Stadium Plans

[WasStefan]

As previously posted ad nauseum, 40,000 seats will do us.

Less if we continue to score only once in a blue moon

40,000 too high. 36k is plenty

 

[Very Proud (AKA Still Proud)]

Do you think the existing structure could take the extra weight of another 3000 seats at the back plus a new roof or do you think they could build from behind similar to what Liverpool have done and I think Ipswich did with their main stand? I like your idea though.

I think space wise we could but that's where a structural engineer would come into their own. We could potentially go even further back but obviously the structure would have to be reinforced/supplemented. Anfield is a great example just shows what can be done.

 

[WickedWolfie]

Do you think the existing structure could take the extra weight of another 3000 seats at the back plus a new roof or do you think they could build from behind similar to what Liverpool have done and I think Ipswich did with their main stand? I like your idea though.

Forest, who have an identical stand, are making major changes. Perhaps we should look at those.

 

[WickedWolfie]

40,000 too high. 36k is plenty

Disagree.

 

[Oldgoldilox]

Very much doubt that it would be possible to expand up and add an extra tier above the existing seating, the existing structure would need to support a larger roof as well as the weight of the extra terracing and seats. And you couldnt really extend the existing terracing in to the void at the back as the pillars would obstruct the view. It might be possible to utilise the void at the very top & back for new exec boxes and covert the back few rows to corporate seating. Hopefully the lower tier can be extended at a different angle towards the pitch and at the same time square up with the touchline. Could add an extra row or two in the middle section below the upper tier to keep all the lower tier rows perpendicular to the pitch.

 

[Minimalist]

Forest, who have an identical stand, are making major changes. Perhaps we should look at those.

Pretty sure it’s not identical.
Completely parallel with the pitch.

 

[WickedWolfie]

Pretty sure it’s not identical.
Completely parallel with the pitch.

Interesting as l had certainly seen that fact quoted.

 

[WKFWolf]

Forest, who have an identical stand, are making major changes. Perhaps we should look at those.

Believe they are renovating/building over the smaller stand in their ground as opposed to the Brian Clough stand.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Pinched this from the "Old Photos" thread. It shows that potentially you could add another 33% in terms of rows at the back of the Steve Bull, c3,000 seats. If you replaced the front tier with a steeper incline from pitch side potentially another 1,000 - 2,000 seats could increase the total capacity by c4,500 seats, which is nearly in line with projections of 36k overall capacity at that point.

Issue is that would not accommodate corporate hospitality boxes and won't address the depth of each row. Likely that they'd have to demolish/lift the existing rows of terrace off the structure to address this issue and perhaps build boxes across the back of the existing stand and seats extending above. The other issue would then be what would they do about the curve of the stand.

Fascinating stuff but one thing is that there are options to produce a stand that could be done in stages with a very clever architect and structural engineer at the helm.

View attachment 30390

View attachment 30388

Nice. Think in your concept, it would need the addition of a shallow rear extension, bringing the back closer to the road. The rear extension would contain the supports for the new roof structure so that it didn’t reuse the existing structure, and if you placed the hospitality section at the back, then you’d have more depth for boxes, function rooms, and to provide lifts and stairs to access the new upper level.

To address the seat pitch issue in the SBU, it would be possible to overlay a new wider stepped layout, but that would lose a few rows of capacity to bring it up to modern standards. Of course that would be more than compensated by the significantly enlarged SBL if that starts from the top of the old boxes and extends further forward to bring the front closer to the pitch.

If you really wanted to finish the job without demolition, then you could remove the SBL and roof, build a new rear extension, and overlay a new upper and lower tier which sits square to the pitch on top of and in front of the old stand, topped with an entirely new, higher roof supported by the new rear extension. The core of the old SBU stand would remain within, but totally hidden within a new seating structure and rear elevation. That’s more or less what Liverpool have been doing with their recent works, but this needn’t be such a large expansion.

 

[WickedWolfie]

Believe they are renovating/building over the smaller stand in their ground as opposed to the Brian Clough stand.

Having looked again it looks like they are doing the Peter Taylor stand first, you are correct. That alone will take Forest to 35k.

 

[WasStefan]

Disagree.

You can disagree but the demand for tickets shows even as low as 33k is enough. But 36k would be nice and tie in with steve bull rebuild.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Interesting as l had certainly seen that fact quoted.

Believe they are renovating/building over the smaller stand in their ground as opposed to the Brian Clough stand.

