Otis
Well-Known Member
As to the original question....
I think if we did build a new Sky Blues stadium within the catchment area, be it a few miles outside the officially city boundary then I think we will see no change in support what so ever.
Consulting with fans would merely see a sheep capacity to say "we want it IN Coventry" reply across the board. Of course most fans would say that but I remember when the Ricoh was rumoured and then under construction and then built we had fans saying it was way too far out and no one would attend out there etc etc. Turns out it's a brilliant location and yes some of those fans still complain about where it is.
It depends what side of the city boundaries you are I suppose. Frankly anywhere that's no worse for example than an out of town boundary placed shopping centre will make no difference. Of course fans will go and watch their beloved Sky Blues. It's like saying if you stuck it in Exhall you would expect less attendees? that's rubbish. I don't quantify my City as having to define a boundary for the purpose of a football team needing a stadium, so long as it's obviously within a strong catchment area and a clear affinity with the city.
West Ham are going to the Olympic stadium and I don't hear too many complaints? they won't even own it and will pay £6m a year rent! If they fail to stay in the top flight they too will be buggered good and proper.
Lets just say it was built at the airport site. Would you still attend?
Err, but West Ham are a London club. the Olympic Stadium is in London. If West Ham moved to Watford then maybe you would have a point.
If City move within Coventry then no-one is going to have a problem. The whole beef with many fans is if we move to another town.