Ivan Gazidis to face grilling from Arsenal fans

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
suker_suker said:
What does my head in about these meetings is the generalisations. We want specifics, not necessarily specific transfer targets but something more concrete than 'we are looking to challenge for trophies' How exactly??
Click to expand...

I think the specifics were that we've signed one top class player and we're looking to do more business after the Euro's. Along with the statement that 'we don't take any money out of the club, all of it is reinvested' and that we're increasing our revenue streams so that more money can be invested into the squad.
 
Gazidis confirmed his intention to reshape the club's salary structure at an Arsenal Supporters Trust meeting and the Gunners are also expected to embark on a summer clear out in a bid to cut £23 million from the wage bill.
 
Bergkamp a Dutch master said:
Gazidis confirmed his intention to reshape the club's salary structure at an Arsenal Supporters Trust meeting and the Gunners are also expected to embark on a summer clear out in a bid to cut £23 million from the wage bill.
Click to expand...

Good news and it seems we are moving in the right direction. Does this now mean they will be offering significantly increased wages to RVP now? I say we should do a fire sale and offer all our unwanted players on huge discounts. I know we'll lose some money but we really need a fresh start and move on!

So what else came from the meeting? Any more answers?
 
23Million off the Wage bill should be pretty easy especially with player like Arshavin (80K ) Almunia (60K) Bendnter (52K) Squllachi (60K) gone.
 
Get rid, get rid, even if it means losing money. I much rather promote our youth players than bring back Denilson or Bendtner. I'd have Landsbury over Denilson, he'd do the same if not better job, cost less and love Arsenal!
 
lazarus20000 said:
Get rid, get rid, even if it means losing money. I much rather promote our youth players than bring back Denilson or Bendtner. I'd have Landsbury over Denilson, he'd do the same if not better job, cost less and love Arsenal!
Click to expand...

I could do the same job as Denilson, and i'd only demand £1000 a week. How hard is it pass a ball backwards?
 
It's definitely a good move reducing our wage bill and clearing out some players, so that we can make room for new ones and / or promote youth. I know some on here will say 'oh I've been saying this for ages, we should have done it years ago' but they fail to recognise that we needed to go down a different route to chelsea, city, liverpool and utd in that we could not spend huge amounts of cash on transfers of top players and instead needed to tie down young players to long contracts. The benefit of hindsight is always a luxury not afforded to those who have to make the decisions and one that is weiled like a stick by fans with an axe to grind. But I think the club she be applauded for steering us through this difficult time and still having the courage to change things when it's warranted.
 
PISKIE said:
It's definitely a good move reducing our wage bill and clearing out some players, so that we can make room for new ones and / or promote youth. I know some on here will say 'oh I've been saying this for ages, we should have done it years ago' but they fail to recognise that we needed to go down a different route to chelsea, city, liverpool and utd in that we could not spend huge amounts of cash on transfers of top players and instead needed to tie down young players to long contracts. The benefit of hindsight is always a luxury not afforded to those who have to make the decisions and one that is weiled like a stick by fans with an axe to grind. But I think the club she be applauded for steering us through this difficult time and still having the courage to change things when it's warranted.
Click to expand...

I have to respectfully disagree. The club is responsible for this difficult period, and aren't really helping matters now. It's all well and good bringing in young players with a view to the future, but the number of flops we've had is alarming, considering Wenger is renowned for his ability to spot potential. The football shape has changed, self suffiency takes a back seat these days to mass spending.
 
Its not the benefit of hindsight it is the benefit of common sense.

What did we think would happen when we offer kids lucrative contracts based on "potential" ?! <doh>
 
Point being that we didn't really have the luxury of spending £100M to replace the invincibles , so we had to go down the youth route. It hasn't been all bad either, we produced szczesny, frimpong, wilshere, coquelin and a consistent top 4 finish And the club are prepared to slash the wage bill and cut loose the players who aren't good enough.so I think that's fair enough and should be applauded.
 
