Turf Moor Development
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2025 1:52 pm
- Been Liked: 2 times
Turf Moor Development
In light of this weeks promotion and a return to the Premiership, will Alan Pace and our Board of Directors be considering whether now is the time to finally explore the development of Turf Moor. We have all made comments over the last ten years on the Cricket Field Stand, enlarging the Bob Lord stand, etc. Interesting that reports are showing Aston Villa increasing their ground capacity without having to close any part of their existing ground, I have always thought personally, that extending the Bob Lord was the sensible option and look to increase our capacity to 25,000. Just wondering what everyone's thoughts and ideas were, striking the right balance between squad investment and ground development always generates an interesting discussion.
-
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2279 times
- Has Liked: 4043 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Interesting that in the piece about Checkets and those American money men, stadium development was one of the things listed as being an investment opportunity. I acknowledge that the article was spuriously titled as other than Checkets being a Burnley board member, it wasn't essentially about Burnley at all.
-
- Posts: 3060
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:37 am
- Been Liked: 1091 times
- Has Liked: 554 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I’ve long considered 25,000 to be about the right ceiling for a capacity for Burnley. Ensure there are 3,000 away tickets and it means we can get 22,000 Clarets in for the big games. I know sometimes demand would outstrip that, but it’d be fine in the main.
A new Cricket Field for 5-6,000 and a back extension to the Bob Lord with a cantilever or goalpost supported roof would be a decent solution, even a wrap around roof covering an L shaped Bob Lord/Cricket Field.
The problem is when you do it? When we’re in the Premier League we can’t afford to lose capacity. When we’re in the Championship we can’t afford to do it.
A new Cricket Field for 5-6,000 and a back extension to the Bob Lord with a cantilever or goalpost supported roof would be a decent solution, even a wrap around roof covering an L shaped Bob Lord/Cricket Field.
The problem is when you do it? When we’re in the Premier League we can’t afford to lose capacity. When we’re in the Championship we can’t afford to do it.
These 2 users liked this post: AfloatinClaret Wokingclaret
-
- Posts: 14648
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5644 times
- Has Liked: 5864 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Turf Moor Development
Spot on.Claretforever wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 7:03 pmThe problem is when you do it? When we’re in the Premier League we can’t afford to lose capacity. When we’re in the Championship we can’t afford to do it.
Sadly development would probably focus on increasing corporate areas for the PL.
This user liked this post: Claretforever
-
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2279 times
- Has Liked: 4043 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Definitely agree that anything above 25,000 would be utterly daft. Another 2,500/3,000 in something looking like it wasn't built during the war would be absolutely fine.
Re: Turf Moor Development
Another tier in the bob lord solely for corporate guests with a more modern shell seems like a good idea, possibly wrapping round to the cricket field as well. Maybe expanding by about 1500 in the meantime would be about right.
-
- Posts: 10444
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
- Been Liked: 3069 times
- Has Liked: 2434 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I’d offer the Cricket Club above market value to allow them to build a ground on Towneley, with council consent. Build another tier behind existing and still have room for a large CP or retail/housing.
Alternatively take the BL back to kerb edge.on Harry Potts Way.
I would like to see the CFS home fans only. Put the travellers down one wing or the other, Longside lower obviously.
Alternatively take the BL back to kerb edge.on Harry Potts Way.
I would like to see the CFS home fans only. Put the travellers down one wing or the other, Longside lower obviously.
-
- Posts: 13020
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3663 times
- Has Liked: 2111 times
- Contact:
Re: Turf Moor Development
The market value of the Cricket Club isn’t the issueTricky Trevor wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 7:30 pmI’d offer the Cricket Club above market value to allow them to build a ground on Towneley, with council consent. Build another tier behind existing and still have room for a large CP or retail/housing.
Alternatively take the BL back to kerb edge.on Harry Potts Way.
I would like to see the CFS home fans only. Put the travellers down one wing or the other, Longside lower obviously.
It’s what they would lose on match day sales that is the problem
Re: Turf Moor Development
I wonder what the comparison is to a new cricket field stand that holds an additional 2000-4000. To a new stand that holds an additional 5000-10000 fans.
