This is the board where Arsenal fans can discuss all things Arsenal, and any other football issues that they feel are of interest to Gunners. Opposition fans are welcome, but remember this board is from an Arsenal point of view. Off Topic Discussion should take place on the Off Topic Forum. Off Topic discussion will be removed. Any topic that is football related, within reason, is not off topic.
Quote:eduardo
I could give two f ucks what le grove or anyone thinks, I believe the guy who told me, I know who his source is at the club and see no reason why he would make it up. Any info got from him in the past has been spot on.
sooo..you don't want me to beat them up? ok no probs.
Ed, from your source, can you let us know if the Hazard rumour is indeed true? So, if we do get past Udinese, have far off are we in getting him? Or is the rumor just BS?
Gabrielsilece I agree. i think the fans should be protesting against Kroeke, his little bi*ch gazidis and that khunt Hill Wood rather than against Wenger. I'd like to see something organised.
Quote:Simon68
I think the one mistake that people have been and are making is in the assumption that things are absolute. That Chelsea came in and bought their way to trophies and assumed 'big club' status, which they did, is undeniable, although the latter is true only insofar as they have an owner with almost unlimitless funds, football wise. Arsene Wenger knew that we could not compete against this model and therefore took an almost diametrically opposite view and acted accordingly. Long-term, new stadium, organic growth, sustainable business model etc. Abramovich instructed Kenyon to have Chelsea breaking even (on a seasonal basis) by 2010. Complete pie in the sky. However, it appeared Abramovich did have some effect, as they had only posted a £43m loss in 2010 (I think).
If things had remained the same, the fact that we hardly had a pot to p*ss in from 2003 onwards, and hadn't won a pot to p*ss in from 2005 until 2009 wouldn't have mattered. Success would have followed, without us having to make signings for Berbatov money. However, with the advent of the Middle Eastlands takeover, the landscape totally changed.
From the transfer market settling down in relative terms, apart from one or two big money signings, it was blown apart by ManCiteh who have spent fortunes on players, paying twice their worth for many of them, just as Chelsea did when Abramovich saved them first from liquidation and then went on his spending spree.
Probably more important than the transfer fees themselves are the wages that go with it. Do you think for a minute David Silva, Tevez or Yaya Toure would have gone there if they hadn't been offered £180k to £220k pw as is largely accepted they do earn? Who was it who said the other day that on top of that ManCiteh are paying the £1m yearly rent on Toure's house?
So what have Chelsea and ManU done in response? Straight out of the window have gone the improved good housekeeping money rules and straight into spend spend spend keep up with the Arabs mode. What other business could announce the equivalent of signing two players for a combined cost of £73m while on the same day announce a yearly loss of £70m as Chelsea did? On top of that Torres is quite likely to be earning a basic of approaching £8m per year and Luiz another £5m. They have signed an unproven 18 year old for £18m and are after Modric for £30m and appear to be signing Mata for another £30m or so. ManU have signed £55m worth of players, two of which are relatively unproven and are prepared to pay £35m for Schneider.
While the rest of the World and its economies go to sh*t, football clubs are going mad.
When UEFA announced it's FFP initiative, everyone was in agreement (including UEFA) that Arsenal, above all other top clubs was in the best position as the best run, most self-sustaining club.
Now it appears, and I hope I am completely wrong, that the rules are not worth the paper they are written on.
These are the changing scenarios that Arsene Wenger and Arsenal have to put up with.
1) To attract new players of top quality, the parasite agents demands for extortionate wages have to be satisfied. 2) To attract new players of top quality, the selling clubs inflated prices have to be met.
3) To keep top players, see 1) above.
Do we swim with the prevailing tide and give in to these demands or do we battle on against them in the vain hope that someone, somewhere will seize power and take a stand against the greed and corruption amongst officials, owners, agents and players?
If it's the former, where does the money come from? Stan won't fund it, so do we just raise ticket prices or raise the money from the issue of a bond scheme. Or any of the other ways that ManU have done to keep up with ManCiteh and Chelsea on the spending front and try to catch up with the debt laden Barcelona on the playing front?
Wenger wants 'super quality' players. The Board won't, it seems, pay the fee and wages price. Wenger doesn't want to pay over the odds for squad players. We want players in. Anyone it seems. Any signing.
I want players in to improve our match day squad and be excellent replacements for the many injuries and spurious sendings off we incur, which are seemingly inevitable. If we signed Cahill, Jagielka or Samba are they going to displace TV5 or Kos? Not in my opinion. So why spend so much of the transfer and wages budget on overpriced reserves? Do we need an attacking central midfielder of top quality? Yes. Should we pay what is necessary? Yes. Should it have been Mata? Probably, from what I've heard about him. Do we need a centre forward like a Benzema? Yes. Do we need a reasonably priced, experienced centre half not in Squillaci mould? Yes.
But it all costs money. We have some, but when, as we well know, other clubs follow what players we are looking at and have the capability to offer twice what we can, whether wage wise or transfer fee wise, or both, because money means nothing to them, then what chance do we have?
It's all very well saying sack the Board, but who is the Board? Stan Kroenke is the Board. Just him. No-one else matters. Whose going to sack him? Himself? Why doesn't he pay off what remains of our debt and just pay himself back over the same period, interest free? And when he sells Arsenal in the future, have an agreement that he is paid back the balance in full by the new owner? That would release more funds for use on the playing side. Why won't he do this? Because it's not in his interests to, that's why. He's got billions at his disposal potentially from the Wal-Mart empire, but have we seen a bean on the playing side? No, because it's not in his interests.
The way it is currently I'm afraid, what with Liverpool one day getting it right having spent loads of money with debt seeming to be just an occupational minor inconvenience, is that unless our youth policy comes up trumps we are facing a future watching other clubs buy success without giving it a thought while we watch great football without trophies to show for it.
Maybe there is method in Wenger's apparent madness in signing AOC, Ryo, Campbell and Jenkinson, as he sees the writing on the wall and that buying players young is the only option.
Fantastic read and all pretty much true,the only point I would comment on is the signing of the young guys,its almost a fruitless quest because when they fulfill their promise said moneybags will poach them.
DB10,the best.
Talking about WENGER on Talkshite at the moment.
A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
GIFSoup Jose The King.
Jose champion, king, legend.
A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
Jose champion, king, legend.
^the clue is in the name.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive new
Posted by: Bergmars (IP Logged)
Date: 23 August, 2011 14:39
Fantastic read and all pretty much true,the only point I would comment on is the signing of the young guys,its almost a fruitless quest because when they fulfill their promise said moneybags will poach them.
