way? Without wishing to pour scorn on City's Lottery windfall and ultimately their PL title win, I was wondering out loud if there is any chance the likes of us, spuds everton etc etc (i.e. teams who appear to maintain a strict fiscal regime) can ever dream of winning the title. Are we going the way of Spain, where Real Madrid/Barca compete between themselves for La Liga. There is a 20point gap between us in 3rd and the 2 Manchester clubs, on this evidence is it a fair assertion to surmise that there is a mini-league even between teams in the top 8? I think there are 3 leagues.. Before any Citeh fans accuse me of jealousy, I actually wanted them to win the title..... Manure winning it season in season out was getting really tiresome.
The issue of City buying the title is an arguement that will rage on and on. I guess, United, Chelsea and Blackburn did not buy the title? We (gooners) can whinge about them buying the title, but it will be a bit hypocritical for United fans to complain that City bought the title. Granted Citeh has spent and lost money like no tomorrow, but this amount of money is nothing to the spending power of the oil rich sheikhs.
Unfortunately it's a modern day football affliction and something we need to accept and move on. Only club i can think of winning the title without buying it is Borussia Dormund...
Of course it can I will not accept that only the clubs that spend the most money can win the title. Arsenal have won in the past by buying the right players, in recent years we haven't - although we have come close - this in itself is proof enough that money is not the reason why clubs win things.
I think that's a really over simplistic argument though. When we were winning titles, we weren't spending huge amounts, but the relative gap was nowhere near what it is now. Chelsea and City have basically blown the roof off of the ceiling on prices. So whereas 10 years ago Wenger could pluck a relative unknown but promising player up for under £10m and pay him £40k per week, now that player is on the radar of the big spenders and he will sell for £25m and be offered £150k per week. Money now, more than ever plays a huge part in teams being able to win trophies.
City pay a LOT more for the top players now, yes. But how much better are they really? Lets not forget Adebayor was given £150k on wages. They cant buy every player in the world (well unless they decide to), and the gap in talent as opposed to wages and transfer fees is what is important. Its not that great, and team work can still overcome it.
But during Wenger's early tenure, he bought players at the highest level. Players like Bergy, Henry, Viera, Pires, Campbell etc were all top quality players. He also forked the money to buy them. Nowadays, i strain to think of 1 player that is in that same league. Only Pod comes near....
Its not an over simplification - Wenger has bought mediocrity during the past few years and we have sold quality. that is the problem pure and simple. Time to go back to what works and there is no reason we can't win again. Pod is a step in the right direction, M'Villa would be too. A change in tactics now and then wouldn't hurt either.
Are you insinuating, the reason only reason why we cannot/will not win the title is because we have not gone out and replaced the likes of Viera, Henry, Bergkamp, Fab etc etc? I think it runs deeper than that, I think it is a case of us not being able to keep hold of our talent. To replace these calibre of players (like for like) will mean us breaking the bank and spend money we do not have. Then you have to ask yourself why let them go in the first place? Look at Harzard, what has he achieved? He is totally out of our price range, with modern technology and globalisation, it is really difficult to unearth rough diamonds, (i.e. nothing is hidden anymore) and potential talents are going for silly money.
You sound like you bought the lie - hook, line and sinker. Despite City spending 3 times the amount on their team than Utd, they had to get 2 injury time goals in the last game of the season to win the league. Chelsea languish in 6th, having spent far more than us over the years. Liverpool are mid table despite splashing out well over £100m on players. We've just managed to sign Podolski - a top player for a reasonable fee. Bet you he scores more than Dzeko next year (if he is even around) who cost City more than twice as much. There are plenty of players out there just as good, believe it or not, than Balotelli - that you dont have to pay £20m for and give up £150k a week on wages.
Anyone remember only 15 years ago when Shearer being brought for £15 million broke the world record transfer fee ...
I accept City have in places paid OTT for their players, what I will not accept is that we could get players like Balotelli, Aguero or Dzeko for a fraction of what city paid for them or even find "hidden" talent like that for next to nothing. Do you also not agree winning the league is not just about an individual (RVP) scoring the bulk of the team's goals, so Pod scoring more than Balotelli next season means nothing if we end up empty handed... Football is a team game and I believe you have to get the balance of the team right. Glad you allude to how much Liverpool and Chelsea have spent, and where they have finished in the League. Don't you think where we have finished is testament to Wenger's miracle, and getting the most out of what tools he has at his disposal?
