macphisto

Without the match going experience at 14-17 years old with your mates then yes we would have lost a lot of fans. In my experience, that time in a supporter's life is so crucial in developing life long bonds to a team. At best it turned a lot of who would have been serious fans in casual fans who probably completely lost interest during the Ashley years.

Thank you, maybe my wording in my original post wasn't the best but I didn't think I had said anything contentious or even up for debate. I thought it was accepted by all that's what happened.

Are you saying the age profile of our crowd didn't significantly increase under Keegan and that there were still large groups of teenagers attending games?

It's not just Tyne & Wear though, we are the only team from the Scottish borders to Sunderland. Based on a quick Google, Northumberland and Tyne & Wear combined is almost 1.5 million people. Yes the North West has a much larger population but they also have a lot more football teams.

Were you around then? I'll speak from personal experience that will resonate with a lot of people of a similar age. Maybe lost a generation was the wrong wording more like locked a generation of fans out of the ground. I grew up in Walker and like most teenagers in the early 1990s I used to attend matches with my mates, say half to a third of games; pay on the door. Mostly stood in the Corner but sometimes went in the Scoreboard or Leazes end. We all used to take sing about the East Stand and their flasks being quiet as they used to sit, be full of old people and season ticket holders. I was there for Keegan's first match back, not particularly for Keegan, but mainly we had probably arranged to just go that day. Not long after Keegan returned within a season or two the stadium went practically all season ticket. Me and my mates were locked out. Yes we could get a few spare tickets every now and again but we couldn't go as a group like we used to and have the same craic. I have not attended a match in the last 10 years but I imagine a lot of teenagers in groups, particularly those from less well-off areas, have been able to attend matches similar to how I did when I was younger due to the availability of tickets. I guarantee those type of fans will soon be locked out as more and more people buy season tickets. How many groups of teenagers will organise themselves and be able to afford a season ticket all at the same time? There's been a lot of talk about the atmosphere of the stadium, I guarantee that anything like the demand of the Keegan era would progressively see the atmosphere go down hill after the first few years. That is what happened prior to Ashley. It wasn't so much apathy but the crowd got progressively old together and any youngsters attending were often there with their parents. Not many groups of teenagers were able to attend games from Keegan to the beginning of Ashley's ownership, the very group who help generate an atmosphere. That is what happens with stadiums that are nearly all season ticket holders; young groups of fans are priced out. Anyone who attended the latter years of the Hall/Shepard era will know that the atmosphere in the ground was terrible as we had an aging crowd with very few younger fans. I mention the East Stand above, by the end of the Hall/Shepard era that is almost what the whole ground was like. There is no more sure way to kill the atmosphere of a ground than it to be full of season ticket holders which is what would happen if we can only expand to 60,000 in our current stadium. Hopefully we can expand further in the current stadium but if not then move elsewhere within the city centre.

Good to hear that about the Emirates. As has been pointed out though, can we really use Arsenal's move as a barometer? Highbury was hardly jumping. Interesting insights regarding the atmosphere at the new stadium on page 12 of this survey by Spurs fans. It seems like the atmosphere is more affected by the actions of the board than the new stadium.

Your timeline is probably right. Regarding the stadium, we'd need to work very closely with the council on any plans and that in itself would take time.

Two other very important things to consider. I would hate to see fans, particularly young fans, prevented from attending the match like the Keegan years. We almost lost a young generation of fans for a few years under Keegan. Why would we do that to ourselves as a club if there is the option (we don't know PIF's plans) to accommodate them in the future either through expansion or building a new ground? My last point is that we talk about this being a sport washing exercise for Saudi Arabia but in many ways it applies to the region to. This could put the city/region on the map and attract investment in the region like we haven't seen before.

I was joking about Charnley's previous comment regarding the training ground. Where did I say that the stadium was a drawback in attracting players? We are in a completely different situation to those clubs. Man City, as has been pointed out, share a city with Man U so their supporter base is more limited than ours in my opinion. Liverpool have plans to expand to 61,000. They could get more but I would think that has more to do with FSG not having the same financial muscle as PIF and are going for incremental increases. With regards to Chelsea, they are restricted by where they are located, richest borough or near the top in the UK. They did have plans to expand before Ambramovich got his passport vetoed. The other thing to note with Chelsea is that they can compensate to a certain extent for their smaller stadium through high ticket prices and corporate packages. Why do people think Ashley was wanting such a high price for Newcastle in relation to our income and football setup when comparable clubs in terms of income were much cheaper? Why were PIF so adamant about buying us? Why are we often referred to as a sleeping giant with so much untapped potential? I believe PIF bought the club and Ashley wanted such a high premium because of this last point, our potential; potential that were it developed would see our crowds grow much more than 6,000-,10,000. If you don't agree with that then you are almost saying that Ashley was maximising the potential of the club in terms of our crowds without even trying. We have a geographical reach like no other in the UK as our nearest Premier League club is 90 miles away.

No player has ever turned us down because of the training ground

Quite rightly they're probably waiting to have the right structure and people in place before announcing future plans. The recruitment in January shows you how threadbare we are as an organisation. There is so much work for them to do after the neglect of the Ashley years. I'm not one of those who thinks they should prioritise one area over another, for example the training ground before the ground. With the right people in place we can develop multiple areas simultaneously. Is also important to consider the different stakeholders we have to build relationships with to finalise our plans. All of that takes time.