Thankyou mate and good point, but it does lead me to wonder that the reason he is developing and giving a chance to homegrown British players like Young Jack, Gibbs, Ramsey, AOC, Frimpong, Jenkinson, Afobe etc and players of character like Chezney is that there is less chance of their heads being turned by the stupid money on offer at other clubs.
That way the important thing is the football itself and they can develop into a force as opposed to being disrupted like we are now.
Posted by: Bergmars (IP Logged)
Date: 23 August, 2011 14:39
Fantastic read and all pretty much true,the only point I would comment on is the signing of the young guys,its almost a fruitless quest because when they fulfill their promise said moneybags will poach them.
Thankyou mate and good point, but it does lead me to wonder that the reason he is developing and giving a chance to homegrown British players like Young Jack, Gibbs, Ramsey, AOC, Frimpong, Jenkinson, Afobe etc and players of character like Chezney is that there is less chance of their heads being turned by the stupid money on offer at other clubs.
That way the important thing is the football itself and they can develop into a force as opposed to being disrupted like we are now.
I hope so.
DB10,the best.
DB10,the best.
A very good article all in all but actually slightly misleading and sensationalist as well.
Firstly, there is absolutely no doubt that Wenger has funds to pay transfer fees, however this is simply because it is A CONDITION of the stadium finance bonds that all funds raised from player sales CAN ONLY be used to improve the squad. Not only does Arsene therefore have access to funds, but the club have it IN CASH in a bank account at his disposal - because put quite simply they aren't allowed to do anything else with the money! Don't take my word for it Arsenal's accounts are published on arsenal.com - what do you think a club with £300m in debt is doing with "Cash and Liquid Assets (treasury bonds) of £100m?
Odd? - When you think about it - it does make sense the bondholders wanted to ensure there was no possibility of someone selling all the players pocketing the cash and leave the bond holders high and dry without substantial assets for their money. Note Ashburton Grove stadium is worth precisely nothing - sure its worth £400m to US, but who else is going to want a football stadium and Islington wouldn't let it be anything else!
Since Arsenal's policy is to develop youth it makes sense that they make actually reasonably significant amounts from player sales, and we all know how shrewd Arsene has been in the market and how he makes about £20m per year (£20 x 5 = £100m).
When Arsene says he has money to spend - that is therefore true, when the Board says he has money to spend that is also true.
Clearly however there is a disparity in wages, especially of the top earners and whilst yes, we would all like to see the best talent money can buy on our pitch every Saturday the fact is that squads win things, not teams and Arsene (for all his faults) has built a top-quality squad. Witness Bendtner who we all laugh at and can't get a game, but there is talk of him flying into the first team of any number of Premiership teams with a price tag of around £11m.
This is the reason that Arsenal spend over £100m on wages each year (slightly more than half our turnover), (the fourth highest in the premiership) theirin is the problem.
Arsene is right to contest that these days to attract and retain top quality £100k / week simply isn't enough, but the board are also right to say, that the club has to be sustainable in the long term. Just bringing in two players on a salary of £200k / week (relatively modest given that Eto is on £500k / week) increases that wage bill by £20m per year - not an insignificant sum and one that has to be paid EVERY year. To put it into context to get that kind of money out of the Premiership games every year Arsenal would have to DOUBLE the cost of your tickets, your pint and your pie!
Now don't get me wrong, I am no different from the next fan, Silent Stan could put in the money (he's got enough of it in his own right but he could always ask his missus to lend him a cpl billion if he's short) and we could go buy a bunch of players and have a better team. What we wouldn't have is a better club - one that stood by its principles (and guns) and one that is going to be around not just for my children to enjoy but my children's children.
You see the trouble with pumping money into a football club as they have found out over at Chelski, is that no matter how deep your benefactors pockets, there is always someone out there, with even deeper pockets and since players are fundamentally greedy (a different topic admittedly - loved Redknapps comments about Mata not going to Chelsea for the trophies but about the money) clubs run "for profit" (or in actuality not to make a massive loss) are always going to be up against it Arsenal is among their number.
The Elephant in the room of course is the Uefa Financial Fair play initiative. IF (and that really is a big IF) they are applied as they should be then Arsenal WILL win the Champions League, because they will be BY FAR the best team in it. To be absolutley fair to the @#$%&, it is more or less a certainty that we will beat Spurs in the final. It may well be an Arsenal-Spurs Champions league final for years to come, with a possible occasional look in for Bayern Munich who (being German) will no doubt get their ducks in a row before anyone else does.
Best team in the Champions league I hear you scoff? Well, IF Ueafa are to be believed yes, because Madrid, Barca, Man U, Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea, PSG, Juve and both Milans won't be playing - and they are just the ones I have looked at. A lot of fans seem to want to win a trophy "at all costs". Well here's an idea - petition Platini and his chums to apply the rules and WE WILL WIN - it won't of course have the same kudos as winning a tournament with Barca et al in it AT THE TIME, but it will still have the Arsenal name on the trophy.
I console myself in the knowledge that if Arsenal continues to be run the way it is then my childrens children will be watching them lift (the occasional) title. Not only that but Chelsea, Man City, Man United et al, will be talked about with due reference to their historical (as opposed current) status. "They were a massive team once upon a time you know" they will whisper in pubs about Chelsea, Man City, ManU et al, the same way we do about Notts County, Wolves, Notts Forest and Dulwich Hamlet.
Lets not forget guys, that if we avoid relegation this year and next we will celebrate a centenary of top flight football. Arsenal have never overpaid for players and I sincerely hope that they never do.
And one final thought, the Chelski's and the Mancy's might have all the bling but our club has something they will never have - class!
Rod
Firstly, there is absolutely no doubt that Wenger has funds to pay transfer fees, however this is simply because it is A CONDITION of the stadium finance bonds that all funds raised from player sales CAN ONLY be used to improve the squad. Not only does Arsene therefore have access to funds, but the club have it IN CASH in a bank account at his disposal - because put quite simply they aren't allowed to do anything else with the money! Don't take my word for it Arsenal's accounts are published on arsenal.com - what do you think a club with £300m in debt is doing with "Cash and Liquid Assets (treasury bonds) of £100m?
Odd? - When you think about it - it does make sense the bondholders wanted to ensure there was no possibility of someone selling all the players pocketing the cash and leave the bond holders high and dry without substantial assets for their money. Note Ashburton Grove stadium is worth precisely nothing - sure its worth £400m to US, but who else is going to want a football stadium and Islington wouldn't let it be anything else!
Since Arsenal's policy is to develop youth it makes sense that they make actually reasonably significant amounts from player sales, and we all know how shrewd Arsene has been in the market and how he makes about £20m per year (£20 x 5 = £100m).