I guess a double tier?
But I wonder if the base line cost for a new stand is X let's call it 20m. Maybe a double tier costs you an additional 5m.
Suddenly you've added an 5000 seats rather than 2000 for 25m.
So for an additional 5m you can house 3000 extra than you could for your original 20m.
Suddenly the cost looks cheaper and maybe more worth it. But only if you fill it. And we couldn't fill that.
So we'd either pay the 20m for 2000. And that just might not be worth it. Or pay a marginally bigger fee but have additional capacity in the stand that's half full most weeks.
Maybe the size we want to increase it by is part of the problem. If the club is ambitious enough and we progress we don't want to have to revisit the same stand in 5-10 years time either, looking for a few more thousand capacity. And having to pay 20m again for new stand rather than 5 right now to cover it would sting.
Who would be a chairman eh.
I guess a double tier?
But I wonder if the base line cost for a new stand is X let's call it 20m. Maybe a double tier costs you an additional 5m.
Suddenly you've added an 5000 seats rather than 2000 for 25m.
So for an additional 5m you can house 3000 extra than you could for your original 20m.
Suddenly the cost looks cheaper and maybe more worth it. But only if you fill it. And we couldn't fill that.
So we'd either pay the 20m for 2000. And that just might not be worth it. Or pay a marginally bigger fee but have additional capacity in the stand that's half full most weeks.
Maybe the size we want to increase it by is part of the problem. If the club is ambitious enough and we progress we don't want to have to revisit the same stand in 5-10 years time either, looking for a few more thousand capacity. And having to pay 20m again for new stand rather than 5 right now to cover it would sting.
Who would be a chairman eh.
-
- Posts: 10444
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 10:06 pm
- Been Liked: 3069 times
- Has Liked: 2434 times
-
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2279 times
- Has Liked: 4043 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Tbf to the board, balancing ground development against money for players, whilst also factoring in the lost revenue during development assuming certain areas are unusable is a really difficult conundrum (at any club) Having said that I desperately hope they never come to the conclusion that a move is the best option, because whatever happens, it really isn't.
Re: Turf Moor Development
As long as we don't move to an industrial estate next to a motorway junction, I'll be happy.
These 3 users liked this post: NL Claret Dark Cloud k90bfc
-
- Posts: 12179
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5987 times
- Has Liked: 226 times
-
- Posts: 17417
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3922 times
- Has Liked: 4892 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I’d say our capacity is near enough perfect for where we are at the moment, bouncing between the Premier League and Championship.
I think if we want to genuinely become an established Premier League club we need to put some proper effort in to growing the fanbase and also expanding the Turf.
For me this is more of a debate around infrastructure investment vs. first team investment and I’ll always be one that would happily sacrifice a few first team signings to see positive off-field improvements.
Before expansion I’d like to see:
- Concourses and kiosks in all stands properly refurbished and modernised.
- Longside and Jimmy Mc re-clad from corrugated steel to something more modern/less cheap looking, especially the yellowing side panels, with the rusting steel supports cleaned or sprayed. Put simply, the look of our two main stands is not Premier League and not the image an aspirational Premier League team would want to give.
- Further investment in Gawthorpe, particularly Academy facilities, to maintain them being world class (U21s currently do recovery at Burnley College for example).
- Ideally a small Academy and women’s team ‘stadium’ at Gawthorpe that could also be used for the tournaments we host.
But at some point it’s unavoidable that the CFS and Bob Lord will have to be replaced. They’re end of life and were a few decades ago.
I think if we want to genuinely become an established Premier League club we need to put some proper effort in to growing the fanbase and also expanding the Turf.
For me this is more of a debate around infrastructure investment vs. first team investment and I’ll always be one that would happily sacrifice a few first team signings to see positive off-field improvements.
Before expansion I’d like to see:
- Concourses and kiosks in all stands properly refurbished and modernised.
