Yes they did and he gets some credit for it, but the squad at his disposal was significantly better than Man U's. I'm no Man U or Fergie fan, but you have to factor in that it was probably there worst squad they've had for a number of years, and they had a freakish amount of injuries. Not having your best backline available for the entire season would be difficult for anyone. Going life and death with Man U last season was not an amazing achievement.
But Arsenal does have a solid foundation. They have some very good young players - Chesny, Gibbs, Wilshere, OXO, Walcott etc. They have quality players in - Carzola, Mertz, Verm, Kos, Arteta, Rosicky, Pod and Giroud. We have a very good base to start off from.
It is a good foundation; built by one guy who everybody wants replacing!!!! The problem really is being able to add the real gems to that base and keeping hold of the existing players when Wenger turns them into gold. The truth is its Wenger who has enabled you to compete for so long and to still feel that you are close enough to have the frustrations that you do. Wenger is hampered bug time; not by his own inadequacies but the climate Arsenal find themselves in; financially unable to compete with the top sides, the pull of the spanish league, losing players because of said financial ambition etc... Replacing Wenger with someone like Guardiola who is unproven at being able to manage at a club who can't attract the best, pay the top fees and wages, manage in a far tougher league on multiple fronts, attempt to get champs league season after season when generally there is only one free spot... without massive finances the best manager for Arsenal is still Wenger in my opinion. Its a big risk for me to change a manager who at least does get you within range of success; one failure to get the champs league with a new manager and you could be set back years. For me the only time I would think of a change is IF you fail to qualify for the champs league; if that happens then I think you probably have to use that time for a new direction. To change now and especially seen as there are very few genuine candidates who can manage without having to spend big seems a risky move to me.
That's true he did inherit great players (Consider that Mancini, Hughes, Ancellotti, Scolari ,Grant etc.. all had the oppurtunity to build their fantasy teams with obscene budgets yet where unable to get anywhere near what Pep managed at Barca) But you have to be insaine to think he was'nt at least partly responsible for Barca's success over this period. His teams played with flair but also with an amazing work ethic and tactical understanding that was evidently drilled into them. I have no doubt he'll go on to be a truly great manager.
So Guardiola is a genius for his success with the best team ever, whilst Mancini is doing a crap job for winning things because he is supposed to have the best players at his disposal? Whilst I would agree that City's squad is better than UTD (at least last season) all the experience was with Utd; it takes a good manager to mentally get his players in to the right frame of mind to go to the next level.
Not saying he didn't do a good job; but the core foundations and the best players were already there! Lets not forget Messi is on a different planet, even with the resources Barca have he is the difference that has enabled them to win so many things. He probably will be a great manager; however he is not suited to Arsenal right now, possibly Chelsea, City or Utd but with the job required at Arsenal no way! He did a good job of CONTINUING Barca's success and NURTURING the core that was ther and is still there, whilst having the luxury of being able to add nearly any player they want. Those luxuries are not at Arsenal, will he be able to do the same job or better than Wenger? Who knows but its a risky gamble in my opinion
I dont agree. I would rather have a young manager that has excelled at something than an experienced manager who has 'seen it all before' but never really reached greatness. Saying that if I had to choose I would go with Jurgen Klopp.
I didn't say that Guardiola is a genius but you have to give him credit for creating arguably the best ever club team in history. Also i didn't say that Mancini was doing crap job either, but he has been far from amazing. With the players he has at his disposal, they should be playing a lot better than they are. I should be wowed by their play, instead i find them overly defensive and boring. On paper, Man City have the best squad in the league and also one of the best in history.
And we have Sagna.. But the fact is - in a great team the whole is grater than the sum of its parts - see ManUnd. In a bad team the whole is worse than the sum of its parts - see Arsenal. I hate the question but it is too obvious - who makes "the whole" grater or weaker? Every manager has his weak spot. Wenger has one which became dominant. ( Probably with age) he started to gravitate more and more towards a certain type of a footballer, or to be precise - a certain type of a character. Probably subconsciously. He calls it " intelligent". His highest accolade seems to be "an intelligent boy". He often calls his players boys. At his age it may be not too misplaced but somehow I hate it. It is not that he prefers pussies of anything like that. Sometimes he buys players who have shown some fighting spirit, like Vermaelen. But this is an exception, more of an effort that stems from necessity rather that natural selection. His dream team in a Wonderwold is full of fabregases. And when you look at individuals - their individual mental weaknesses are not that obvious. And yet the lack of character and "mental strength" of the Arsenal team that we see week after week is quite obvious, and by the end of the day it is the cumulative effect of characters gathered together. If you put a bunch of half scared people in a dark room with imaginary ghosts they will soon become absolutely horrified. All strengths and weaknesses multiply in a team. We have a mental insecurity plague. How to cure it? I do not know. Buying a one of two mentally super strong guys may help and may not. Changing the doctor? Probably. But anyway it is a serious condition.