When Arsene says he has money to spend - that is therefore true, when the Board says he has money to spend that is also true.
Clearly however there is a disparity in wages, especially of the top earners and whilst yes, we would all like to see the best talent money can buy on our pitch every Saturday the fact is that squads win things, not teams and Arsene (for all his faults) has built a top-quality squad. Witness Bendtner who we all laugh at and can't get a game, but there is talk of him flying into the first team of any number of Premiership teams with a price tag of around £11m.
This is the reason that Arsenal spend over £100m on wages each year (slightly more than half our turnover), (the fourth highest in the premiership) theirin is the problem.
Arsene is right to contest that these days to attract and retain top quality £100k / week simply isn't enough, but the board are also right to say, that the club has to be sustainable in the long term. Just bringing in two players on a salary of £200k / week (relatively modest given that Eto is on £500k / week) increases that wage bill by £20m per year - not an insignificant sum and one that has to be paid EVERY year. To put it into context to get that kind of money out of the Premiership games every year Arsenal would have to DOUBLE the cost of your tickets, your pint and your pie!
Now don't get me wrong, I am no different from the next fan, Silent Stan could put in the money (he's got enough of it in his own right but he could always ask his missus to lend him a cpl billion if he's short) and we could go buy a bunch of players and have a better team. What we wouldn't have is a better club - one that stood by its principles (and guns) and one that is going to be around not just for my children to enjoy but my children's children.
You see the trouble with pumping money into a football club as they have found out over at Chelski, is that no matter how deep your benefactors pockets, there is always someone out there, with even deeper pockets and since players are fundamentally greedy (a different topic admittedly - loved Redknapps comments about Mata not going to Chelsea for the trophies but about the money) clubs run "for profit" (or in actuality not to make a massive loss) are always going to be up against it Arsenal is among their number.
The Elephant in the room of course is the Uefa Financial Fair play initiative. IF (and that really is a big IF) they are applied as they should be then Arsenal WILL win the Champions League, because they will be BY FAR the best team in it. To be absolutley fair to the @#$%&, it is more or less a certainty that we will beat Spurs in the final. It may well be an Arsenal-Spurs Champions league final for years to come, with a possible occasional look in for Bayern Munich who (being German) will no doubt get their ducks in a row before anyone else does.
Best team in the Champions league I hear you scoff? Well, IF Ueafa are to be believed yes, because Madrid, Barca, Man U, Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea, PSG, Juve and both Milans won't be playing - and they are just the ones I have looked at. A lot of fans seem to want to win a trophy "at all costs". Well here's an idea - petition Platini and his chums to apply the rules and WE WILL WIN - it won't of course have the same kudos as winning a tournament with Barca et al in it AT THE TIME, but it will still have the Arsenal name on the trophy.
I console myself in the knowledge that if Arsenal continues to be run the way it is then my childrens children will be watching them lift (the occasional) title. Not only that but Chelsea, Man City, Man United et al, will be talked about with due reference to their historical (as opposed current) status. "They were a massive team once upon a time you know" they will whisper in pubs about Chelsea, Man City, ManU et al, the same way we do about Notts County, Wolves, Notts Forest and Dulwich Hamlet.
Lets not forget guys, that if we avoid relegation this year and next we will celebrate a centenary of top flight football. Arsenal have never overpaid for players and I sincerely hope that they never do.
And one final thought, the Chelski's and the Mancy's might have all the bling but our club has something they will never have - class!
Rod
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
24 August, 2011 15:25
And that is how we should want to win the Champions league - when the best teams are banned from it? How gallant and sporting is that? It's one thing to beat a lesser light in the final because the better teams were knockjed out earlier but if that is something to be proud off winning a watered-down competition that is a sad commentary on how far ambitions have really fallen since 2004.
As for being able to spend more there is no doubt we could spend more if the wage structure did not impede us doing so, and maybe that is exactly what the re-designed wage strcuture of the past few years was specifically designed to do - allow the Club to falsely claim it was ready to spend more more money without having to prove it by actually spending it?
After all, having that cash banked away decreases our net debt which increses interest in the Club by outside investment which increases our share value - but allows the Club to insist the money is available to spend the whole time, even if they would rather stick their fingers in electrical outlets than actually spend it.
As for being able to spend more there is no doubt we could spend more if the wage structure did not impede us doing so, and maybe that is exactly what the re-designed wage strcuture of the past few years was specifically designed to do - allow the Club to falsely claim it was ready to spend more more money without having to prove it by actually spending it?
After all, having that cash banked away decreases our net debt which increses interest in the Club by outside investment which increases our share value - but allows the Club to insist the money is available to spend the whole time, even if they would rather stick their fingers in electrical outlets than actually spend it.
Yes what you say in principle and theory is correct Rodeo, but it hasnt happened has it?
Why?
because Wenger spent the money on wage rises for players like eboue and denilson.
Plus a club will always have large liquid assets after season ticket sales etc, they cant blow all that on transfers.
Wenger can justify that he has reinvested all money from player sales by including pay rises for youngsters we have never heard of. It all counts
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
Why?
because Wenger spent the money on wage rises for players like eboue and denilson.
Plus a club will always have large liquid assets after season ticket sales etc, they cant blow all that on transfers.
Wenger can justify that he has reinvested all money from player sales by including pay rises for youngsters we have never heard of. It all counts
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
24 August, 2011 15:54
Actually Padre all of these raises you rightly refer to came while Ivan Gazidis was at the table negotiating, and of his specific accomplishments as MLS Deputy Commissioner(and an employees of MLS Club Owners, including Stanley Kroenke)was the development and implemantation of the League-Wide Salary Cap and Wage Structure, and he will be at the table negotiating a new deal for Armond Traore any day now and Johna Djourou next month.
His position on wages so far is to call for a Premier League Salary Cap. That's all it is so far really.
His position on wages so far is to call for a Premier League Salary Cap. That's all it is so far really.
Quote:RadioFreeArsenal
And that is how we should want to win the Champions league - when the best teams are banned from it? How gallant and sporting is that? It's one thing to beat a lesser light in the final because the better teams were knockjed out earlier but if that is something to be proud off winning a watered-down competition that is a sad commentary on how far ambitions have really fallen since 2004.
As for being able to spend more there is no doubt we could spend more if the wage structure did not impede us doing so, and maybe that is exactly what the re-designed wage strcuture of the past few years was specifically designed to do - allow the Club to falsely claim it was ready to spend more more money without having to prove it by actually spending it?