No we didn't. Our spending hasn't changed since moving stadiums, so the argument that we were handicapped doesn't have much in the way of basis. We could just as easily have bought adults - as we did BEFORE the stadium move.

We pretty much spent £20m per season at Highbury, we've spent more than that and less than that since moving - it averages out to the same though - our spending hasn't changed
 
We may have a roughly average spend of around £20m each season either side of the stadium move, but you are not taking iinto account the relative difference in prices for top players in that time. For example a £20m spend in. 96/97 bought us overmars, grimandi, petit, upson, anelka and vieira, whereas a £20m spend in 03/04 only bought us reyes, clichy, lehmann and senderos. A£ £20m spend in 12/13 is barely enough to get even one top player !! So relatively, we have been spending far less on transfers. When you compare this to the vast amounts that city, chelsea, utd and liverpool have spent on transfers, it puts it into perspective.
 
PISKIE said:
We may have a roughly average spend of around £20m each season either side of the stadium move, but you are not taking iinto account the relative difference in prices for top players in that time. For example a £20m spend in. 96/97 bought us overmars, grimandi, petit, upson, anelka and vieira, whereas a £20m spend in 03/04 only bought us reyes, clichy, lehmann and senderos. A£ £20m spend in 12/13 is barely enough to get even one top player !! So relatively, we have been spending far less on transfers. When you compare this to the vast amounts that city, chelsea, utd and liverpool have spent on transfers, it puts it into perspective.
Click to expand...

i know what your saying most dont or wont they just want us to "spend huge on a single player and **** the model we have just get usmanov in that will solve it", 35m for hazard id rather not sign him also giroud of montpellier we were linked with him now on bbc website says he valued at 50m no thank you
 
PISKIE - I'm arguing against the fact you said we had to go down the youth route. For £20m per season we could buy adults, we could buy 2x £10m players who would be the Overmars/Petit equivalents - thats 4 decent players over 2 seasons.

Arteta, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Podolski - even Gervinho - all were in that price range pretty much.

Capoue looks exactly like the sort of player who we could benefit from having, if it doesn't work, well, at least we tried. Thats why I won't make a song and dance about Gervinho flopping relative to the start of the season because, at least we tried and I can't fault the club/manager in that respect. Capoue could be our Petit.
 
we waste millions of £s on loads of 'POTENTIAL' - but are now congratulated for trying to offload.

Wenger strikes again - - - well actually its not him calling for trimming- the finance man has noticed it doesn't make good sense.
 
theHotHead said:
PISKIE - I'm arguing against the fact you said we had to go down the youth route. For £20m per season we could buy adults, we could buy 2x £10m players who would be the Overmars/Petit equivalents - thats 4 decent players over 2 seasons.

Arteta, Mertesacker, Koscielny, Podolski - even Gervinho - all were in that price range pretty much.

Capoue looks exactly like the sort of player who we could benefit from having, if it doesn't work, well, at least we tried. Thats why I won't make a song and dance about Gervinho flopping relative to the start of the season because, at least we tried and I can't fault the club/manager in that respect. Capoue could be our Petit.
Click to expand...

Well, relative spend wise I think we did. Taking our average spend of £20m per season, whilst it could get us two £10m players (in an Arteta, Mertesacker mold) it would not have enabled us to spend anywhere else, so we would not have been able to bring in the players who were unknown and undeveloped - the prime example being RVP, signed for £2.75m and barely known to anyone. Clichy £275k !,Flamini £1m, Song £1m, Joel Campbell £900k, Jenkinson free ... the list goes on. So the club have been right to gamble on small amounts of money, with big paybacks. It hasn't worked out with everyone, but it was never likely to. I think there needs to be some recognition of where Arsenal have achieved to develop a team on a budget, rather than buying a ready made one for a small fortune. It's not worked out perfectly, but it's not nearly as bad as some people make out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back