave. Other that just being thick or on the wind up. 

Right so if you don't agree with someone else's opinion they are either thick or on the wind up eh ? nice way to debate.

[PAPA LAZAROU]

2 minutes ago, goose2010 said:

why? We have a top class pitch so why do we need a top class ground? The ground we have is fine for the size of the club we are. 

Our former training ground was " fine " for the size of the club we are too.

[taupe]

2 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

the training ground will make no difference to any top player coming here.

Do you really believe that? Seriously? No difference whatsoever? 

 

At least acknowledge that perhaps for some players, depending on what they've been used to, it might be an incredible lure, at least a factor in their decision. To say it makes "no difference" is one helluvan assumption.

[Leicester_Loyal]

7 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

Counter absolute tosh I'm afraid. As has already been said the training ground will make no difference to any top player coming here. All the other top clubs have perfectly adequate training grounds, and that is all they are training grounds. No player or his agent is going to be swayed by them. Top players want to know the club's ambition and how much they will earn. Training grounds don't even come into the equation. The money sent on Seagrave should have gone on expanding the ground. 

We aren't a top club though are we?

 

We're competing again Villa, Newcastle, Wolves etc. Would a player be swayed by an extra 5k fans in the ground? Would they be swayed by an extra 5k a week (when already earning 80k)?

[PAPA LAZAROU]

2 minutes ago, taupe said:

Do you really believe that? Seriously? No difference whatsoever? 

 

At least acknowledge that perhaps for some players, depending on what they've been used to, it might be an incredible lure, at least a factor in their decision. To say it makes "no difference" is one helluvan assumption.

I'm afraid football at the top level is very cut-dry and simple. Top players want to play for the top six clubs and the top wages and play in Europe on a regular basis. at no time do they say to their agents I quite fancy Leicester have you seen their training ground ? Of course, I can see the benefit of having good training facilities to bring through young players but ~I don't see the reason to spend that much on a training ground. I mean golf courses?

[PAPA LAZAROU]

6 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We aren't a top club though are we?

 

We're competing again Villa, Newcastle, Wolves etc. Would a player be swayed by an extra 5k fans in the ground? Would they be swayed by an extra 5k a week (when already earning 80k)?

Yes indeed they would. They certainly won't be swayed by training grounds.

[Terraloon]

23 hours ago, FoxesAreBlue said:

Who are also currently extending their ground despite having to compete for ticket sales with the likes of Chelsea, Brentford and QPR on their doorstep let alone all of the other London clubs in that city

The vast difference is that London has a massive influx of tourists and just like the plethora of theatres that all attract decent numbers football is very much a tourist attraction.

The question is of course will Leicester be looking to attract tourists to games because the reality is that they are the ones that spend big at grounds, they eat fast food in the stadium, they buy the beer , the buy  far replica shirts and club branded merchandise at the ground than ST holders.

 

Sadly it’s why the stadium expansion is not as quite straight forward in economic terms as some think.

 

I cant immediately put  my hands on it but I read an article once that talked about how ticket sales on a game to game basis linked with low level hospitality ( such as a programme a drink and a burger say) in a club lounge generates something like 3 times the spend of a ST attending the same game.

 

Its worth looking at the % of capacity that clubs sell by way of ST Leicesters is  around 71%, Liverpool 46%, Chelsea 60%. Yes some clubs with vast capacity have the same sort of % as Leicester but most of the top 10 clubs sale as a minimum 16000 tickets on a game to game whereas Leicesters at circa 9000 is only just about double Bournemouths.

 

That isn’t the end of the story because those tickets account for the 3000 or 10% that has to be given to the away team who spend next to nothing in terms of merchandise 

[An Sionnach]

The stadium is too small for a PL top ten club . It is perfectly adequate for a championship club. Top players are always attracted by big stadia. It may be bullshit but it baffles brains. Leicester is easily big enough as a city to have a 40 thousand seat stadium anyway.

[5waller5]

5 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

I'm afraid football at the top level is very cut-dry and simple. Top players want to play for the top six clubs and the top wages and play in Europe on a regular basis. at no time do they say to their agents I quite fancy Leicester have you seen their training ground ? Of course, I can see the benefit of having good training facilities to bring through young players but ~I don't see the reason to spend that much on a training ground. I mean golf courses?

You have a very strong opinion on this. Do you have specific insight that supports your opinion, or is it just your gut feeling like the rest of us??