After all, having that cash banked away decreases our net debt which increses interest in the Club by outside investment which increases our share value - but allows the Club to insist the money is available to spend the whole time, even if they would rather stick their fingers in electrical outlets than actually spend it.
Its hardly the champions league though, is it mate? 3 non-title winning teams from each big super league get to compete each year (bar the fourth placed team has to do one QL - but it is rigged in their favour so that team is a cert anyway).
Should it not be the team that won their domestic league that are the only one's allowed to compete in this crooked cometition? (The way it used to be).
I hate the CL nowadays - its a money spinning joke.
If there was fairness as you mention, then should Shamrock Rovers from my native country or Copenhagen from Denmark etc not have automatically qualified for the competition group stages and not have to do play offs that they have no hope of winning as soon as they meet the 4th placed team from a large league. Where is the fairness in that? How invaluble would that qualifying money be to the smaller countries teams who are CHAMPIONS outright. Why should Man City or Inter or real be given automatic starting berths when they are not champions of their own leagues.
The whole proposed UEFA Fair Play Rules are a joke - there is no such thing as fair play in this competition. I've lost my passion for the game in the last few years due to FIFA and UEFA corruption. Their cancer has spread like wildfire into the game. Our beautiful game is being taken from us one greedy piece after another.
A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
Jose champion, king, legend.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
24 August, 2011 17:21
Quote:Thetruthis
Its hardly the champions league though, is it mate? 3 non-title winning teams from each big super league get to compete each year (bar the fourth placed team has to do one QL - but it is rigged in their favour so that team is a cert anyway).
Should it not be the team that won their domestic league that are the only one's allowed to compete in this crooked cometition? (The way it used to be).
I hate the CL nowadays - its a money spinning joke.
If there was fairness as you mention, then should Shamrock Rovers from my native country or Copenhagen from Denmark etc not have automatically qualified for the competition group stages and not have to do play offs that they have no hope of winning as soon as they meet the 4th placed team from a large league. Where is the fairness in that? How invaluble would that qualifying money be to the smaller countries teams who are CHAMPIONS outright. Why should Man City or Inter or real be given automatic starting berths when they are not champions of their own leagues.
The whole proposed UEFA Fair Play Rules are a joke - there is no such thing as fair play in this competition. I've lost my passion for the game in the last few years due to FIFA and UEFA corruption. Their cancer has spread like wildfire into the game. Our beautiful game is being taken from us one greedy piece after another.
Talking far too-big picture for little ol'me today
![[:wor kid:]](../phorum-5.1.15/mods/smileys/images/13.gif "[:wor kid:]")
But actually agree pretty fully with you here especially about the "Champions" League...I just get no rise about only winning it when the rules keep bigger and better clubs out. Like to have a bit more ambition that that lol
Quote:RadioFreeArsenalQuote:Thetruthis
Its hardly the champions league though, is it mate? 3 non-title winning teams from each big super league get to compete each year (bar the fourth placed team has to do one QL - but it is rigged in their favour so that team is a cert anyway).
Should it not be the team that won their domestic league that are the only one's allowed to compete in this crooked cometition? (The way it used to be).
I hate the CL nowadays - its a money spinning joke.
If there was fairness as you mention, then should Shamrock Rovers from my native country or Copenhagen from Denmark etc not have automatically qualified for the competition group stages and not have to do play offs that they have no hope of winning as soon as they meet the 4th placed team from a large league. Where is the fairness in that? How invaluble would that qualifying money be to the smaller countries teams who are CHAMPIONS outright. Why should Man City or Inter or real be given automatic starting berths when they are not champions of their own leagues.
The whole proposed UEFA Fair Play Rules are a joke - there is no such thing as fair play in this competition. I've lost my passion for the game in the last few years due to FIFA and UEFA corruption. Their cancer has spread like wildfire into the game. Our beautiful game is being taken from us one greedy piece after another.
Talking far too-big picture for little ol'me today
But actually agree pretty fully with you here especially about the "Champions" League...I just get no rise about only winning it when the rules keep bigger and better clubs out. Like to have a bit more ambition that that lol
Cool handle, by the way. I'd love to rip up the EPL, pay cap, only a certain ammount of foriegn players per team, boot out the money men (Feckin Premier league my @#$%&) and get back to the good old days of league 1,2,3,4. I know it'll never happen, but that is my dream.
I have some great memories as a kid when things were fair and square. The European cup that Liverpool were so amazing in. I remeber a game I was listening to on the radio on the year dot, we had an Irish team, can't remember which one - anyway got crushed 8 - 0 at home - I think Pool took mercy in the second leg; but it was fun having a small team from one's own country play Dalglish and co. What a team they were!
And we the Arsenal had Terry Neil
. He's still knocking around. He was on an RTE sport radio programme a few months back.A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
Jose champion, king, legend.
TTI.
When the CL was The European Cup and all the teams in it each season were all champions of their respective leagues, to be quite honest it was a pretty p*ss poor competition. Only about 4 teams were realistic contenders each year. The UEFA Cup had far more depth of quality.
The CL may be a money spinning bonanza (not least for UEFA), but the standard of football is the best in the world and that includes international football and the World Cup. And the number of clubs that have a good chance to win it is about 8 each season.
Rodeo
The wage bill has been reduced considerably by the sale of Cesc, Nasri, Eboue and Clichy and the loan of Denilson, probably to the tune of nearly £20m pa.
And yes, you're quite correct about the ring fencing of money purely for spending on the playing side, but as I said in an earlier post, it's about what AW thinks is value for money and he won't spend it where he thinks he won't get value. It may be stubborn and p*ss people off, but it does make sound business sense. It may also be Stan's view that he doesn't want to spend money increasing the length and value of squad players contracts.
No doubt some of our 'super quality' targets agents are asking for silly money which is maybe why we aren't seeing them arriving.
Chelsea pay their players stupid money (apparently Terry and Lampard are on parity contracts) and lose shedloads of money each year.
We can't afford to do that.
The chances of Arsenal winning the CL due to other clubs being excluded because of FFP is about the same as me having a 2's up with the Middleton sisters. UEFA won't sanction it for fear of a breakaway European League being formed (and Arsenal wouldn't miss out on that either).
When the CL was The European Cup and all the teams in it each season were all champions of their respective leagues, to be quite honest it was a pretty p*ss poor competition. Only about 4 teams were realistic contenders each year. The UEFA Cup had far more depth of quality.
The CL may be a money spinning bonanza (not least for UEFA), but the standard of football is the best in the world and that includes international football and the World Cup. And the number of clubs that have a good chance to win it is about 8 each season.
Rodeo
The wage bill has been reduced considerably by the sale of Cesc, Nasri, Eboue and Clichy and the loan of Denilson, probably to the tune of nearly £20m pa.