- Longside and Jimmy Mc re-clad from corrugated steel to something more modern/less cheap looking, especially the yellowing side panels, with the rusting steel supports cleaned or sprayed. Put simply, the look of our two main stands is not Premier League and not the image an aspirational Premier League team would want to give.
- Further investment in Gawthorpe, particularly Academy facilities, to maintain them being world class (U21s currently do recovery at Burnley College for example).
- Ideally a small Academy and women’s team ‘stadium’ at Gawthorpe that could also be used for the tournaments we host.
But at some point it’s unavoidable that the CFS and Bob Lord will have to be replaced. They’re end of life and were a few decades ago.
Re: Turf Moor Development
Away fans aren’t going to be entering the ground from anywhere other than the current location. It’s the only place where the coaches can park as close to the ground. For that reason it would be the CFS to be redeveloped and I don’t think the capacity needs to be increased by much, trying to shift 2 spares for Monday was hard work. Cost of going to football plus easier access to watch at home means crowds won’t dramatically increase. An upgraded or new CFS should do.
If the club finds itself in the Championship again and the current Sky package is in place there will be a lot empty seats if the capacity is increased. Attendances for the midweek games will still be low during the cold months.
If the club finds itself in the Championship again and the current Sky package is in place there will be a lot empty seats if the capacity is increased. Attendances for the midweek games will still be low during the cold months.
This user liked this post: Goalkeeper
-
- Posts: 1531
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
- Been Liked: 299 times
- Has Liked: 4112 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Wouldn't flattening the turf and using the ground space be better than adding parts or replacing 1 stand.
Plenty of local teams we could ground share with for a season or 2
Plenty of local teams we could ground share with for a season or 2
-
- Posts: 4220
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
- Been Liked: 1012 times
- Has Liked: 1197 times
- Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre
Re: Turf Moor Development
The Council and planning appeals panels have made it clear that they oppose both a move for BCC or even the sale of more land to BFC even if the financial implications could be sorted out. The income from 19 or 23 football days are a massive reason for BCC's continued successes in the Lancashire League.
-
- Posts: 7535
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
- Been Liked: 2279 times
- Has Liked: 4043 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I have often thought along similar lines. The actual positioning of the ground could have been on a slightly different footprint and still fall within the boundaries of what at present constitutes the club's land. The siting of the ground doesn't make the best use of the land available, especially being right up against Harry Potts Way.cockneyclaret wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:00 pmWouldn't flattening the turf and using the ground space be better than adding parts or replacing 1 stand.
Plenty of local teams we could ground share with for a season or 2
Re: Turf Moor Development
Might cost a few quid that option and it just wouldn’t feel right.cockneyclaret wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:00 pmWouldn't flattening the turf and using the ground space be better than adding parts or replacing 1 stand.
Plenty of local teams we could ground share with for a season or 2
Re: Turf Moor Development
My vague memory of this is that actually building the stand isn't the issue, it's the access and in particular the emergency access/exits that are restricted if the cricket club is there.TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 7:59 pmThere's no need for the cricket club to move anywhere. I bigger stand could be built on the footprint of the CFS
-
- Posts: 1746
- Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2024 6:12 pm
- Been Liked: 537 times
- Has Liked: 1275 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I believe they are making another third of the CFS seats safe standing over the summer. This will probably will be the biggest development, but the entire CFS needs replacing really.
-
- Posts: 17417
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3922 times
- Has Liked: 4892 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
This could be true, I’m not sure, but pretty sure TFC’s statement is also correct - the CFS is not far off being as deep as the Longside.
I also think there’s lots of opportunity to move the pitch closer to the Jimmy Mc and Longside to create some room for Bob Lord expansion.
My main criteria in any ground redevelopment would be to get the fans as close to the pitch as possible.
-
- Posts: 17417
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3922 times
- Has Liked: 4892 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Out of interest, where have you heard this. I’m not sure the Council or their planning department has any jurisdiction over private party land sales.bfcmik wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:05 pmThe Council and planning appeals panels have made it clear that they oppose both a move for BCC or even the sale of more land to BFC even if the financial implications could be sorted out. The income from 19 or 23 football days are a massive reason for BCC's continued successes in the Lancashire League.