 

Personally speaking, if I’m 21, possibly first time to the UK, and I’m signing for £80k/wk, then 6 months in an on-site hotel suite, with beautiful swimming pool, gym, golf course, medical and support professionals, meeting facilities for my interpreter lessons etc etc, whilst I find my feet and settle in, would make me feel much more at home and supported by my new employers, and that would eclipse a £10k wage increase.

 

I’d recognise that, during my 10-15 year career at the top, succeeding quickly is way more valuable than a few grand right now. 

[Beechey]

We're a one-club county with a population of ~700,000. We have horrendous waiting lists for season tickets, we sell out pretty much every game, and we have the 7th smallest ground in the division by capacity. How anyone thinks our stadium is currently large enough is beyond me.

[Leicester_Loyal]

21 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

I'm afraid football at the top level is very cut-dry and simple. Top players want to play for the top six clubs and the top wages and play in Europe on a regular basis. at no time do they say to their agents I quite fancy Leicester have you seen their training ground ? Of course, I can see the benefit of having good training facilities to bring through young players but ~I don't see the reason to spend that much on a training ground. I mean golf courses?

 

20 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

Yes indeed they would. They certainly won't be swayed by training grounds.

Again, we're not competing against the top clubs, so what can we offer that Villa and Wolves can't?

 

You think footballers care that the stadium has 5k extra fans in it week after week? It's not like 32k vs. 60k is it?

[urban.spaceman]

36 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

Our former training ground was " fine " for the size of the club we are too.

And our new training ground is emblematic of the club we're aspiring to be. 

 

Elite.

[TWUKO]

We need more seats to accommodate more season ticket holders and more casual fans. More could be done with tickets for schools, local football clubs etc. 

 

Also the stadium is nice, but the outside is very basic and championship looking modern type stadium. The new east stand will be iconic and futuristic and I hope once its done they follow in a few years with an identical version in the West stand and bring it to 50k.

 

As long as we are a Premier league club I think its viable and the city and county with a population of over 1 million should be enough to attract more fans. Having to pay for a membership and book tickets a month or more in advance on some occasions is just daft, they'll always be a struggle to fill cup games but that's where pricing will play a part.

 

Loads of clubs are planning future infrastructure projects, we can't be left behind and need to compete off the field with the likes of villa, everton, Newcastle, wolves etc.

[goose2010]

1 hour ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

Right so if you don't agree with someone else's opinion they are either thick or on the wind up eh ? nice way to debate.

but you are debating for no reason at all. I honestly dont think you believe what you are writing either. 

 

The former training was fine yes. But for a club our size bringing through a first team player is massive and having Seagrave will only help that. 

 

Sticking an extra 5000 seats on the stadium isnt going to do much long term. 

 

[smudger63]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We aren't a top club though are we?

 

We're competing again Villa, Newcastle, Wolves etc. Would a player be swayed by an extra 5k fans in the ground? Would they be swayed by an extra 5k a week (when already earning 80k)?

They will be swayed partly by money and also their perception of which club is most likely to tally with their own ambitions and most likely to succeed in those ambitions. The only time a training ground or ground size and fanbase may come into it, is if the clubs competing fo their signature are of a relatively similar status.

Oh and more importantly who will give them the most money too

Edited 18 August 2022 by smudger63

[FoxesAreBlue]

57 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

The vast difference is that London has a massive influx of tourists and just like the plethora of theatres that all attract decent numbers football is very much a tourist attraction.

The question is of course will Leicester be looking to attract tourists to games because the reality is that they are the ones that spend big at grounds, they eat fast food in the stadium, they buy the beer , the buy  far replica shirts and club branded merchandise at the ground than ST holders.

 

Sadly it’s why the stadium expansion is not as quite straight forward in economic terms as some think.

 

I cant immediately put  my hands on it but I read an article once that talked about how ticket sales on a game to game basis linked with low level hospitality ( such as a programme a drink and a burger say) in a club lounge generates something like 3 times the spend of a ST attending the same game.

 

Its worth looking at the % of capacity that clubs sell by way of ST Leicesters is  around 71%, Liverpool 46%, Chelsea 60%. Yes some clubs with vast capacity have the same sort of % as Leicester but most of the top 10 clubs sale as a minimum 16000 tickets on a game to game whereas Leicesters at circa 9000 is only just about double Bournemouths.

 

That isn’t the end of the story because those tickets account for the 3000 or 10% that has to be given to the away team who spend next to nothing in terms of merchandise 

I must say, I do quite a bit of work at Fulham (which is what made me mention them) and, anecdotally, they do seem to get a lot of tourists from abroad get match tickets… particularly from the USA

[Leicester_Loyal]

5 minutes ago, smudger63 said:

They will be swayed partly by money and also their perception of which club is most likely to tally with their own ambitions and most likely to succeed in those ambitions. The only time a training ground or ground size and fanbase may come into it, is if the clubs competing fo their signature are of a relatively similar status.

