All these new grounds

Will we get left behind with the emergence of so many new grounds coming up? Everton and Spurs are set for new ones. West ham just moved while Liverpool and Man City have upgraded theirs. Then you have the likes of Swansea, Leicester and Southampton that are are new model stadiums aswell. Arsenal's is modern too and Chelsea will be upgrading before long themselves.

Now I know we need to get back to the premiership before we can talk about ground stuff but is simply changing the north stand gonna be good enough in the current climate? Will the day come where we might have to consider leaving VP and build a new ground?

I guess we could be in a unique situation where we could have a traditional ground with a modern twist. Replacing the north stand and filling in the corners either side of the Holte would go a long way to achieving that I think. Whether it would be up there with the new spurs and West Ham grounds remains to be seen. Dr xia is an expert in this field one would expect VP to look decent I suppose.

I guess it's currently a "walk before we can run" situation for us isn't it? No business model around ROI rates for a rebuild/refurb of a ground the size of VP is gonna stack up when the attendances are c30k. I think it would have to be predicated on a return to - and occupying of - the upper half of  the Prem on a permanent basis. I was looking the other day at MON seasons to see when we'd last won 5 out of 6 games, and I'd forgotten how massive the attendances were for a lot of that period. I think Xia would want to think we'd be guaranteed 40+k attendances before he'd commit long term. You are right though, Tony is the man when it comes to redevelopment. Might be worth keeping an eye out to see I'd he or one of his linked companies sets up an SPV via Companies House as that's   often an indication of development, although it might not be specifically for VP, it could well be. SPVS are a way of holding the estate in a specific way related to - for example - ground redevelopment as I think the asset goes "off book" and keeps developments costs/income separate from the rest of the business, such as interest on loans etc. I think it is also a way of paying less tax.
I'd much prefer a situation where VP was developed with a massive North Stand/corners filled in, than a new generic stadium somewhere off the M42.
WHU fans must be thrilled with their new ground (not). I heard someone say the other day "and the centre back just smashed that ball all the way back into row A...". Not every new ground works out and it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.

Once we do get back to the top flight l think we'll see the best of Xia both with his investment on the pitch and off it.

I don't just think it'll be a case of "if you build it they will come" either. He'll really incentivise the fans on a number of levels and there'll be far more to the stadium upgrade than just filing in the corners.

If we do go up next season, the next 3 years will not be boring.

Villa Park is outstanding though. While we might need a bit of polish here and there and some construction work at North Stand the stadium itself is like a historic master piece. It's like coming across the an original veteran car chassis that just requires money and time to get right. I've been to a fair few stadiums all over the world and very very very few can be compared to Villa Park, and I'm saying this as a fairly objective Norwegian (and I normally don't sugarcoat shit).

Like said above the priority must be to achieve success on the pitch so we can get 40 k gates again, often.

Like most of the comments above, I say get it right on the pitch first and the rest will follow. Realistically I don't see us requiring a capacity greater than around 45-50,000. In the more recent successful times we only really sold out against the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool etc at 42,000. With work to the existing ground on the North Stand and corners etc I'd be happy. Better to have a rocking sold out stadium with 45,000 in it than a 55-60,000 stadium 60-70% full. Let's not replicate Manchester AbuDabhi City. Let's keep our history, keep our home, and keep our soul.

Dazzle wrote:Like most of the comments above, I say get it right on the pitch first and the rest will follow. Realistically I don't see us requiring a capacity greater than around 45-50,000. In the more recent successful times we only really sold out against the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool etc at 42,000. With work to the existing ground on the North Stand and corners etc I'd be happy. Better to have a rocking sold out stadium with 45,000 in it than a 55-60,000 stadium 60-70% full. Let's not replicate Manchester AbuDabhi City. Let's keep our history, keep our home, and keep our soul.

The problem is everyone else seems to be moving with the times. Will VP, even if it's improved, be able to compete with the new grounds popping up right now? That's the question. I also think the crowds won't be an issue if the prices are decent.

