Why why why when we have these discussions do people have to be extremists ??? Nobody is saying we need to spend £30m+ on players. Nobody is saying we need to offer £180k p/w. There are plenty of players out there who we could buy comfortably between £10m and £20m and whose wages would fit inside our wage structure but Wenger won't buy them because it hinders the development of the bloody kids. Kids like Diaby, Denilson and Walcott
Yes, I think you are right. When you talk about players like Enrique and Ba and so on, you are absolutely correct, we could have signed them. But I think when we start talking about those players, we are rolling the dice far more. It is very easy to look at the dozen or so success stories in this price range and say, "Why didn't Wenger buy him?" But we forget that there are about 100 players of a similar ilk that were not a success. You also have to ask if they would fit our system play. Ba was a real injury risk, he could have never played again when Newcastle signed him, I can just hear the wailing if we had bought him and he had never played a game for us. I can't tell you why Wenger didn't buy each one, but i general each one would have had an issue, or they wouldn't be going (relatively) cheap. I will say that there are a lot of teams looking for players in this price range so I would expect it is difficult to find a bargain.
Are you talking about players that were actually transfered or just those that were in the press as available.
Well, yes you can, once we bid 21M they are free to offer him around to see if they could get more. I isn't first come first served. If we had balked at 21M, Chelsea would have got him for 21M before the deadline. I know Abramovich has wads of money, but he wouldn't be spending 3M he didn't have to. That deal was done and dusted before his release clause ran out.
I'd like to see Wenger be more tactically astute at times, but the only reason we were even in positions to be challenging was because Wenger had built a team on a meagre budget who were capable of challenging. I think you underestimate just how difficult it is to keep a team consistently in the Top 4 and Champions League, especially given our resources. Look at how much other teams have spent (and failed in some cases) to do likewise. It's my opinion that someone other than Wenger in charge and Arsenal may not have been finishing in the top 4 in this period. Remember that Mourinho has spent ££££ at the clubs where he had success. I'm not a massive fan of Alan Sugar, but he summed it up perfectly when he said, in his usual dulcet and dismissive tones: 'I'd like to see how bloody special he is down at Leyton Orient'
thats what i'm getting to, as the manchester clubs have better players and a far bigger budget i think he'd be shown up for what he is, a good manager but certainly not in the class of fergie or wenger, since 2004 he's probably spent twice as much as any other manager
As an outsider my view is that Jayram or SNIAC are in no way wrong but I also take some of Piskie's points. Piskie is absolutely right in that many Arsenal fans are quick to underestimate just how hard it was to get Arsenal to consistently finish in the top 4 on such a shoe-string budget. In my view no other manager could do that. I also think Piskie is right in that sacking Wenger would be a big mistake. Who exactly would those calling for AW's head propose they replace him with? There is nobody else IMO that knows Arsenal Football Club better than Wenger. With this current crop of players I doubt many managers could be doing much better than AW is now. Piskie is right in the sense that despite all your problems, we (Chelsea) are only 5 points ahead (and you still have home advantage against us + we have a trip to Eastlands) and in my opinion look no better than Arsenal at this moment in time. Sure Arsenal should be aiming higher than 4th, but sometimes you have to adapt to the situation. This is a transitional year for Arsenal. I accepted that in August there was no way Chelsea could realistically challenge for the title, but next year I expect better. Where I 100% agree with Jayram is that Arsenal ARE in crisis and with all due respect I think Piskie is either ignoring this out of blind tribalism and loyalty or just delusion. For a club like Arsenal to lose 3 games on the bounce isn't good enough. As Jayram says the consequences of not making top 4 are disastrous. It is already accepted Arsenal Football Club are not a club that can any longer compete for honours, but if you were to duck out of the CL I could see you going the same way as Liverpool. These days you need CL to attract the kind of calibre of player that can win you things. The whole promise of moving to the Emirates was on the basis Arsenal would compete for and win things. Jayram is also right in his criticism of Wenger. Wenger inherited George Graham's back 4 so never really had to put much emphasis on defending etc. When that back 4 was broken up Wenger had to buy his own defenders and try and coach them in his own way but I genuinely wonder how much time on the training field Wenger spends on defending and comments from Robert Pires last year were actually quite revealing on this front. Over the last 3 or 4 years we've probably seen Arsenal concede more goals from set pieces than any other side. Another point where I agree with Jayram and disagree with Piskie is on team ethic and team spirit. It's all well Piskie saying "We're a confidence team", well that actually applies to all the other 19 teams as well. You never learn anything about a team when they are winning, it's when the chips are down that you look for fighters and people willing to stand up and be counted. Man Utd and to a lesser extent Chelsea have had that mentality down the years which Arsenal have lacked. Up until 2 years ago in terms of technical ability Arsenal were better than both Chelsea and Man Utd but not mentality and they didn't have the same team spirit or work ethic as those 2 clubs did. One thing I've learnt watching Chelsea