That quote doesn't contradict anything I've said in this post. It shows that my expectations of him were overly optimistic. When we signed him, I thought it was a decent acquisition, nothing more. I don't remember anyone rolling out the red carpet for him when we got news of his agreement to join us. Therefore not a top tier signing.
I don't understand this "ambitious" label. To me it seems that it is applied very arbitarily. Were Chelsea or Manchester City "ambitious" this year? Did it make any difference? How about QPR, were they ambitious? It may be that ambition is just being prepared to take a financial risk. In which case, you are a genius if it works out and an idiot if it doesn't. I think the ambition is clear at Arsenal. Back in 2003 they decided that they didn't want to be a mid -tier club like Spurs-Liverpool-Everton-West Ham etc and pick up titles every 10 years, perhaps a cup win every now and again. They decided that they wanted to build a club that would mount a challenge every year. So they invested the money from the win, into the stadium and a youth system to rival Barcelona and Ajax. In any case that seems more ambitious to me, to want to make it into the world's elite clubs, than just spending money to try and win another title before dropping back into the pack.
There we go again, Toledo and his BULLSHIT analogies. Were Chelsea and City ambitious this year? Last I checked, neither City or Chelsea have been on an 8 year barren spell with no signs of improvement, and only competing to end in the top 4, aka Arsenal. City just won the league last year, are in the cup final this year. Chelsea won the Champions league last year, get the difference? Now obviously you don't get the difference because you made a ******ed analogy of comparing teams who win stuff, with a team that hasn't won **** all in almost a decade, and only currently finds itself fighting for top 4. When it comes to ambition, Chelsea and City certainly have much more than we do, and incase IT'S STILL HARD FOR YOU TO GET, just look at their recent trophy count, and look at ours, that tells you all you need to know about their ambition, and ours.
Toledo, simply get it through your head that Arsenal's current main ambition, is to simply secure our top 4 spot, that's our main goal. Anything else, like winning a cup, is only a bonus. All the evidence even backs that up, one just has to look at our position in the last 2 seasons, the actions we've taken (and lack off action) to see that our main priority is securing top 4. Unless you're really that deluded to think this club for the past 2 seasons actually had ambitions and plans on winning the league. But since this is you, I wouldn't be at all surprised if you actually did think that. Mr Toledo comparing Ronaldo's stats with Giroud. What other great comparisons are you going to make next? Comparing Gervino's stats to Messi's early stats?
Invested money in the stadium to make us elite, lol, erm, how'd that exactly work out? Zero trophies to show for it, struggling to get 4th spot, competing with Spurs. You say Arsenal didn't want to be a mid tier club like Spurs, Everton, Liverpool, funny, 2 of those teams we've been competing with all season, and Spurs, have been competing with us for years. And how's that challenge been? Build a club that can mount a challenge every year? LOL, has that worked out? Or are we expected to wait another 10 years? As for Arsenal's great youth academy, other than Gibbs Wilshere and Shezny, can you name me any other player in the current first team squad that's come through the ranks of our academy? Mind you, most also seem to agree we need a new goalkeeper as Shezny isn't good enough. But let's give 3 players, so our mighty youth academy we've invested so much in, to rival Barca, has only produced 3 players in the current starting 11, 1 of which is probably going to get demoted next season.
This is a football forum, if you don't like discussions or disagreements, then maybe you can **** right off you stupid silly ****.
What it comes down to is I don't like little bitches like you who always makes these silly posts rather than responding back to points being made. As I said, if you don't like disagreements or discussions, then **** off because this ain't a forum for a single minded opinion or view.
When Gazidis said that AFC was the most ambitious club he knew, I am sure he did not mean immediate trophies at all. I am sure that, as a businessman, he looks at the club from a completely different perspective - he thinks of it as an ambitious business model of a club that wants to modernise, develop and expand its brand so that it could be completely independent from outside financial injections, self-sufficient, generating money and at the same time competing on a similar level as the elite clubs which are lavishly subsidised either by mega-rich owners, like ManCity and Chelsea or (indirectly) by the state like Real. He thinks this is ambitious, and it is hard to argue with that.
He was responding to questions asked by shareholders specifically about transfer policy and the results on the pitch.
From a rival point of view I think some of the points made by both sides are valid. I don't normally agree with anything Piskie says but I think it is fair to wait and see what signings you bring in over the summer. You are in a fantastic situation as a club. You have a great new stadium generating huge match day revenue. You are owned by Britain's wealthiest man. If you do qualify for the champions league next year, and it is looking likely you will with us and Chelsea playing each other, then it is completely fair to expect your board to make some marquee signings. If you don't then it is quite right to question the board and their ambition. With your revenue, fan base and stadium you should be competing for the league every year and not battling with us to finish fourth.
Totally agree with this. And isnt Gazidis in charge of transfer negotiations so therefore respknsible for failing to sign players like Mata before Chelsea came along?
The questions must be asked regardless of our last 4 games. Scraping for the Champions league should not be our ambition. As of marquee signings - ask Wenger and he will telll you that Cazorla, Girous and Podolski were marquee signings... so I do not expect miracles.
But regardless of how rich Arsenal are, we are still only the 4th richest. Arsenal, by investment in the stadium and youth, have managed to pull themselves into 4th place and out of the Spurs/West Ham/Everton/Aston Villa pack, trailing behind. We can have hopes of catching United who are burdened with quite a bit of debt, and we can hope that Chelsea and Manchester City get reigned in by FFP. Gazardis and the board see this as a financial war. They want to make Arsenal the richest club in Britain. If they had bought a superstar over the last 10 years and incurred debt to do so, it would have impeeded progress in this direction. Their ambition is to become the richest club in England and dominate the league for ever afterwards. Winning a FA cup is not very ambitious as far as they are concerned. That is why Gazardis considers Arsenal more ambitious. Now we have been over this 500 times. YOU may not feel that they will be successful. YOU may not feel that bringing Arsenal to a dominant point is worth 10 years without a trophy. YOU may feel that it should be possible to do both. YOU may think that it shouldn't take so long to dominate english football. YOU may feel that they are only doing it so that they can get rich. Is it "ambitious"? I think so, but again that's opinion.