And yes, you're quite correct about the ring fencing of money purely for spending on the playing side, but as I said in an earlier post, it's about what AW thinks is value for money and he won't spend it where he thinks he won't get value. It may be stubborn and p*ss people off, but it does make sound business sense. It may also be Stan's view that he doesn't want to spend money increasing the length and value of squad players contracts.
No doubt some of our 'super quality' targets agents are asking for silly money which is maybe why we aren't seeing them arriving.
Chelsea pay their players stupid money (apparently Terry and Lampard are on parity contracts) and lose shedloads of money each year.
We can't afford to do that.
The chances of Arsenal winning the CL due to other clubs being excluded because of FFP is about the same as me having a 2's up with the Middleton sisters. UEFA won't sanction it for fear of a breakaway European League being formed (and Arsenal wouldn't miss out on that either).
simon can I suggest you put your long post in for a lead article, maybe add or refine it, as its a great piece
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
I'm very much with you simon68 you make some good points and earlier also I was going to say the same but couldnt remember your handle.
I don't think people quite "get" that in football finance / clout terms we really are absolute minnows.
Deloitte publish a very good list of football finance by club turnover but this is DIRECTLY AVAILABLE money - where we do compete. But winning trophies is a fight and when its "about to kick off I look not only at the adversary, but the people standing behind my adversary and indeed the people behind them. There is another way of looking at football club finances and that is to look not only at the club turnover but the backers nett worth and the backers backers nett worth.
When you do that here's the table.
Club T/O Backer/Nett Worth Backup Team/Nett Worth
Arsenal $0.3bn Kronke $2bn His Wife $3bn
Juventus $0.3bn Fiat $85bn None
Barcelona$0.5bn State of Catalonia $314bn None
Paris SG $0.1bn QatarInvAuth $60bnQatar $900bn
Chelsea $0.3bn Abramovich $7bn Siberia/Russia $1894bn
Anzhi M $0.1bn Kerimov $7.8bn Dagestan/Russia $1894bn
Real Mad $0.6bn City of Madrid $500bn? GovSpain $1409bn
Man City $0.2bn Sheikh Mansour $1000bn AbuDhabiIA $1000bn
AC Milan $0.3bn Burlusconi $8bn Italy $2055bn
Now of course I am not saying that the state of Italy runs AC Milan and I am not saying that AC Milan is worth $2063.3bn, but what I am saying is that these clubs have access to implied and very substantial muscle (including financial) that we simply do not have. So for example when the chips are down and you are $500m in debt, its pretty handy when the City Council can "rezone" your training ground so that it is much more valuable to developers and you can therefore wipe out the debt as Madrid City Council did (not state aid though according to the EU investigation), or for example when you are $1000m in the red, a state run airline, coincidentally controlled by the same people as your club can rock on down with a cheque for $600m for a "sponsorship agreement" paid upfront.
The fact is that Arsenal have for years (thanks to both the board and AW) punched well above their weight and will continue to do so when you reference the above table.
But the takeaway point is that to get involved in some kind of financial Mexican standoff with some of these clubs is just pure madness and we should on no account do it.
One final point I will mention because I forgot to say it earlier, we all know the old football adage I am sure, but it is as true of the Club as it is the players it is generally uttered about.
Form is temporary.....
Rodeo
I don't think people quite "get" that in football finance / clout terms we really are absolute minnows.
Deloitte publish a very good list of football finance by club turnover but this is DIRECTLY AVAILABLE money - where we do compete. But winning trophies is a fight and when its "about to kick off I look not only at the adversary, but the people standing behind my adversary and indeed the people behind them. There is another way of looking at football club finances and that is to look not only at the club turnover but the backers nett worth and the backers backers nett worth.
When you do that here's the table.
Club T/O Backer/Nett Worth Backup Team/Nett Worth
Arsenal $0.3bn Kronke $2bn His Wife $3bn
Juventus $0.3bn Fiat $85bn None
Barcelona$0.5bn State of Catalonia $314bn None
Paris SG $0.1bn QatarInvAuth $60bnQatar $900bn
Chelsea $0.3bn Abramovich $7bn Siberia/Russia $1894bn
Anzhi M $0.1bn Kerimov $7.8bn Dagestan/Russia $1894bn
Real Mad $0.6bn City of Madrid $500bn? GovSpain $1409bn
Man City $0.2bn Sheikh Mansour $1000bn AbuDhabiIA $1000bn
AC Milan $0.3bn Burlusconi $8bn Italy $2055bn
Now of course I am not saying that the state of Italy runs AC Milan and I am not saying that AC Milan is worth $2063.3bn, but what I am saying is that these clubs have access to implied and very substantial muscle (including financial) that we simply do not have. So for example when the chips are down and you are $500m in debt, its pretty handy when the City Council can "rezone" your training ground so that it is much more valuable to developers and you can therefore wipe out the debt as Madrid City Council did (not state aid though according to the EU investigation), or for example when you are $1000m in the red, a state run airline, coincidentally controlled by the same people as your club can rock on down with a cheque for $600m for a "sponsorship agreement" paid upfront.
The fact is that Arsenal have for years (thanks to both the board and AW) punched well above their weight and will continue to do so when you reference the above table.
But the takeaway point is that to get involved in some kind of financial Mexican standoff with some of these clubs is just pure madness and we should on no account do it.
One final point I will mention because I forgot to say it earlier, we all know the old football adage I am sure, but it is as true of the Club as it is the players it is generally uttered about.
Form is temporary.....
Rodeo
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
24 August, 2011 20:46
No one is saying we should but we do have more resources and ought to use them just as we did the same from 1998-2005 when we were outspent by most clubs but still were willing to spend more (relatively speaking) and more ambitiously and be more competitive.
The Board misled us and let us down really for the past several years and if anyhting is continuing to do so I fear. No we didn't have to spend like Chelsea or now Man City. We just had to spend more like Arsenal used to and clearly there was nodesire on our Club's opart to do that much even, and clearly given the lack of question or complaint or even action certainly our Board felt no desire to see us to do so.
If you increase our wage strcuture out to 150-170K a week you can sign that many more players like we used to sign from 1998-2005 and equally importantly you can keep your better players until the team does finally compete for and win trophies. Right now we offer neither good wages or good prospects of winning trophies you cannot blame top players for going to City ahead of Arsenal, period. They will make more money and have better prospects to win silverware too. I mean sickening as it is to say there are 4-5 clubs in England right now that if I were a genuinely ambitious player I would look to before Arsenal, because I will either get more money and more trophies or maybe both.