down the years (similar to what PowerSpurs said) is that players that continually make mistakes are not good enough, sooner or later Arsenal fans will find that out, IMO there is no such thing as coincidences in football. I used to think that in the late 90s we were as good as United and Arsenal but bad luck and silly mistakes were the only thing that stopped us, years later when we began to decline I accepted that these players (our defence and midfield) just simply weren't good enough, don't get me wrong I idolised some of these players and it was hard to accept but it was the truth. To progress you have to accept there is a problem first. The likes of Arsenal87, Jayram, SNIAC accepted this a while ago and they have every right to express this concern without being labelled "doom merchants". Many including myself predicted Arsenal's demise years ago, I honestly felt Arsenal were finished as a force after 07/08 when the midfield quartet was broken up. Arsenal should have won the League and probably Champions League that year too but never fulfilled their promise and as a result the players lost faith and the revival of clubs like Barca, AC Milan, Man City suddenly appealed to many of your players. It's tough but changes have to be made, I think Wenger needs help, someone like David Dein. The current board IMO should also be removed. You can either sink or swim, I could see Arsenal becoming a midtable club in the next few years unless significant changes are made, this cannot continue. Newcastle are getting better and better and Liverpool are steadily improving. Spurs are right up there as well. 5 years ago Arsenal would have been fine, but dropping out the top 4 now would be cataclysmic stuff in my view. Sooner or later we will pick up form and Spurs at this stage are well clear of you so if Arsenal don't start getting results now I think it's looking unlikely you'll get top 4. I can't see us winning at Swansea so you need to be looking at Bolton away to claw back some points. If we can keep the 5 point gap having played United at home and Swansea away I would be confident of us getting a top 4 finish and Arsenal dropping out.
With a scouting system as impressive as ours and Wenger's encyclopaedic knowledge of players I think we could have bought better to be honest. But I guess we have to agree to differ here.
I think the argument about wheteher Arsenal are "in crisis" or not is fairly irrelevant. I don't see much difference between Arsenal this year and previous years. We have had a worse start, and the injuries hit a bit sooner, but if we can recover some form, we will end up where we usually do. I think everyone knew a few years ago, that thinkgs were going to get tougher for Arsenal. What I don't see is anyone suggesting anything that really provides a solution. A lot of people suggesting that our players are not good enough, that Wenger isn't good enough, and sometimes, not very often a name of who should replace them. But, no one can suggest how these players, administrators or managers would change Arsenal. I know a lot of people don't believe that we are constrained financially, which I think is a little odd, because it has been such an over-riding issue for years. I dont think that will change. Buy better players is also suggested, but Eduardo, Nasri, Arshavin, Rosicky, Koscieley, Squillachi, Metersacker and Santos come in for a fair amount of criticism and were all bought in at a price. My view is that the general overall discontent is that we are not winning trophies, not that Wenger is doing anything specific glaringly wrong. People say he is tactically naive, but we put together one hell of a run before Christmas with a virtual reserve side. Is that tactically naive? District line is incorrect when he says all players making mistakes just aren't good enough. Chelsea tend to have mature players and this may be true for them. Younger players make mistakes and get better. If someone could point out something, other than just swapping all our players with potential, for another set of players of the same value, who are flavor of the month, then I might change my mind but no one is going to tell me that a team of even... Swartzer Enrique-Cahill-Samba-Vertonghen Mbille-Parker-Gotze Hazard-RVP-Podolski ...would be doing any better than our team as it currently stands.
I would have agreed with you a few years ago. Many of my Arsenal mates hate Walcott (and I mean hate). I used to defend Walcott to the hilt in arguments with them and say "he is only young" and "will improve" but I don't think he ever will. He consistently makes the same mistakes time and time again. My view is that if your good enough, your old enough. Just in brief cameo's I've seen more from Oxlaide Chamberlain in 70 minutes to suggest he will progress than I have from Walcott in about 6 or 7 years. Walcott is 22 now, when Messi and Ronaldo were his age they didn't have the same confidence issues Walcott did and could deliver. Now Walcott clearly isn't as good as these players and shouldn't be compared to them but they matured and therefore improved much quicker than Walcott did. I hate West Ham but I had nothing but admiration for them with their approach in the late 90s, they threw their young players in at the deep end and with an experienced managers and some older and more experienced heads it worked and they secured a 5th place finish under Redknapp, they'd have done even better if they could have won more than just 3 away games that season. The only way you can improve and learn is by playing, I've said this for years and grown frustrated by Chelsea's lack of will and guts to give youngsters a chance. At 17 I could just tell Gerrard and Rooney would be special players, I never got that with Walcott and still don't at 22. I think the same of Gibbs, did do with Djourou, Vela Justin Hoyte and many other failed Arsenal youth projects. Wilshere and Song are different though, they are really promising young players and will be very good for Arsenal. Ramsey is decent but shouldn't be starting IMO.