Jayram, thats my point. We were mediocre when Wenger took over, he turned us into champs by identifying key positional issues and remedying them. He turned us into Invincibles by buying players that were not out of our price range. Lets analyse that team that forged beauty with steel, power and pace: Lehmann Lauren - Toure - Campbell - Cole Ljungberg - Vieira - Gilberto - Pires Henry - Bergkamp Subs - Wiltord, Reyes, Edu, Parlour. Name a single player in that list that we bought who was top class when we bought him. I'm not saying name those who were class before, but when we bought them. Bergkamp and Henry came to us after their stock had fallen from disappointing spells in Italy. The money we spent on players then was comparable to what we spend now. Wenger bought players suitable for us and even players like Reyes who were not amazing still helped. We don't need the likes of Hazard to become champions, just a few shrewd purchases and keeping the best players that we have is what we need. The vicious circle needs to break - we can't keep our best players if we can't provide them with a winning team.
Omo - you can't have it both ways - on one hand you argue we can't compete with City because of what they spend and on the other you argue that Liverpool and Chelsea have spent money and have not done well in the league. We don't need to spend "City" money to compete, if we can buy the likes of Podolski, if Newcastle can buy the likes of Cisse and Ben Arfa, we can buy players that are better than much of the dross we currently have. this is why my claims that buying the right players is better than spending loads on players who may or may not work out. I think there are better players than Balotelli at a fraction of his cost. City only really bought Yaya Toure, Aguero and Silva for the right money, I mean these guys would walk into any world team. Fine, they are out of our league, but we don't need them. Dzeko at £30m was way over priced. We don't need players like that, he isn't suited to our game anyway.
The media have convinced football fans that Chelsea were the first to buy success but pretty much every club has been, in truth it was started by United, Leeds tried to imitate but failed. The problem is if we finish in the top 4 even once, you are averaging £40m more income than the team that finishes one place below you in 5th, that in turn allows you to cement your position at the top. For years nobody could compete with United or Arsenal, or even Liverpool due to circumstances out of our control, now the playing field is reversed and others don't like it. If you want equality you are in the wrong league, the PL never has been equal which was Sky's sole purpose in the first place. In the past the Championship was equal but it's now filtering down the lower leagues as well due to Parachute payments. Football isn't fair just as life isn't fair. When things are going your way you won't complain though, but when they're going against you naturally you will, human nature
Absolutely spot on HotHead. The spending of City and Chelsea in recent years has been used as a smokescreen to cover up Wenger's deficiencies as a manager in the last few years. The fact is nobody is telling me that in the last 5 years Arsenal haven't had the capability of winning the title. In 07/08 and 10/11 you could easily have won it. The fact is the calibre of player Arsenal are buying is nowhere near as good as the calibre of player they are selling and as a result Arsenal have fallen, Same is happening to Chelsea whilst trying to balance the books. With the exception of Mata and Ramires, I can't think of one player we've signed in the last 2/3 windows that is the standard of the players we bought a few years ago. Newcastle this season are a shining example of what can be achieved if you invest sensibly and think outside the box. Cabaye went for £4.7m and would probably go for £15-£20m now. Compare and contrast that to Arsenal signing Gervinho (who I actually think is a good player) who hasn't impressed and was bought for £10m from the same team. The one good thing about the recession and FFP is that clubs can no longer just throw money about like there's no tomorrow and have to buy sensibly
I think you're comparing the early Wenger team to the Premier League today, and the comparison doesn't stand. Back then, the standard of football was nowhere near as good as it is today. Wenger literally revolutionised the Premier League, he changed the way teams trained, the tactics, the whole fitness regime, diets, and players whole attitude to their profession. It wasn't long before he arrived that players would think nothing about having a big fry up before a match and then sink a few pints after. When Wenger arrived and brought in players like Bergkamp (yes I know Roich signed him) Ljungberg, Henry, Vieira it dramatically upped the standard and raised the bar. Other teams followed suit and the whole of the premier league gradually improved, even the smaller teams were bringing in talent from abroad and playing champagne football. The point of this is that talent no longer comes cheap. David Dein summed it up recently when he said that the transfer market has been totally skewed out of proportion by 'too much money, chasing too little talent' He's right, and I don't think you can compare the market today, to when Wenger first arrived. Like I said, then he was able to pick out promising young players for next to nothing, these days there are already 3 or 4 big spenders chasing that player with the offer of a huge transfer fee and top wages. It's not the same level playing field as it was. This is part of the reason why Wenger is so coy on his transfer targets, because if he mentions someone, they then get snapped up by someone who's willing to pay significantly more.
Ok, so how did we sign Podolski (a proven goal scorer at all levels)? How did we win the race to sign OXO? How much is Wilshere worth - when didnt pay a bean for him? How comes we won the race to sign Walcott when Chelsea were after him? Your logic does not stack up. Players are available that improve us and allow us to compete with City no matter how much they spend. until the rule changes where one team is allowed more players on the pitch and in the squad than another, the money argument is really just an excuse. On another point, please explain how we would improved by replacing RVP with Aguero - i take it you agree that Agueero is not twice as good as RVP... Maybe Tevez is 3 times better? he's on triple the wages. How about replacing Arteta with Barry? Barry was twice the price so he must be twice as good right? I could go on.