I don't see us changing the trophies thing with the players we now have so we have to change the wage structure get some of these players to sign with us for the wages and then when we win a trophy or two we'll be set as players will come to Arsenal for less because they have more chances to win trophies.
If we don't change the wage structure now who knows how long it'll be before we are ready to attract players with success on the pitch again?
The Board misled us and let us down really for the past several years and if anyhting is continuing to do so I fear. No we didn't have to spend like Chelsea or now Man City. We just had to spend more like Arsenal used to and clearly there was nodesire on our Club's opart to do that much even, and clearly given the lack of question or complaint or even action certainly our Board felt no desire to see us to do so.
If you increase our wage strcuture out to 150-170K a week you can sign that many more players like we used to sign from 1998-2005 and equally importantly you can keep your better players until the team does finally compete for and win trophies. Right now we offer neither good wages or good prospects of winning trophies you cannot blame top players for going to City ahead of Arsenal, period. They will make more money and have better prospects to win silverware too. I mean sickening as it is to say there are 4-5 clubs in England right now that if I were a genuinely ambitious player I would look to before Arsenal, because I will either get more money and more trophies or maybe both.
I don't see us changing the trophies thing with the players we now have so we have to change the wage structure get some of these players to sign with us for the wages and then when we win a trophy or two we'll be set as players will come to Arsenal for less because they have more chances to win trophies.
If we don't change the wage structure now who knows how long it'll be before we are ready to attract players with success on the pitch again?
[quote Simon68]TTI.
When the CL was The European Cup and all the teams in it each season were all champions of their respective leagues, to be quite honest it was a pretty p*ss poor competition. Only about 4 teams were realistic contenders each year. The UEFA Cup had far more depth of quality.
The CL may be a money spinning bonanza (not least for UEFA), but the standard of football is the best in the world and that includes international football and the World Cup. And the number of clubs that have a good chance to win it is about 8 each season.
Rodeo
The wage bill has been reduced considerably by the sale of Cesc, Nasri, Eboue and Clichy and the loan of Denilson, probably to the tune of nearly £20m pa.
And yes, you're quite correct about the ring fencing of money purely for spending on the playing side, but as I said in an earlier post, it's about what AW thinks is value for money and he won't spend it where he thinks he won't get value. It may be stubborn and p*ss people off, but it does make sound business sense. It may also be Stan's view that he doesn't want to spend money increasing the length and value of squad players contracts.
No doubt some of our 'super quality' targets agents are asking for silly money which is maybe why we aren't seeing them arriving.
Chelsea pay their players stupid money (apparently Terry and Lampard are on parity contracts) and lose shedloads of money each year.
I prefered the old system. The Uefa cup was great, and the cup winners fired up some great teams.
you really should be a thread starter as you are very well informed and write brilliantly. Just saying.
A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
GIFSoup Jose The King.
Jose champion, king, legend.
When the CL was The European Cup and all the teams in it each season were all champions of their respective leagues, to be quite honest it was a pretty p*ss poor competition. Only about 4 teams were realistic contenders each year. The UEFA Cup had far more depth of quality.
The CL may be a money spinning bonanza (not least for UEFA), but the standard of football is the best in the world and that includes international football and the World Cup. And the number of clubs that have a good chance to win it is about 8 each season.
Rodeo
The wage bill has been reduced considerably by the sale of Cesc, Nasri, Eboue and Clichy and the loan of Denilson, probably to the tune of nearly £20m pa.
And yes, you're quite correct about the ring fencing of money purely for spending on the playing side, but as I said in an earlier post, it's about what AW thinks is value for money and he won't spend it where he thinks he won't get value. It may be stubborn and p*ss people off, but it does make sound business sense. It may also be Stan's view that he doesn't want to spend money increasing the length and value of squad players contracts.
No doubt some of our 'super quality' targets agents are asking for silly money which is maybe why we aren't seeing them arriving.
Chelsea pay their players stupid money (apparently Terry and Lampard are on parity contracts) and lose shedloads of money each year.
I prefered the old system. The Uefa cup was great, and the cup winners fired up some great teams.
you really should be a thread starter as you are very well informed and write brilliantly. Just saying.
A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
Jose champion, king, legend.
Good points rodeo, but dont forget Usamanov Worlds 2 nd richest man
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
Quote:I never knew that.Padre Pio
Good points rodeo, but dont forget Usamanov Worlds 2 nd richest man
A man does what he must - in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures - and that is the basis of all human morality.
Winston Churchill
Jose champion, king, legend.
his personal wealth is supposed to be $40 billion
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
27 August, 2011 19:30
But's let put ego on top of greed ahead of Arsenal. And some still defend this Board. They sold Arsenal out - period. They are unfit to be remembererd as Arsenal Men and Women.
I cannot believe what they have done to Arsenal without a hint of shame or conscience from any of them.
I cannot believe what they have done to Arsenal without a hint of shame or conscience from any of them.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
28 August, 2011 18:02
How's that wage structure looking now then?
SPOT ON!!
This is not the first time I've heard this and I believe it has been going on for years. If you look at the Ashley Cole situation, he was a gunner through and through but when the board went back on their word and refused to pay him the agreed extra £5,000 per week he took Chelsea up on their offer. I believe that if he had gotten the agreed figure he would never have gone to Chelsea. And please don't tell me that Clichy is/was a better player !!
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
Philly the kid
(IP Logged)
02 September, 2011 20:44
I've cussed Ashley as much as anyone.
Thinking about it. I wish we'd just paid the extra £5 grand too.
Our board is/was/always will be the problem.
Thinking about it. I wish we'd just paid the extra £5 grand too.
Our board is/was/always will be the problem.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
Posted by: 2bsure2bsure (IP Logged)
Date: 31 August, 2011 10:35
but when the board went back on their word
What word was that then?
It was Dein's not the Board.
Posted by: 2bsure2bsure (IP Logged)
Date: 31 August, 2011 10:35
but when the board went back on their word
What word was that then?
It was Dein's not the Board.
And besides, I heard it wasn't just about the extra £5k pw, it was also about Cole's agent wanting Arsenal to pay him £750k for negotiating the new contract and Arsenal telling him to get it off his client if he wanted it as it was nothing to do with them.
Quite right too and good riddance to Cole and his agent.
It's p*ssing me off that some people are forgetting what a little toe rag Cole is and the damage Dein has done to us.
Next thing people will start saying Josef Fritzl was a good family man.
Quite right too and good riddance to Cole and his agent.
It's p*ssing me off that some people are forgetting what a little toe rag Cole is and the damage Dein has done to us.
Next thing people will start saying Josef Fritzl was a good family man.