They plan to replace the stand opposite the Brian Clough stand with a new 10k three tier structure. That’s the major work. They also plan to improve the other stands, including the Brian Clough stand, and the area around the ground. From the artwork, it looks like the Brian Clough stand will get an external reskin and new glazed structure with improved access. The Brian Clough stand was built around the same time as the Steve Bull was, and in a similar style, but it’s square to the pitch and has a different roof, so certainly not identical. I think their improvements to that stand might provide useful insights for a Steve Bull refurb, even if they couldn’t be exactly replicated.

 

[WickedWolfie]

You can disagree but the demand for tickets shows even as low as 33k is enough. But 36k would be nice and tie in with steve bull rebuild.

How, given that we are capacity constrained and that has been one of the drivers of ticket pricing, you feel able to make those statements so categorically is beyond me.

 

[Elvis Wolf]

Let's get things right on the pitch before working on Molineux Development.
Don't blame Fosun for treading water on this front.
Millions spent on players but so far no improvement.
Action needed PDQ or we are gonna be in the doo doos!!
Relegation doesn't bear thinking about.
All our top players will be transferred and we'll be back to square 1.

 

[Very Proud (AKA Still Proud)]

Very much doubt that it would be possible to expand up and add an extra tier above the existing seating, the existing structure would need to support a larger roof as well as the weight of the extra terracing and seats. And you couldnt really extend the existing terracing in to the void at the back as the pillars would obstruct the view. It might be possible to utilise the void at the very top & back for new exec boxes and covert the back few rows to corporate seating. Hopefully the lower tier can be extended at a different angle towards the pitch and at the same time square up with the touchline. Could add an extra row or two in the middle section below the upper tier to keep all the lower tier rows perpendicular to the pitch.

Couple of RSJ's should sort it!

Seriously though there's enough space behind to add an extra upper tier, though will be something for the engineers to sort out. The whole thing would of course be predicated on the existing underlying structure being sound. Additional structure could be built to bear the weight I'm sure.

The undercroft will need some reconfig, but in the pic I posted I have one large lower tier, then Exec Boxes then an upper tier, which as long as the load issues are address code be feasible.

 

[Minimalist]

Nice. Think in your concept, it would need the addition of a shallow rear extension, bringing the back closer to the road. The rear extension would contain the supports for the new roof structure so that it didn’t reuse the existing structure, and if you placed the hospitality section at the back, then you’d have more depth for boxes, function rooms, and to provide lifts and stairs to access the new upper level.

To address the seat pitch issue in the SBU, it would be possible to overlay a new wider stepped layout, but that would lose a few rows of capacity to bring it up to modern standards. Of course that would be more than compensated by the significantly enlarged SBL if that starts from the top of the old boxes and extends further forward to bring the front closer to the pitch.

If you really wanted to finish the job without demolition, then you could remove the SBL and roof, build a new rear extension, and overlay a new upper and lower tier which sits square to the pitch on top of and in front of the old stand, topped with an entirely new, higher roof supported by the new rear extension. The core of the old SBU stand would remain within, but totally hidden within a new seating structure and rear elevation. That’s more or less what Liverpool have been doing with their recent works, but this needn’t be such a large expansion.

In the end that will cost close to as much as a complete demolition and rebuild I’d guess.

 

[WasStefan]

How, given that we are capacity constrained and that has been one of the drivers of ticket pricing, you feel able to make those statements so categorically is beyond me.

Prices are high now and the ground barely sells out. If you really think adding 10k more seats will mean prices will drop you are deluded. Prices will stay the same and the ground would have 8k+ empty seats

There is very little business case to expand simply because attendances are now plateauing at a higher price point, as much as we would all like the bully knocking down and rebuilding.

 

[lostwolf]

Pretty sure it’s not identical.
Completely parallel with the pitch.

Forest's Executive Stand down the side is similar to the Bully, but you're right it runs flush with the pitch. It's a similar age and build though.

 

[WickedWolfie]

Forest's Executive Stand down the side is similar to the Bully, but you're right it runs flush with the pitch. It's a similar age and build though.

Believe it was the same builders too....

 

[Minimalist]

I kinda wish Morgan hadn’t bothered doing the north bank. It’s the imbalance of the stadium now that irks me. Or he could have done it without the half quadrant and moving the pitch.

 

[lostwolf]

Believe it was the same builders too....

Just checked the Simon Inglis ground bible. Not sure about the builders, you might be right there, but the architects were different: Atherden and Nutter designed ours and then the design was apparently copied by Husband & Co. at the trees. I prefer theirs to be honest, the cantilevered shape always seemed unnecessary.

(Just looking at it now, the second edition of Inglis' book is tragic - post Bradford but pre Hillsbrough, unaware of the horror just around the corner.)