Not that I want to see the CC moved. That should remain and there’s plenty of space for a tightly packed but expanded ground. I think it’s only a few meters of land they need to redevelop the CFS anyway.
Re: Turf Moor Development
There would be a huge amount of people contesting the plans if a cricket club at towneley was proposed. There's already issues with the traffic going through there at the moment which has been raised numerous times and there are discussions being had on how best to control it. Adding a cricket club in there as well would only make things worse on top of the recently agreed camping facilitiesTricky Trevor wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 7:30 pmI’d offer the Cricket Club above market value to allow them to build a ground on Towneley, with council consent. Build another tier behind existing and still have room for a large CP or retail/housing.
Alternatively take the BL back to kerb edge.on Harry Potts Way.
I would like to see the CFS home fans only. Put the travellers down one wing or the other, Longside lower obviously.
-
- Posts: 4497
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
- Been Liked: 1003 times
- Has Liked: 1595 times
- Location: burnley
-
- Posts: 1730
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:51 am
- Been Liked: 291 times
- Has Liked: 600 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I've always thought that the depth of the cfs would take a bigger capacity, ie 2nd tier of 1500-2000, but also wondered about access and exits etc, but I would have thought it could somehow be doable.
Similarly with the bls, as has been mentioned a cantilever style 2nd tier over and wrapping round to join on to the cfs which could provide better access maybe from the corner as a quadrant type ie more turnstiles. All this giving us 3/4,000 extra capacity which imo would be about right. For instance going off demand we could probably have had 25/26,000 on for Mondays game, so should we sustain a stay in the Premier league and become re-established we'd probably be comfortable with that figure.
Re: Turf Moor Development
I'm not really arsed about the development of the ground. I quite like people saying it's shite, it shouldn't be a welcoming place for people to come.
There's a few bits that could do with sprucing up but mainly just cosmetic rather than increasing or decreasing capacity. Maybe update the cladding all around the ground which now looks very grubby, and perhaps cantilever roofs for the cricket field and fishwick.
I would much rather the club and council worked together to do something about the surrounding area. The work under the culvert and what's been done to the center looks nice but something now needs to be done from the prinny royal to the Belvedere road junction. It looks like Damascus once Putin and Isis had finished up with it.
There's a few bits that could do with sprucing up but mainly just cosmetic rather than increasing or decreasing capacity. Maybe update the cladding all around the ground which now looks very grubby, and perhaps cantilever roofs for the cricket field and fishwick.
I would much rather the club and council worked together to do something about the surrounding area. The work under the culvert and what's been done to the center looks nice but something now needs to be done from the prinny royal to the Belvedere road junction. It looks like Damascus once Putin and Isis had finished up with it.
This user liked this post: ChrisG
-
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2023 11:20 am
- Been Liked: 36 times
- Has Liked: 14 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I can never understand the weird obssesion with potentially having empty seats, there are people on here who would be happy with a 10k ground as long as it was full.
The club needs to sort the two new stands out first and foremost. The legroom is terrible, no protection from the elements. If we're going to have a longside then have a longside, 15k stand down the side, give 5k to away fans which they access via the ginnel.
Capacity upto 30k, lets start having a little ambition.
The club needs to sort the two new stands out first and foremost. The legroom is terrible, no protection from the elements. If we're going to have a longside then have a longside, 15k stand down the side, give 5k to away fans which they access via the ginnel.
Capacity upto 30k, lets start having a little ambition.
This user liked this post: Juan Tanamera
-
- Posts: 17417
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3922 times
- Has Liked: 4892 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I agree and I think we need to be challenging the Fulham, Palace capacities if we really want to ‘belong’ there.alwaysaclaret wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:27 pmAll this giving us 3/4,000 extra capacity which imo would be about right. For instance going off demand we could probably have had 25/26,000 on for Mondays game, so should we sustain a stay in the Premier league and become re-established we'd probably be comfortable with that figure.
I think we could if we established ourselves and importantly ultimately played an exciting brand of football.