Oh and more importantly who will give them the most money too

Which is pretty much where we're at, if any of the big 6 come in, it doesn't matter what size our stadium is, doesn't matter about the training ground, maybe if we offer triple the salary (highly unlikely) then they'll come here. We're fighting against Villa, Wolves, Newcastle, any advantage we have over them helps us. A training ground is one, now we can move onto the stadium, increase our revenue and hopefully be able to offer slightly more money if need be to these players.

 

Anyone saying we don't need to expand our ground is clueless, but likewise those saying a training ground (where the players spend 80% of their working week) has no influence on a players decision where he moves to, is equally as clueless, they all have a part to play.

[smudger63]

47 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Which is pretty much where we're at, if any of the big 6 come in, it doesn't matter what size our stadium is, doesn't matter about the training ground, maybe if we offer triple the salary (highly unlikely) then they'll come here. We're fighting against Villa, Wolves, Newcastle, any advantage we have over them helps us. A training ground is one, now we can move onto the stadium, increase our revenue and hopefully be able to offer slightly more money if need be to these players.

 

Anyone saying we don't need to expand our ground is clueless, but likewise those saying a training ground (where the players spend 80% of their working week) has no influence on a players decision where he moves to, is equally as clueless, they all have a part to play.

If villa were trying to sign a player that we were trying to sign, but were offering 20 grand a week more than we were, do you really believe he's going to say, thanks but no thanks Villa, I'm going to sign for Leicester because although I wont be so well off, their training ground better than yours. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

6 minutes ago, smudger63 said:

If villa were trying to sign a player that we were trying to sign, but were offering 20 grand a week more than we were, do you really believe he's going to say, thanks but no thanks Villa, I'm going to sign for Leicester because although I wont be so well off, their training ground better than yours. 

Yes.

 

Also the sort of player that is purely going for money aren't the ones we want to be signing all the time, that'll get us into a mess like the one we're currently in. Offer them the facilities to improve themselves, offer them a place in the squad, offer them the chance to develop and move onto the next big club.

 

If someone offered me a 10% payrise, I wouldn't leave my company. If they offered me the same salary, but said I'd likely be promoted within 5 years at the next company, I'd seriously consider it. We're all built differently.

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

I'm afraid football at the top level is very cut-dry and simple. Top players want to play for the top six clubs and the top wages and play in Europe on a regular basis. at no time do they say to their agents I quite fancy Leicester have you seen their training ground ? Of course, I can see the benefit of having good training facilities to bring through young players but ~I don't see the reason to spend that much on a training ground. I mean golf courses?

The major benefit of Seagrave is the overnight stays etc and that’s part of thinking behind the golf course. 
 

When we were playing in Europe or midweek, players like Jonny Evans can stay at Seagrave from Tuesday to Sunday. It means no early morning, no driving at silly time, no distractions with kids. 

 

Villa I know for fact under Dean Smith were finishing midweek games away; getting a coach to their training ground for rub downs etc, then either jumping in their cars for a hour or two on the motorway or getting to a hotel room for 4am but have to check out early despite recovery sessions being mid afternoon. 
 

Ultimately makes life a lot easier for club and player. The golf course is the way a player gets unwind pre match. Few City lads were at Belfry last Thursday and then they stayed at Seagrave that night, ready for the transport down to London Friday 

[JimmyC74]

We can’t compete with the top club’s on wages, clearly, and so we don’t shop at that level.

 

Strategically the Club has taken the decision to target and bring in younger, promising players who aren’t likely to get game time at Yanited, Man City, L’pool etc develop them and give them earlier opportunities in the first XI.  Some will excel be sold and funds reinvested. 

 

For those players, seeing a best in class training ground I would imagine is very important and a big draw. Important because it would compare favourably to the surroundings they are already accustomed to and reassure them that moving to City is good for their career.  Money comes into it and we aren’t bad payers for that level of player - and reward achievement.

 

Also having ambition to upgrade the stadium would demonstrate we are a club looking to progress.

 

Our best players in living memory - players like Neil Lennon, Muzzy, Matt Elliott, Vards, Mahrez, Kante and Madders were not taken from the first XI of a top 6 club - but all were hungry. This model we are following is the right one for us in the long term IMO.