There's an article in the Athletic today about sponsorship deals in football, primarily at Man City. We're mentioned in the article too. I didn't read it in-depth as it was a bit boring but one thing did catch my eye. The owner of Everton or his company paid a record fee to be the shirt sponsor of Everton's womens team. There are so many ways to get around FFP, I wonder how else you could manipulate the women's team to funnel money into the club?

Spurs have won around 14 major domestic trophies since we last won the FA Cup. West Ham have won three domestic trophies since we last won a domestic trophy. You might think I'm scraping the barrel with West Ham's three trophies but their last one was in 1980, 25 years after our last win. Difference with all the other teams is that they all have competition on their door step where kids can easily shift their support or households can be split in who they support. It's nowhere near the same as us in my opinion where we almost have a captured market ready to tap into. No doubt a lot of people in our region support other teams like Liverpool or Man U but they could be tempted back to a successful Newcastle as they don't have any other options in regards to watching a successful team in-person.

It's a difficult to answer, I know where you're coming from as I remember when Robson got tremendous stick for missing out on the Champions League (I think it was for the Champions League) on the final day of the season. What I would say is that we have a much higher supporter baseline than possibly any other team. I firmly believe that none of the others teams would get our crowds given our standard of football, Ashley ownership and lack of any silverware for over 50 years. I don't think it's just about us as supporters but rather that we aren't a one city team, more of a one region team.

The sad thing is that none of us, apart from a very select few, can answer that question with 100% certainty as we don't know what it's like to win something. What a sad inditement on the club and even more reason for why I think our crowds could go through the roof as look at our crowds now when no one has seen us win a thing; no other club in Europe is like us. I remember reading Fifty Years of Hurt in 2006, little did I know we would then have the pleasure of Ashley for 14 years

By the way, I think this discussion is a bit academic anyway as when push comes to shove, the city council would find somewhere for the ground either within the city centre or within walking distance. They have far too much to lose by the club moving out. I'm sure they'd also want to expand the ground as they would know it could pull in a lot of football tourists that would generate income city wide. The council is crying out for money and weekend visitors would help fill the gap, not to mention income from additional home support. I know football tourists are not everyone's cup of tea but they are part and parcel of the modern game and does help to grow the support.

We get the 50+ now and we're rubbish. I said a minimum of 70,000 so even on "bad" night we'd get about 60,000. I don't see many crowds in the 50,000s if we really took off apart from maybe the odd League cup match. I'm certain we'd sell out every Premier League match.

I see where you're coming from but I just want us to realise our potential, that is all. People might think I'm delirious but it grates me that we are mentioned in the same breath as West Ham, Villa, Everton, Leicester and other teams of that ilk. We have the potential to be much more than those teams and I see a larger stadium one way of finally cementing our place amongst the top teams in Europe. A lot of the discussion in this thread, I'm not having a go at you, I find similar to Charnley when he said "no player has ever turned us down because of the training ground". I have to be honest I find it small time thinking and people not knowing our true potential; it's sad to see. A bit off topic, but I also believe it would help to raise aspirations across the region, for too long we have settled for second best in all areas. A 70,000+ crowd every week would give us all so much pride and know that we can go head to head with the best of them in other areas too.

I've no doubt you're right about there being occasions where we would not get above 70K but would that not be the time to give discounted tickets to kids? That was one of the worst things of the Keegan era, albeit a smaller ground, a lot of youngsters could not get to see a match. I think you or someone else spoke about this a few weeks back how a lot of kids had to resort to watching matches at the Odeon back then. If we had a top team then I am sure we would sell over 65,000 season tickets if we wanted to. This is a mad region for football. We have been terrible for the last 10+ years and yet still were near full capacity every year and I have to hand it to Sunderland; stuck in Division 3 and yet have higher attendances than 6 or 7 Premier League teams according to an Athletic article today. Our crowds are mind boggling considering the ownership and standard of football.

I was openly doubtful of Howe up until the last three games and delighted he's turned it around. We don't know how much an input he had into the transfers, we do know he played a part, but Howe and others should be congratulated as we had a very good window in terms of the quality and character of the players we recruited. The likely partnership of Howe and Ashworth also bodes well as I think they will work together very well.

Fine for now is the key part and that's when we have a poor team. An increase of 8,000 is nowhere near enough when we are talking about possibly challenging for the Champions League in future, say 8 years, where the catchment area runs from the Scottish Borders to potentially Leeds as a lot of kids will turn away from Sunderland and Middlesbrough to follow Newcastle if we were successful.

I can understand where you're coming from to certain extent but when you see what the Old Town Hall in Newcastle used to be like and what we replaced it with then it's just criminal. Dan T Smith has a lot to answer for. Same with the Royal Arcade that got knocked down for Swan House roundabout.

You think the attendance would only rise by around 8,000 going from relegation fodder under a detested owner to potentially a situation where we consistently win/challenge for major trophies? I'd say easily 70,000 and use the games where we might not sell out to grow the young fan base with discounted tickets.

In truth that was most of our support under Ashley

For all the furore over our takeover and others like PSG, Man City and Chelsea, it's owners like Ashley and Donaldson I detest more than anything. Just in it to bleed clubs dry and even more than that is the duplicity of their ownerships, never being honest and thinking they can hoodwink fans all the time. I have nothing against people making money from football but there's a right way to go about it.