What the Cole Dein episode demonstrates that there was already a split between Dein and them.
As Wenger worked closely with Dein it does raise the issue whether all was well between Wenger and board.
Doesnt matter what you think of Cole, and I dont think that much of him,there is no doubt it left Wenger with problems in his relationship with board.
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
As Wenger worked closely with Dein it does raise the issue whether all was well between Wenger and board.
Doesnt matter what you think of Cole, and I dont think that much of him,there is no doubt it left Wenger with problems in his relationship with board.
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
Quote:Simon68
And besides, I heard it wasn't just about the extra £5k pw, it was also about Cole's agent wanting Arsenal to pay him £750k for negotiating the new contract and Arsenal telling him to get it off his client if he wanted it as it was nothing to do with them.
Quite right too and good riddance to Cole and his agent.
It's p*ssing me off that some people are forgetting what a little toe rag Cole is and the damage Dein has done to us.
Next thing people will start saying Josef Fritzl was a good family man.
Simon, during that period, it was also reported that a raging Wenger went tot eh Baord and told them to pay Cole what was agreed with Dein and him..just paid that 55,000pw.
And it all ended up with COle's agent getting what they wanted - bump his salary to 70,00pw (the salary offered by Chelski) to sign a 1-year contract extension or else he walked away on a Bosman.
Again, what sort of nonsense that PHW and Fizman had beign syaing all along that the Baord "will not refuse funds for Arsene Wenegr to sign any players he wanted".
DO you knwo that Arsene Wenegr let slipped that he wanted to re-sign Anelka, but again the Board refused to have any delaing with his brother who is his agent?
Guess we all have to wiat for Wenger to retire to write his memiors then to know or to have an inkling of the true stories.
merl it was dein who refused to allow wenger to sign anelka, DD has admitted that publically, he said he would not deal with Anelka's brothers again after the trouble they caused him in the sale of anelka
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
Ta.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive new
Posted by: eduardo (IP Logged)
Date: 04 September, 2011 22:41
merl it was dein who refused to allow wenger to sign anelka, DD has admitted that publically, he said he would not deal with Anelka's brothers again after the trouble they caused him in the sale of anelka
I had forgotten that Ed. How could I have? It was the closest I'd seen Dein to losing his cool.
Do we attract more of these players than others?
Anelka, Adebayor, Cole, Nasri, Bentley, Bendtner (to a degree).
But then you have to look at the loyalty of others like DB10, TH14, PV4, RP7, Freddie, Lauren and others.
Posted by: eduardo (IP Logged)
Date: 04 September, 2011 22:41
merl it was dein who refused to allow wenger to sign anelka, DD has admitted that publically, he said he would not deal with Anelka's brothers again after the trouble they caused him in the sale of anelka
I had forgotten that Ed. How could I have? It was the closest I'd seen Dein to losing his cool.
Do we attract more of these players than others?
Anelka, Adebayor, Cole, Nasri, Bentley, Bendtner (to a degree).
But then you have to look at the loyalty of others like DB10, TH14, PV4, RP7, Freddie, Lauren and others.
160K views, fecking hell
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
12 September, 2011 05:42
Simon that account just makes no sense - first off most people say the 5000 a week was the money Barnett wanted, even David Dein reportedly suggested as much although the Premier LLeague investigation did not give any credence to that claim as that still wouldn't explain why the Board would offer 5000 less a week . If that were true it would eexplain why they would not offer 5000 more a week which was never the issue.
Either Barnett wanted 60 K a week for Cole plus 5k for himself which would mean there was a dispute over 10 K which no one has said, or that they offered Ashley Cole what he was actually asking for the simple truth is as the Premier league investigation revealed the price was always 60 K a week for Cole, and that was that.
Actually in fact if you break down 750K over three years it comes out to about 5K a week, but again if the 5K a week were the issue then why didn't we just agree to pay the 60K but not to the pay the other 5K and let them decide how to proceed? Then that claim about the extra 5K might make. As it stand it simply doesn't stand up to simple math and logic. If the problem was a payment to Barnett and just said no to other 5K. we would have offered Cole the 60K. And the only other way that might be possible is if they had only asked for 55K aweek as the Board offered plus the agent's fees.. And the Premier League Report shows neither was the case.
And btw, we actually pay more in agent's fess than Man United according to the Premier League from twp years ago, so there is that as well to consider.
I think the4 Club has said nothing because it is happy to let people believe this myth about this incident. because that saveds them having to answer some rather embarassing questions when they really didn't want and couldn't afford to answer.
Either Barnett wanted 60 K a week for Cole plus 5k for himself which would mean there was a dispute over 10 K which no one has said, or that they offered Ashley Cole what he was actually asking for the simple truth is as the Premier league investigation revealed the price was always 60 K a week for Cole, and that was that.
Actually in fact if you break down 750K over three years it comes out to about 5K a week, but again if the 5K a week were the issue then why didn't we just agree to pay the 60K but not to the pay the other 5K and let them decide how to proceed? Then that claim about the extra 5K might make. As it stand it simply doesn't stand up to simple math and logic. If the problem was a payment to Barnett and just said no to other 5K. we would have offered Cole the 60K. And the only other way that might be possible is if they had only asked for 55K aweek as the Board offered plus the agent's fees.. And the Premier League Report shows neither was the case.
And btw, we actually pay more in agent's fess than Man United according to the Premier League from twp years ago, so there is that as well to consider.
I think the4 Club has said nothing because it is happy to let people believe this myth about this incident. because that saveds them having to answer some rather embarassing questions when they really didn't want and couldn't afford to answer.
Interesting that Wenger described the summer has worse than hell and intimated there had been all kinds of problems he could not talk about. He also said it was not just him involved in transfers that there were 20 other people, that implied the blame should be shared.
True or not just about every source believes that there was a dispute between Wenger and Board. Its not what people say its what you can see with your own eyes that counts
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
True or not just about every source believes that there was a dispute between Wenger and Board. Its not what people say its what you can see with your own eyes that counts
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
Re: Wenger and the Board at Loggerheads Exclusive
RadioFreeArsenal
(IP Logged)
12 September, 2011 09:05
I agree Padre, the thing is if as some insist Mr. Wenger is the one who refuses to copperate why not just sack him and install an ambitious new guy who will do what the Board wants? I think thew question already answers itself really...
Because the Board realise that Wenger is the best man to make the most of what we have and what money is made available to him. After all, he has been doing it for the last 16 years.
Who else could do it? Arsenal is one of the top football managing jobs in the world and as such needs a top manager. Perhaps the only 2 men who could take it on are Guardiola and Hiddink. The other top managers would require shedloads of money which we don't have.