-
- Posts: 17417
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
- Been Liked: 3922 times
- Has Liked: 4892 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I’d be one of them too, and nothing to do with parking.
Having the CC next Turf Moor is part of our heritage. There’s plenty of room and no need to move it.
These 2 users liked this post: Burnley1989 ArmchairDetective
Re: Turf Moor Development
It’s an issue that needs sorting sooner rather than later. We’ve been kicking this can down the road for a couple of decades now since a redevelopment was first mooted.
We can’t keep spending millions titivating. I dread to think how how much we’ve spent continually doing up the BL and CFS.
There needs to be some proper long term thinking with this.
We can’t keep spending millions titivating. I dread to think how how much we’ve spent continually doing up the BL and CFS.
There needs to be some proper long term thinking with this.
-
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:29 am
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 64 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Why should they move? Its their home just as much is the Turf is the Football clubs.summitclaret wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:21 pmThat can be solved by gifting them a large sum to be invested, with the interest etc. generating an annual income in perpetuity.
They were there first weren't they?
Re: Turf Moor Development
It's not really about capacity though. Bog standard matchday income, particularly at the prices most Burnley fans would bear, is peanuts compared to the tv money.
All the recent new grounds/stands have primarily been to up the hospitality seating, that's where the money is.
-
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:29 am
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 64 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
getbennyon wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:38 pmI can never understand the weird obssesion with potentially having empty seats, there are people on here who would be happy with a 10k ground as long as it was full.
The club needs to sort the two new stands out first and foremost. The legroom is terrible, no protection from the elements. If we're going to have a longside then have a longside, 15k stand down the side, give 5k to away fans which they access via the ginnel.
Capacity upto 30k, lets start having a little ambition.
Ambition is fine. Living in dreamland is another. When has the club ever looked like selling 25k home tickets, apart from very rare one-offs?
Just take a look 12 miles down the M65 for what we'd end up with.
Re: Turf Moor Development
What's your thinking behind that? Palace AVG 25k. Call it £500 for 4,000 extra ST's and that's 2 million a season extra in the kitty. Obviously won't be exactly like that but you get the jist. Practically negligible when considering the sums on offer in the PL so presume youre thinking of some other benefit I'm not grasping?
-
- Posts: 1711
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
- Been Liked: 440 times
- Has Liked: 610 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
The cricket club won’t allow us to buy them out. They’ve been there longer than the turf has been there and make far too much money on match days . The only feasible outcome would be to build a stand with a pavilion facing the cricket ground at the back of the new stand and allow them to keep The profits from match days.
Another issue would be the access to build a new stand , they’d not allow diggers and bulldozers on the cricket pitch for a couple of years.
Another issue would be the access to build a new stand , they’d not allow diggers and bulldozers on the cricket pitch for a couple of years.
-
- Posts: 3020
- Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:31 pm
- Been Liked: 722 times
- Has Liked: 2352 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Couldn't Burnley Cricket Club just move in as tenants of Lowerhouse?blatherwickstattoos wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:49 pmThe cricket club won’t allow us to buy them out. They’ve been there longer than the turf has been there and make far too much money on match days . The only feasible outcome would be to build a stand with a pavilion facing the cricket ground at the back of the new stand and allow them to keep The profits from match days.
Another issue would be the access to build a new stand , they’d not allow diggers and bulldozers on the cricket pitch for a couple of years.
They all seem on get on very well judging by the various Lancashire league threads...
These 2 users liked this post: blatherwickstattoos Hopey
-
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2023 11:20 am
- Been Liked: 36 times
- Has Liked: 14 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
The club is experiences the highest demand for ticket since the 1960s.Transpennine wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:47 pmAmbition is fine. Living in dreamland is another. When has the club ever looked like selling 25k home tickets, apart from very rare one-offs?
Just take a look 12 miles down the M65 for what we'd end up with.
Again, i ask, why are you afraid on potentially empty seats?