I'd be devastated if we moved from Villa Park. It holds too many memories of when my dad first starting taking me to watch Villa in the 70's, and it's the area where I went to school. It's a no-go for me under any circumstances.

I'm also quite torn on the idea of filling in any corners. Yes, it increases capacity and yes, it probably increases noise levels slightly within the stadium but the ground would lose something by not having four separate stands. That's what sets VP apart from soul-less, 'bowl' type stadia such as The Emirates & The Etihad.

In terms of capacity, a large, new end stand of a similar construction type to the Trinity Road, would increase capacity sufficiently for our near-future needs.

In terms of noise levels, I'd rather see this generated from performances & results on the pitch. The noise levels inside VP are huge, when we've got something to shout about.

If we ever did find we needed more than 50,000, say, if we had a sustained run as a top-four, Champions League club, things would get interesting.

I think the only viable option would be to reconstruct the Doug Ellis stand, which is the narrowest stand at VP (in terms of depth back from the pitch). This was compensated for by constructing it high & steep (probably about as steep as you're allowed)

In fact, I seem to remember that the houses on Witton Lane immediately behind the old stand were demolished and the road moved back to its current alignment and Witton Lane Gardens was created.

If a replacement stand were constructed along similar proportions to the Trinity, but without having to be curtailed by the road passing behind at an angle, it would surely make it our highest capacity stand (surpassing both the 12,954 of Trinity Rd and the 13,472 of the Holte).

Of course this would mean either diverting Witton Lane again (and losing the Gardens) or bridging the stand over Witton Lane (as was done with the Trinity). You'd probably still obliterate Witton Lane Gardens though.

I would take an educated guess that, assuming the prior capacity had already reached 50,000, this would achieve a capacity of maybe 58,000.

This is about the most any club could achieve whilst still maintaining four distinct stands, which is what we should be aiming for. It would make our ground all but unique in world football and fans of even the biggest English clubs of today (perhaps with the exception of Liverpool) would travel to B6 from their characterless mega-stadiums, and be secretly green with envy.

I think this debate will hot up should we get back to the Prem next season.
The North Stand is a complete eyesore in my view. As someone said above, a Trinity style stand in its place and total redevelopment of the Doug Ellis stand would be a good thing. Smartening the place up no end.
Moving to another location is a complete no for me, no,no,no,no!!!! We would lose our soul like so many other teams have done.
It is all well and good moving to a new, all singing, all dancing soulless bowl of a stadium, but not for me.....Unless the rules on safe standing change and we could have a Dortmund style stadium, the most intimidating place i have ever been and the best atmosphere bar non, any where in the world of football.
So, assuming the idiots that control the game in our country adopt safe standing here is a thought for you peeps.......
Holte end upper stays the same with the lower becoming safe standing.
The Doug Ellis copying the Trinity with 3 tiers of seating.
Now, here is the jewel in the crown for me...A new North Stand comprising of a massive bank of safe standing only, Dortmund esq.
Imagine the atmosphere and noise that would be generated by that build eh.
Maybe just a dream but that would be the way forward for me and that would make it ,in my view, the best stadium in world football.
Keeping the original facades on the Holte and Trinity whilst incorporating the new build alongside. Maybe built in original brick all the way around. Fabulous, bloody fabulous.
Just an idea.

I often wonder, if you could convert a lot of the modern grounds back into the old pre-all-seater ratios, what the capacities would be - would old trafford, for example, now hold 100,000?
I bet some of the capacities would be huge now, cos the physical size of the modern stadiums are much bigger.

De Kuip wrote:I often wonder, if you could convert a lot of the modern grounds back into the old pre-all-seater ratios, what the capacities would be - would old trafford, for example, now hold 100,000?
I bet some of the capacities would be huge now, cos the physical size of the modern stadiums are much bigger.

