I think there's a bit of revisionism going on regarding Ozil's time at Arsenal.
Mesut Ozil's time at Arsenal was mixed, but he did have some successful times with us. His time at the club remains divisive because it never quite reached the heights many hoped he would. His arrival from Real Madrid was a landmark/iconic moment for the club because it signalled that we could once again attract world-class talent. He did play his part in ending the club's 9-year trophy drought, winning 4 FA Cups and producing some of the most creative football seen at the Emirates.
At his best, he was a footballing artist. His vision, intelligence and ability to create chances were among the finest in world football, and few players in Arsenal's history could match his technical gifts from an ability perspective. However, his career at the club coincided with a period when football was evolving away from the traditional playmaker role. The modern game increasingly demanded intensity, pressing and defensive work, areas where Ozil was never particularly strong.
It's a difficult one because many will point to the chances he created, the trophies he helped deliver and the lack of elite players around him for much of his Arsenal career. But there is a valid argument that a player of his reputation and wages should have imposed himself more in big games, carried the team more often and adapted better to the changing demands of elite football.
I reckon the reality probably lies somewhere in the middle. Ozil was neither the failure some portray him as nor the flawless genius others remember. He was a world-class creator who brought moments of brilliance and played a role (regardless of how big you deem it) in one of the club's most successful periods post-Invincibles.
Nonetheless, you can't help but feel there remains a sense of unfulfilled potential - both for the player and the club - which is why his legacy continues to divide opinion to this day.
I've never truly settled on where I stand on him.