There is so much wrong with ToledoTrumpton's post and the First paragraph of District Line's post I don't have the energy to respond. It would take an entire page from me to critique them here. But I wont let it be said I am a mudslinger, so, aftger the Racists V Man U game I'll attempt a condensed version
There is something in that. Whilst Wenger does have a largely deserved reputation of being a person that improves players there are a lot of people that we sign who are good but then dramatically decline. For example imagine how good we would be if Arshavin, Chamakh, Rosicky, Eboue, Denilson or even Almunia had not all got a lot worse for whatever reason.
District Line, you talk about how difficult it has been to maintain a Champion's League spot on a shoestring budget .... what shoestring budget has that been then ? Highbury housed 38,000, few clubs got greater attendances than us. Then you have what we spent in the early days, that was no shoestring budget. WE got fans in the door and Champions League footie that brought in more dosh. The only real competition Arsenal have had was from Man U so getting in the CL waqs no big deal especially when you consider our wage bill, it was only up until recently we had the 3rd highest wage bill - so we SHOULD be finishing in the top 3. Nothing special about that to me. Toledo - see above regarding financial constraints, our spending has not changed for the worse since moving to the Emirates ! Players who continually make mistakes are NOT good enough. Senderos, Bendtner, Squillaci. You claim kids learn, Djourou hasn't, Walcott hasn't. In Walcott's case he isn't getting better, he is NOT learning. Contrast him to Lennon who we Arsenal fans laughed at because he was a speed demon, now look at him !! You've simplified your final analysis. We have lacked certain players for years, if we had them our deficiencies would've been neutralised. You can't say we haven't been begging for a keeper, CB and CM since the Invincibles. Had Wenger bought the players we needed the gap between us and the others would hardly exist, neither would the need to have to buy more expensive players, we could've just strengthened the squad with key squad players, job done.
This is a key point, I will agree with you. If you don't accept this then I can understand why you would have an issue. Let me try and put it simply, but even if what you say is true, there is no manager of any company in the world that sets the wage structure, or approves capital spending. Not a single one. So the target of your ire should be the owners and the board. I have rounded a lot of numbers dramatically to make it easier. I know I will be accused of "fixing" it but all I can say is this is honestly what I think. We went from a turnover of about 150M to about 250M. The property deals confuse the issue and make the turnover look much higher on the books, but I am focusing on the football operation. Before Emirates expenses were about 100M wages and 30M costs apart from wages. We had about 20M for transfers each year and we had one of the highest wage bills in England (2nd), close behind Manchester United who were only about 10M or 20M ahead of us, but they did have a lot more money to spend on transfers. We did not have much debt. We now have the loan for the stadium, which is about 20M in interest and we are repaying it as well, and that is about 25M. In addition we ramped up our youth facilities, and yes, we pay a bit more corporately to our owners than we used to, so that our costs apart from wages are up to about 60M. Our wage bill has risen to about 120M. So 45M Loan interest/repayment + 120M wages + 60M costs = 225M and we have something like 25M to spend on players (about the same as before) maybe a bit more.. The problem is that we now are =4th in the wage table with Liverpool - 120M, Manchester United - 130M, Chelsea 170M, Machester City 200M+, and 25M does not buy you a lot. This includes any profit from player sales which is part of the turnover. Our spending has not changed, but our rivals' has. Now I grant you, I made a lot of guesses based on last years numbers and the sparse facts available, but all I am saying that it isn't too hard to consruct a scenario where, as you say, our financial situation has not changed much, but the other clubs have a significantly changed situation.
Yes - I tried to make it really easy. It is really difficult to get the numbers behind corporate accounts these days. I do agree that there are a few players we need to shed, but I'm not sure they would make as big a difference as people think. And the whole youth strategy accepts that a lot of the players will not make it. When Yennaris has to play against manchester United though...
Toledo whilst I agree with your post the bottom line remains, when Arsenal were spending more than others we were qualifying for the CL easily. When we slipped behind Chelsea and Man U in wage bill to 3rd .. we finished 3rd. When we slipped to 4th we finished 4th. Now we are 5th .... guess what is going to happen This is why I say Wenger has NOT done anything special with limited resources - our final positions seem to be linked to wage bill.
I'm a bit of a realist, and this is pretty much where I sit. The media is so fond of polarising issues. Wenger, I believe is neither doing worse, or better, than could be expected. However, I think he has had some bad luck too, injuries and Fabregas. I mean if Fabregas wasn't a Catalan, he would still be with us. I do think a conservative, youth-based strategy was a good choice when, on average, we could stay comfortably in the top 4 and have a run at a trophy or two each year. Now, that there are a few more sugar-daddies about, that strategy isn't looking as good, but is it possible to switch strategies without making a mess of it all?
The same people that originally hated on Wenger for buying Oxo are now the ones hating on him for subbing him.....it's a funny old world