 

[Minimalist]

Just checked the Simon Inglis ground bible. Not sure about the builders, you might be right there, but the architects were different: Atherden and Nutter designed ours and then the design was apparently copied by Husband & Co. at the trees. I prefer theirs to be honest, the cantilevered shape always seemed unnecessary.

(Just looking at it now, the second edition of Inglis' book is tragic - post Bradford but pre Hillsbrough, unaware of the horror just around the corner.)

Presumably the reason for the shape was to effectively make it bigger.
Was daft though, especially as money was tight and to begin with the whole stand sat so far from pitch.
Should have been built straight, maybe higher with lower tier same size as upper...

 

[Wandsworth Wolf]

Presumably the reason for the shape was to effectively make it bigger.
Was daft though, especially as money was tight and to begin with the whole stand sat so far from pitch.
Should have been built straight, maybe higher with lower tier same size as upper...

I guess you've just got to remember that back in '79 this was already a huge stand.
They probably thought it was more than big enough (especially as it was just the first phase).

If that redeveloped Molineux stadium had been completed, it would have been the best ground in English football by a country mile.

God, I hope in my lifetime I get to see a Molineux stadium that is finished.

 

[hollo]

40,000 too high. 36k is plenty

No, no -45,000. We have to be ambitious.

 

[lostwolf]

No, no -45,000. We have to be ambitious.

Fair enough. But I think most of us think 40k would be plenty. I know @reanswolf has understandable reservations, but for me even if the ground isn't full all the time that isn't a problem. I reckon we'd currently get a full house for the 'big 6', Villa and important games (first game, last season if somethings on it, boxing day etc.), and 28-35k for all the other games. What we'd have then is growing room, if we're challenging for Europe more could come, groups of friends could start attending together again regardless of how we're doing, and younger fans could get the habit. Looking at Sunderland, an economically similar town but with a smaller wider catchment area, of we did what they've done in terms of support I'd be chuffed bits. When people talk about empty seats, I just don't agree, a packed home end can make a din regardless of empties, and to repeat a point I've made before, don't confuse a packed stadium with an excited crowd; we think the ground needs to be full to make the atmosphere, but forget that when the ground's full it's because it's an important game!!

 

[MutchAdo]

There is absolutely no need to increase capacity right now, the Steve Bull is in drastic need of knocking down and rebuilding as it's far from safe but beyond that any redevelopment to increase capacity is a pipe dream. There were empty seats in the South Bank for City and probably 15% of the North Bank was empty for the entire game, much more after half time.

To attract more we need sustainable success, whether that be top 6 finishes, good cup runs, whatever. The interest from 2018 has waned, we may all disagree on why that is. But as it stands we don't sell out so why would Fosun expand?

 

[Sussex Wolf]

In the end that will cost close to as much as a complete demolition and rebuild I’d guess.

Probably true on the building side, but would save a lot of time and money on demolition, so might make economic sense. Liverpool have done it for a reason, and I doubt their owners would willingly spend more than they need to.

 

[SevernWolf]

There were empty seats in the South Bank for City and probably 15% of the North Bank was empty for the entire game, much more after half time.

It definitely wasn't possible to buy City tickets a couple of hours after they went on sale to members, because I was on a plane at the time and tried as soon as we landed. If there were any empty seats, it wasn't due to lack of demand.
Forest tickets went on sale to members today, and the only place you can get two seats together is in the Graham Hughes stand. It's hardly a glamour fixture, and money is tight at the moment.
There's also a waiting list for season tickets, so they could definitely expand Molineux and fill it most weeks. Whether it makes economic sense for them to do that when you consider that most money comes from TV, not ticket sales, is another matter.

 

[greco wolf]

There is absolutely no need to increase capacity right now, the Steve Bull is in drastic need of knocking down and rebuilding as it's far from safe but beyond that any redevelopment to increase capacity is a pipe dream. There were empty seats in the South Bank for City and probably 15% of the North Bank was empty for the entire game, much more after half time.

To attract more we need sustainable success, whether that be top 6 finishes, good cup runs, whatever. The interest from 2018 has waned, we may all disagree on why that is. But as it stands we don't sell out so why would Fosun expand?