Re: Turf Moor Development
I had 2 spares for Monday, it wasn’t easy to shift them and didn’t get face value not that I was bothered. That level of demand isn’t there.alwaysaclaret wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:27 pm. All this giving us 3/4,000 extra capacity which imo would be about right. For instance going off demand we could probably have had 25/26,000 on for Mondays game, so should we sustain a stay in the Premier league and become re-established we'd probably be comfortable with that figure.
-
- Posts: 1711
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
- Been Liked: 440 times
- Has Liked: 610 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I think lowerhouses third team get more crowds on then Burnley’s first so they’d be losing moneyJohnDearyMe wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:53 pmCouldn't Burnley Cricket Club just move in as tenants of Lowerhouse?
They all seem on get on very well judging by the various Lancashire league threads...

This user liked this post: JohnDearyMe
-
- Posts: 1711
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2023 12:16 pm
- Been Liked: 440 times
- Has Liked: 610 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I had about 15 people asking me for tickets haha. If you’d have put them on Facebook on a public thread they’d have gone in minutes
This user liked this post: mybloodisclaret
Re: Turf Moor Development
I can only think that the club's recent baulking at the cost of a functioning PA is because they're planning on redevelopment of at least one of the stands
Re: Turf Moor Development
You could rebuild the cricket field stand incorporate a new cricket club house we a sweetener, needs replacing anyway. Could do it in exchange for a bit more space at the rear.
I'd imagine we won't entertain moving the away fans to another stand, that would be away fans only.
Just assumptions
I'd imagine we won't entertain moving the away fans to another stand, that would be away fans only.
Just assumptions
-
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 11:29 am
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 64 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
I don't think there's any evidence that the highest demand since the 60's shows that we'd regularly sell 25k home tickets.getbennyon wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:54 pmThe club is experiences the highest demand for ticket since the 1960s.
Again, i ask, why are you afraid on potentially empty seats?
Empty seats:
1. Ruin the atmosphere
2. End up filled by away fans.
Re: Turf Moor Development
We rarely sell out now
Re: Turf Moor Development
Turf has barely been full this season despite our success. On Sky etc the Jimmy Mac lower looks shocking when it’s always half full. I’d definitely prefer a tighter ground, lower capacity and obv with that generate a better atmosphere. Brentford built a new stadium and knew their limit at 19,000. Full every game and looks great.
-
- Posts: 3060
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:37 am
- Been Liked: 1091 times
- Has Liked: 554 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
You know what I’ve thought, beyond the 25,000 comment I made, that wouldn’t it be great if you had a ground where you could hide seats.Conroy92 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 7:38 pmI wonder what the comparison is to a new cricket field stand that holds an additional 2000-4000. To a new stand that holds an additional 5000-10000 fans.
I guess a double tier?
But I wonder if the base line cost for a new stand is X let's call it 20m. Maybe a double tier costs you an additional 5m.
Suddenly you've added an 5000 seats rather than 2000 for 25m.
So for an additional 5m you can house 3000 extra than you could for your original 20m.
Suddenly the cost looks cheaper and maybe more worth it. But only if you fill it. And we couldn't fill that.
So we'd either pay the 20m for 2000. And that just might not be worth it. Or pay a marginally bigger fee but have additional capacity in the stand that's half full most weeks.
Maybe the size we want to increase it by is part of the problem. If the club is ambitious enough and we progress we don't want to have to revisit the same stand in 5-10 years time either, looking for a few more thousand capacity. And having to pay 20m again for new stand rather than 5 right now to cover it would sting.
Who would be a chairman eh.
I mean the back section of stands with backboard, maybe metal, that come down on some sort of hydraulic system the make it appear the stand back was lower than it actually was. So maybe covering the back 5,000 seats across two stand, should they not be needed. Of course they’d have to be saleable on a match by match basis, and I’m probably going out of my mind.

It would stop the ground looking as empty like Ewood does when they have 12-14,000 on.
This user liked this post: turfytopper
-
- Posts: 763
- Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2022 9:53 pm
- Been Liked: 317 times
- Has Liked: 187 times
Re: Turf Moor Development
Nothing more than maintenance and a lick of paint here and there,leave well alone.