Last time i went to the Etihad, nearly got thrown out by the way for arguing with the stewards, it was explained to me why, on the top tier for away supporters , you cannot stand up.
When the stadium was originally constructed, as an athletics stadium, the top tier, as was at the time before expansion was built a such a steep angle it was against health and safety regulations for people to stand. So the Etihad for me will never be a proper football stadium, never.
It could never be converted to safe standing above the first level without a total rebuild.
Emirates, the most soulless bowl ever constructed, apart from when we visit en mass.
Anyone who is building a new stadium should take into consideration that safe standing may be allowed at some point in the future and allow for this in the construction plans.

I hate bowl stadiums. New Wembley is shit. Arsenal is shit. Whatever happens with the future of VP I hope it at least resembles a proper football ground

Preliminary designs have been leaked. ..

How many houses would have to be demolished to build it?
Maybe we can knock down Aston Hall, then all the car parks could be in one spot. There have been some successes at knocking down and re-building using same materials in a numbered sequence. If that is done saving the original facade, then the rest is not really historic and could easily be up-graded. I would want the same distance from the pitch all round as now though - I hate those stadiums with loads of space around the pitch.

I've been reading other lower league football forums the last year. Especially after they've played us at Villa Park. I think every single time I've done that, there's been comments about how great Villa Park is and how it's an old fashioned football ground.

How anyone would even consider doing anything radical regarding Villa Park is beyond me.

Keep it where it is just upgrade the stands as we march towards the Champions League!

Our owner is from the future, I'd expect a genius design that incorporates future technologies but still have a feel of history and heritage about it, this is Xia's forte after all and it will be regarded as the new bench mark for sports stadiums if when it happens.

Its the fans that make the place, not the bricks, steel, glass and plastic, it is and always will be the fans.

So you're expecting a stadium made out of fans?

That's what Villa Park is made out of right now.

Trotters wrote:Preliminary designs have been leaked. ..

That picture is what you get if you add Camden Yards to Villa Park. Good of you to keep some fat American Orioles fans on the steps on the lhs of the picture!

It's the new Busch stadium (Cardinals) rebranded in claret & blue. Most of it is open air but that section is gorgeous!!!

I've thought for ages that it's the area around Villa Park which is the big issue. It's a dump basically and the locals don't support the club whatsoever. Ok on one (Park & Aston Manor) side you have a big opportunity for development but the other 3 sides are surrounded by squalid mess and ancient scruffy housing.

Trotters wrote:It's the new Busch stadium (Cardinals) rebranded in claret & blue. Most of it is open air but that section is gorgeous!!!

Is it indeed, that's me told! Really looks like the yards. Still right about the fat Americans on the steps though...

The Utterer wrote:I've thought for ages that it's the area around Villa Park which is the big issue. It's a dump basically and the locals don't support the club whatsoever. Ok on one (Park & Aston Manor) side you have a big opportunity for development but the other 3 sides are surrounded by squalid mess and ancient scruffy housing.

Come on mate, I agree it ain't pretty but, it is what it is. You can't just bulldoze the local community cos you think it's an eyesore. And Aston Park is a park, not a development opportunity. Inner city communities need parks more than anyone.

Villa Park and its local community are intrinsically linked. They've both grown together, in whatever direction life took them, for the last hundred-odd years.

This is the other reason why I don't want the corners of the ground filled in. I like the fact that you can look out of the stands and see into the local streets. This is the other problem with bowl stadia. They're closed off from the local community. Once you're inside you could be anywhere.

As far as the local housing is concerned, I don't have a problem with it (as long as I don't have to actually live in one of them - harsh but true! ).

To my mind Villa Park is a football ground dating from the Victorian Era which is still surrounded by Victorian houses so, everything is as it should be. If they knocked em all down and replaced it with 'Cul-de-Sac Land', then I think that would also be to the detriment of the stadium. It's all part of its charm.

McGrath , I'm a hopeless old Football Romantic, I am.

Are you hinting that I should photoshop in some Victorian era shithole housing? Because....no.



And surely now that Westwood is gone you don't have to peer out through the corners of the stands and into the streets in the hope of seeing some local lad with more talent playing slam?