Tickets were sold. Season tickets. If people
Don’t turn up still
Sold tickets. When I went to Newcastle game there were seats near me. People on holiday and didn’t want to sell them back to club I was told

So still a ‘sell out’

 

[chignalwolf]

Disagree.

and me.
to be on the same level as the top 6 plus Newcastle a minimum of 50k, if the Vile can get 40k+ so could the mighty Wolves.
aim for the top you might come second,

 

[inaglasshouse]

and me.
to be on the same level as the top 6 plus Newcastle a minimum of 50k, if the Vile can get 40k+ so could the mighty Wolves.
aim for the top you might come second,

Yes at least 45 with potential to go higher for me. Lets get it done right this time. We still have a massive support earnt from families whose grandparents folllowed the triple champions of England in the 50's. They are still out there and we could still get back to our true status towards the top of English game. Always believe in the old gold and don't let the bottlers, neighsayers and corporate types tell you any different.

 

[MutchAdo]

It definitely wasn't possible to buy City tickets a couple of hours after they went on sale to members, because I was on a plane at the time and tried as soon as we landed. If there were any empty seats, it wasn't due to lack of demand.

Tickets were sold. Season tickets. If people
Don’t turn up still
Sold tickets. When I went to Newcastle game there were seats near me. People on holiday and didn’t want to sell them back to club I was told

So still a ‘sell out’

Not disputing that, I never said the tickets weren't sold just that there were loads of empty seats from kick off and more so later in the game. If people want to buy tickets and not turn up that's even worse.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Not disputing that, I never said the tickets weren't sold just that there were loads of empty seats from kick off and more so later in the game. If people want to buy tickets and not turn up that's even worse.

Even worse? You can’t force people to turn up, or to sell on their tickets. The fact is, as far as the club is concerned, if the tickets are sold, and there are more people who want to buy tickets, then there is unmet demand. You can go to sold out music concerts, films, shows, etc and find empty seats. I’ve said before and will say it again, by any conventional measure of capacity, Molineux has been full since we were promoted.

 

[Minimalist]

Probably true on the building side, but would save a lot of time and money on demolition, so might make economic sense. Liverpool have done it for a reason, and I doubt their owners would willingly spend more than they need to.

Would it really be quicker though?
I imagine gently picking away parts without causing damage to what you want to remain would slow some parts down. If it’s just what they outlined in ask wolves it probably works; but extending back also and replacing the roof would not be easy. Possibly very similar time scale as complete demolition, perhaps actually longer.

 

[AndyY]

There is absolutely no need to increase capacity right now, the Steve Bull is in drastic need of knocking down and rebuilding as it's far from safe but beyond that any redevelopment to increase capacity is a pipe dream. There were empty seats in the South Bank for City and probably 15% of the North Bank was empty for the entire game, much more after half time.

People say the SB is “ far from safe” but that is patently untrue as it has a safety certificate.
It may not be up to modern standards of space or concourse facilities but it is nonsense to say it is unsafe.
And tbh I feel safer in the SB than I did at Wembley for the cup semi final because I felt the rake of the stand was too steep when trying to walk down the steps.

 

[SevernWolf]

Not disputing that, I never said the tickets weren't sold

But as it stands we don't sell out

 

[MutchAdo]

 

[Peszkywolf]

There's Victorian stands at British football grounds, lots of those Leitch designs so I'm sure the Steve Bull is safe for a decade or 2. What would make the club replace it though is lack of corporate seats, the Steve Bull boxes must be the worst in the premier league (behind away fans, no outside seats?).
Would love us to round some corners and bump up the capacity to 36k, plenty of people ask me for spare tickets. Kids can't go out of the blue and get hooked like most people on here probably did.

 

[bigbadwolftoo]

Bigger ground, with more corporate, retain pricing or reduce a bit with some lower cost seats. Get the visiting supporters in a corner as we are in most modern grounds or shoved into old stands with poor facilities and viewing.

Would go for 40-45k, with expandability considered.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Would it really be quicker though?
I imagine gently picking away parts without causing damage to what you want to remain would slow some parts down. If it’s just what they outlined in ask wolves it probably works; but extending back also and replacing the roof would not be easy. Possibly very similar time scale as complete demolition, perhaps actually longer.

In terms of stand closure, yes. Removing and rebuilding the SB Lower, removing the existing roof and building a rear extension (if required), could all be done while the SB Upper remains open. Then the rebuilt SB Lower can be opened before they close the SB Upper to rework that. Keeping a large part of the stand open during the works is itself worth a few million. Demolition and removal of all that old concrete in the SB Upper would not be cheap or quick, with Morgan previously estimating close to a year. As I said, Liverpool are going down this route for two stands, so clearly it must make sense in some cases. The same is true in conversion of some old offices into new ones, or into flats. It depends on what you start with.

The total duration of the project may be little different from a complete demolition and rebuild, but through phasing and keeping some of the stand open throughout, the economics may be more attractive, especially if avoiding demolition costs more than outweighs the complexity of working around the old structure.