Alan Shearer sends message to Saudi chiefs over Newcastle’s stadium plans

by Andrew Reynolds · 11 December 2024, 09:40

One of the biggest topics of conversation regarding Newcastle United at the minute is what needs to be done to increase the capacity of our stadium - whether that's extending St James' Park or building a new ground.

This has sparked a lot of debate amongst supporters with some believing we should not leave our iconic home for fear of losing the atmosphere as we saw with West Ham moving to the London Stadium.

However, others believe that we will never progress financially as a club without a larger capacity and the ability to bring in more commercial revenue to catch up with the big boys of the Premier League.

Shearer makes his preference clear

Speaking to World Soccer Talk, Toon legend Alan Shearer admitted that he would like to see the club remain in their current home and explore any opportunity to expand than find a new ground.

Even if the decision was made to move, Shearer expressed his desire for the new stadium to still be in the centre of the city, adding that being right in the middle of town is what makes St James' Park so great and connected to the community.

Here's what Shearer said on the situation:

"If it’s at all possible to extend the ground and stay there, then that would be my preferred choice. I don’t know the ins and outs and the financials and all of those things, but on a level playing field, if everything was normal, I would prefer to stay at St. James’ Park.

"Even if they’re not [staying], I think it would be really important to keep it centrally located because that’s one of the key things. The great thing about our club is that it’s right in the middle of the city and it means so much to everyone."

It does feel like your average match-going fan wants to remain where we are, regardless of if that means limiting what we can spend in the future, but it's a decision that is ultimately out of our hands.

A bigger stadium does not equal success

The idea that Newcastle simply must relocate to progress seems to be floating around at the minute, but there are many examples of how that is not completely true.

Of course more commercial revenue would give us more room to work with regarding PSR, but you can just look at the likes of Chelsea and Liverpool to prove that you can win trophies and not have to build a new fancy stadium.

Stamford Bridge actually holds less than St James' Park with just over 40,000 while Anfield was similar to our capacity at around 54,000 before they extended to add a further 7,000.

Both these clubs have won a number of trophies in the last decade or so and should be the perfect example to our owners who will soon be coming to a final decision.

Our 'big six' rivals have a big headstart from a financial point of view, but if we can build revenues elsewhere - via naming rights, the training ground, kit sponsors and new commercial partners - wouldn't this be a better solution than tearing down St James' Park?