Nicely put and yes i forgot the very good Sagna! But i think with the younger lot coming through, there seems to be a bit of fight, a more stronger spirit than before. Players such as - Chesney, Wilshere, OXO and Frimpong come to mind. Wilshere is definately future captain material. But you are right, its the collectiveness of the team, that doesn't exude confidence. Individually, we have some very fine players, but as a team, it just doesn't work as well as it should. At the end of the day, the responsibility is with Wenger to do something. We are in Decemeber, have our full squad available, yet look fragile. I can't remember this happening to Arsenal in recent history. We are either plagued with injuries or we run out of steam around March. Either way, it is looking a little more worrying than usual.
I agree with Gents reply completely. Anyone who thinks in the short term we would benefit from losing Wenger is wrong. It would be criminal not to give him the chance to spend the cash now that it is becomming available.
Well if you look at the issue financially, Bradford wages are below Arsenal's by about as much as Arsenal's are below Manchester City's. If you think that Arsenal have a chance of beating richer clubs, particularly in one off cups, then you must concede that Arsenal have a chance of losing to teams below them. If you think that Arsenal must ALWAYS beat Bradford, ie they don't have any chance at all, then you must concede that Arsenal have no chance of beating Manchester City. For me, it actually gave me some more faith in football. That a small team can beat a larger one, which is something we are seeing more this year. I'm still hoping we can win more than the League Cup this year. You might say "No Chance", but the Bradford fans are hoping they can win a trophy too. Is that more crazy? Or are they just better fans than we are.
the gulf in class between us and City is nowhere near the difference between us and league 2 Chamakh earns the same amount per week as an average of 50 league 2 players combined...
Are you saying that Bradord were classier than Arsenal last night, because I didn't see that. I saw Bradford do a good job of doing what they had to do, and getting a little bit of good fortune. They could have played us 30 more times in exactly the same way, and had us play exactly the same, and not made it to the shoot-out again once. If upsets didn't happen, cup competitions wouldn't be what they are. That is why the CL has a league format for the first round, because occasionally Celtic beat Barcelona. I understand people wanting to sack Wenger for a long trophy drought, but for a League Cup defeat to Bradford? That is just football.
Sometimes it takes an objective viewpoint from outside the club to illustrate what is really going on
an interesting piece by Jim White on the BBC "The trouble is, Arsenal have not only weakened themselves by letting go those they have nurtured, they have strengthened their rivals. And in football, the successful team is the one that always builds. If your rival has someone better than you, you do whatever it takes to steal him. You don't let your rival have your best. The truth is, as the club built its glittering new home, a money-printing factory, it allowed its team to decline post 2005. Sure, in theory, there is something admirable about refusing to fuel the ludicrous inflation of players' wages. But in reality, when rivals are only too willing to do just that to tempt your best talent, it is self-defeating. Especially when ultimately it is those players that the customer will pay big money to come along and watch. This is the footballing fact the Arsenal board seem to have forgotten: in the end, it's success that people want to see. "
But what is the solution? I don't really understand why he thinks Arsenal have "forgotten this". I would say Arsenal and every other club know this better than he does. It is the same with every club, Everton lost Rooney, Spurs lost Modric, Swansea are about to lose Michu. Even United lost Ronaldo! There are only a few clubs that can pay players 200K/week. If any club do relatively well, they will lose their key players to the rich teams as soon as their existing contracts start to run out. It happens at every level. Arsenal do it themselves. He might as well say, "Southamton are stupid, they could be great if they held onto Walcott and Ox." It isn't a case of "refusing to fuel the inflation of player's wages" it is a case of not being able to. The only reason why Arsenal alone in the premiership are selected for the honour of somehow having a choice in this matter, is because Arsenal produce more great players than the other teams, not because they somehow are unusually morally virtuous.
