How is it about becoming a super club of the 21st century or perhaps maintaining the position of one? Well, the surroundings of your home is a barometer.
If you are lucky to inherit a high capacity sand built for other things that would otherwise leave as a white elephant, then, such as Manchester City and West Ham, luckily.
For others aware of the growing dimensions of the world's largest sport with its new greatness, building a new stadium is the potential path towards opportunity and scale, and even a fundamental need.
The debate will be enraged on the purpose behind a new stadium.
Is it a vanity project? An opportunity to increase commercial income through facilities for everything, from Beyonce to boxing? To generate more value for owners? Or, what the average fanatic really wants, to have a winning bloody football team.
Actually, it is all of the above and recent history will tell you that building a modern stadium is a challenge and an opportunity.
Manchester United has started working to get away from old Old Trafford
The co -owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe has converted a progressive stadium plan into a cornerstone of its new era
The concepts delivered by Foster + Partners have postulated the stadium as a 'Wembley of the North'
Arsenal fans, Tottenham and Everton know the commitments that their clubs have endured to make expensive improvements.
The next probable cabin outside the range for a complete restart of the stadium is the Glazer/Sir Jim Ratcliffe project. But being a unique beast, I think Manchester United will not have the same obstacles and challenges that others have faced.
Among the Premier League clubs, United is in a parenthesis, regardless of a decade of decomposition and its current play under Game Ruben Amorim.
Although the numbers allegedly show that Liverpool has been observed more in the last 12 months worldwide, United has unsurpassed recognition in terms of world support and brand relations.
In that sense, a new headquarters to reflect its aura is a need to stay as market leaders.
Only a United Institution could allow Glazers to borrow this amount to buy the club, then use the money from that club to pay the debt they created, more dividends, and increase their value by 700 percent.
Although it is the antithesis of what any fanatic would like, he showed that United can do what others cannot. Therefore, Ratcliffe paid £ 1.25 billion for 28 percent.
I am not surprised that he and the Glazers want a new ambitious stadium. The optics is good, makes United looks large, bold and progressive, but also speaks with the fundamental purpose of increasing long -term commercial value.
The Miami Dolphins Hard Rock Stadium is a multipurpose place that houses the Miami Grand Prix
Tottenham has built a new stadium that has been marketed like no other in the country
Look at America and see the footprint of the Miami Dolphins stadium that has a Formula One racing track.
It reinforces the idea that Manchester United is important and the increase in capacity means greater income. It would allow them to monetize a new digital technology, increase corporate areas and organize other events, sports and entertainment.
Traditional football fans may not like all that Hullabaloo, but in the real commercial world in which football now exists, it is what to do.
We have seen that others find it an obstacle financing stadium. Arsenal was innovative to be the first great club to reconstruct completely. There is no doubt that financing affected its economic capacity to compete in the field, since shareholders did not want to spend on large transfer and salaries at the same time.
Tersene Wenger played the line and Arsenal became winners to a participation club among the first four. There was even a rumor that one of the conditions for the financing of the Emirates was that Wenger had to stay as a manager!
Tottenham built a phenomenal stadium that Daniel Levy has been marketed like no other in the United Kingdom, but they have found little on the path of trophies so far worthy of such a magnificent environment.
My commercial nose tells me that there are bank agreements around debt and a series of other things that restrict Tottenham's expense in the way people may think they should.
Everton was committed by the way they explained the spending in Bramley-Moore Dock, which partly led to a deduction of points for infractions of gains and sustainability rules (PSR), although it should also be taken into account that Farhad Moshiri does not He helped himself burn cash in inappropriate players and managers.
Orsene Wenger saw its reduced transfer budget after Arsenal built the Emirates stadium
Everton's new Dock Bramley-More
It is important to note that I do not believe that the challenges that many clubs had in the construction of stadiums are visited in Manchester United.
If they are assigning a separate budget for the development of the stadium, because it is a capital spending project, it is not something that comes out of their PSR.
Arsenal's shareholders for several years made a decision on the spending of the versus the player's expense. They were not willing to do both. You don't necessarily have that problem with United. They can administer the two parts of their business in harmony.
For them, 'New Trafford' is a vital part of a general revitalization project to make United the force that once were.
The modern football industry is a phenomenon. Players earn vast and previously unheard of salaries and have larger followers on social networks than in the Pope. Clubs earn great income. Its power is so significant that everything around it must be done correctly.
Ratcliffe will realize that building a stadium must be matched by progress in the field. One has to trigger the other, not suffocate. He is an innovative. He creates things, so it is logical that fulfilling the ambition he has for United and the legacy he wants to leave, building a larger and better home for the club will be the governing principle.
The great decision for United is whether you must rebuild and expand the existing stadium to 87,000 or start from scratch and make it even bigger.
I would be inclined to go with the new construction, more expensive but with greater income and future, instead of screwing. I suspect that Sir Jim would also like that.
The mayor of Manchester, Andy Burnham, is among those in charge of obtaining the project on the line
Ratcliffe and the Glazers are in favor of the ambitious plan to build a new stadium for United
United will have made its assessment. A specially designed stadium will be available to operate at the elite level for the next 50 to 60 years, with a design capable of adopting digital, AI, virtual reality, banquet, corporate, tours and a series of other enabling.
I do not believe that public money has been destined to the stadium itself and it is not. It is a commercial company and if you own the football club, you pay.
There are also suggestions that are part of a regeneration project in that area.
A panel that includes political luminaires such as the mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham, former Chancellor George Osborne and the true intellectual capital Gary Neville (!) They are giving their advice.
It is possible that United owners do not seem excessively knowledgeable about football at this time about choosing managers, sports directors and buying players and public relations, but I am quite sure that they know what they are doing commercially.
I just hope that this second Wembley label does not adhere. There is no such thing or need for it.
Wembley is Wembley and part of the iconography of English football that helped facilitate the power of the most successful national league in the world. I did not dilute the name as a wink to 'level up': you would not call another tennis tournament the northern wimbledon.
Regardless of nickname, the idea of radically renewing Old Trafford is correct. A vital game change for the entire club, in fact.
For most clubs, such an ambitious project would be a fiercely challenging perspective due to excess. For Manchester United, it is an opportunity about the opportunity.