Who else could do it? Arsenal is one of the top football managing jobs in the world and as such needs a top manager. Perhaps the only 2 men who could take it on are Guardiola and Hiddink. The other top managers would require shedloads of money which we don't have.
Quote:You actually took the pains to explain this Simon. I stopped teaching babies long ago because they infuriate me alot when they wouldnt understand common sense, i'm very impatient with them.Simon68
TTI.
When the CL was The European Cup and all the teams in it each season were all champions of their respective leagues, to be quite honest it was a pretty p*ss poor competition. Only about 4 teams were realistic contenders each year. The UEFA Cup had far more depth of quality.
The CL may be a money spinning bonanza (not least for UEFA), but the standard of football is the best in the world and that includes international football and the World Cup. And the number of clubs that have a good chance to win it is about 8 each season.
But Simon, Pep hasn't proven he could manage on a low budget, and he's pretty bad at transfers.
But Simon, Pep hasn't proven he could manage on a low budget, and he's pretty bad at transfers.
Manager's are judged on how well they can assemble a team and the direction they're taking them, not the budget they spend.
If a manager spends 1 million and the team is a position lower in the league, they're seen to be crap, if a manager spend 15mil and gets the team 2 positions higher is seen as good.
Transfers in football are in a market which means sometimes you can be conned. Like what we did to Zenit and Barca did to us.
Wenger has a brilliant history of not being conned.
Pep will be seen as good until Barcelona flop.
If a manager spends 1 million and the team is a position lower in the league, they're seen to be crap, if a manager spend 15mil and gets the team 2 positions higher is seen as good.
Transfers in football are in a market which means sometimes you can be conned. Like what we did to Zenit and Barca did to us.
Wenger has a brilliant history of not being conned.
Pep will be seen as good until Barcelona flop.
I trust Guardiola's ability to get the team playing the right way as long as he has talent at his disposal, the same as I do Hiddink. Despite what people are saying about us having lost our best players (only Cesc comes into that category as far as I'm concerned), we have some outstanding players at our Club and I don't think these two need to spend the amount that a Mourinho would want to in order to create a successful team.
The players I regard as outstanding are Chez, TV5, Sagna, Jack and RvP. The very good are Song, Kos, Arteta. Possibly Gervinho but it is too early to tell, ditto Mertesacker and Benyoun. The potentially outstanding or very good are Ramsey, Myaichi, Walcott, AOC, Gibbs, Frimpong, Campbell. Others are either not good enough or it is too early to tell.
What we lack is a Messi and now Cesc.
The players I regard as outstanding are Chez, TV5, Sagna, Jack and RvP. The very good are Song, Kos, Arteta. Possibly Gervinho but it is too early to tell, ditto Mertesacker and Benyoun. The potentially outstanding or very good are Ramsey, Myaichi, Walcott, AOC, Gibbs, Frimpong, Campbell. Others are either not good enough or it is too early to tell.
What we lack is a Messi and now Cesc.
Wenger's comments on friday that arsenal's best contract offer will not mean its enough to get the players(RVP, AA, TV5, Theo and Song) to sign new deals within the next year, for me is a statement aimed once again at Kroenke and the Board, that Arsenal must up its max wage or we will lose most if not all these players next summer,
I think it also backs the info I reported in this thread. Money for transfer bids is there, but our wage structure(max Wage) is out of line with the big spenders and so we are hamstrung by this no matter what transfer funds we have.
For those that missed Wenger's comments on renewing contracts
Wenger - We're ready to discuss new deals
by Richard Clarke
Arsène Wenger has started the process of securing some of his star players on new contracts.
In the summer, Samir Nasri was allowed to leave for Manchester City because, according to the manager, Arsenal received a "reasonable price" for a player with one-year left in his contract. FIFA rules would have allowed the midfielder to sign a pre-contract with a new team in January and walk out for free at the end of the season.
The likes of Theo Walcott, Robin van Persie and Alex Song are in the same situation next summer. Wenger admits the negotiating process is always tricky so he is not wasting any time.
"Yes, this starts now," said Wenger. "We will try to convince them. Our desire is there to do it and we are ready to sit down with them.
"After that we see where we go but the gap on that front has become bigger for us so, today, I cannot say that if we go to the maximum [deal] we are sure to sign a player - even if we do that we are not sure."
However, Wenger is not expecting a repeat of this summer when Nasri and Cesc Fabregas both departed. He believes the former was good business and the latter a specific case.
"I always said that Cesc was a bargain," said Wenger. "We were forced into a situation because for me he is one of the best midfielders in the world and we knew that we would sell him under what he's worth.
"With Nasri at least we got a reasonable price for a player with one year to go."
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
I think it also backs the info I reported in this thread. Money for transfer bids is there, but our wage structure(max Wage) is out of line with the big spenders and so we are hamstrung by this no matter what transfer funds we have.
For those that missed Wenger's comments on renewing contracts
Wenger - We're ready to discuss new deals
by Richard Clarke
Arsène Wenger has started the process of securing some of his star players on new contracts.
In the summer, Samir Nasri was allowed to leave for Manchester City because, according to the manager, Arsenal received a "reasonable price" for a player with one-year left in his contract. FIFA rules would have allowed the midfielder to sign a pre-contract with a new team in January and walk out for free at the end of the season.
The likes of Theo Walcott, Robin van Persie and Alex Song are in the same situation next summer. Wenger admits the negotiating process is always tricky so he is not wasting any time.
"Yes, this starts now," said Wenger. "We will try to convince them. Our desire is there to do it and we are ready to sit down with them.
"After that we see where we go but the gap on that front has become bigger for us so, today, I cannot say that if we go to the maximum [deal] we are sure to sign a player - even if we do that we are not sure."
However, Wenger is not expecting a repeat of this summer when Nasri and Cesc Fabregas both departed. He believes the former was good business and the latter a specific case.
"I always said that Cesc was a bargain," said Wenger. "We were forced into a situation because for me he is one of the best midfielders in the world and we knew that we would sell him under what he's worth.
"With Nasri at least we got a reasonable price for a player with one year to go."
*Signing Ozil is a signing Bergkamp type moment for Arsenal. It changes things utterly.*
Shouldnt have wasted so much money on the Denilsons and diabys then
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
- until Wenger moves on, they'll always be the also-rans in the major competitions. A club in elite purgatory. Always good enough to make it to the big race, never fast or smart enough to push over the finish line in first place. That's all about the manager. Until he changes, Arsenal fans will continue to celebrate glorious failure.
And I will produce the "smoking gun" on why they can't break the salary scale..
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
