A fallacy quashed?

[budesonide]

This is courtesy AKBapologist in the rumour thread. I thought it might get lost amidst all the shite in that thread.

Agents involved in potential deals with Arsenal and even some at the club itself, report that he is so scrupulous in weighing up his options that he might be described as dithering while his empire burns.

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’ No one at the club seems to have sufficient authority to do that now.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I)

So, as some of us have been saying all along, it has been a self-imposed financial restriction by AW. And, no-one ever said we have the the kind of money city or chelsea has to splash around.

Am I worng then to think that with a more flexible approach (or with DD around) we might have at least won a fuc*king carling cup?

So, when the board have always said there was money to spend if AW needed it, they were not bullshitting as some would hav us believe?

And that, our board is so spineless and visionless they haven't the cajones to tell AW to wake the fuc*k up?

As i said in a previous thread -- to counter a letters's assertion -- unless we slip into abject midtable mediocrity, this board don't have the balls or vision to get AW to shape up.

[Cripps_orig]

This is courtesy AKBapologist in the rumour thread. I thought it might get lost amidst all the shite in that thread.

Agents involved in potential deals with Arsenal and even some at the club itself, report that he is so scrupulous in weighing up his options that he might be described as dithering while his empire burns.

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’ No one at the club seems to have sufficient authority to do that now.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I)

So, as some of us have been saying all along, it has been a self-imposed financial restriction by AW. And, no-one ever said we have the the kind of money city or chelsea has to splash around.

Am I worng then to think that with a more flexible approach (or with DD around) we might have at least won a fuc*king carling cup?

So, when the board have always said there was money to spend if AW needed it, they were not bullshitting as some would hav us believe?

And that, our board is so spineless and visionless they haven't the cajones to tell AW to wake the fuc*k up?

As i said in a previous thread -- to counter a letters's assertion -- unless we slip into abject midtable mediocrity, this board don't have the balls or vision to get AW to shape up.
One of the problems of not having a Transfers section and having just one thread with all the transfers, things are missed.

Anyway the rot started long before Dein left the club, we were pretty shite 05/06 and 06/07 but the shiteness then was excused cos of the new stadium and the rebuilding Wenger needed to do.

Few years on we are still at that shite level with no progress. Doubt Dein being here would have changed much on the pitch.

Would have been better than Gazidis though who has done f all

[Power n Glory]

:clap:

It doesn't matter how many quotes you find, some people would rather believe he's a victim of circumstance and in a powerless position.

We've had quotes from Wenger saying that we have money but he chooses to nurture young talent. Quotes from various board members saying we have money to spend. Quotes from Wenger about sitting in on contract negotiations when needed, heck, a few months back I heard something on the Tuesday Club about Wenger saying he sits in on the catering budget meetings! Which other manager does that?

But given all this, you'll still find some that believe he's just a puppet. He's one of the longest standing managers in Prem League history, has changed the culture of Arsenal, convinced the club to make huge changes such as building the youth development academy to the move to the Emirates, yet some believe he's some sort of pawn. I don't believe that for a second.

Look back on his quotes during his early days as a manager and you'll see he's doing what he's always wanted to do. He's trying to build an Ajax. That's great for us and great for him, but we need someone at Board level that knows just as much about football as he does. American guys that know about Sports management won't help because they'll depend on him for guidance just like how the Board do now. They can't get rid of Wenger because he's their walking stick. Dein was a football man and Mr Arsenal which is why he could put Wenger in check. Wenger respected his footballing opinion and we need someone else like that.

[Joker]

I wouldn't want David Dein back, because of his behaviour in the past, but I think that this is evidence that Wenger did impose artificial budget constraints on himself, to the detriment of the club as a whole. I think the whole problem is that Wenger is economically a free marketeer, and like the free marketeers in the Conservative government at the moment, they believe in austerity and adhere to this ridiculous notion of the housewife's budget, where increasing debt even in a manageable way is seen as heresy. I believe it would have been entirely possible for Wenger to spend reasonable amounts of money in the last 5 years to augment the squad with quality players, and if he did this, we may have won something.

I am not saying we needed to spend huge amounts of money like City, but more signings like Sagna and Vermaelen (i.e. players who didn't cost the earth, could slot in immediately and were the sort of quality players who could improve the squad) would definitely have helped. The fact that it appears Wenger put ideology over the welfare of the squad is a bit of an indictment his performance as manager in the last 5 years tbh.

Nevertheless, the board need to take responsibility for not putting extra pressure on Wenger to invest in the squad. However, they had an incentive to maintain the status quo, seeing as they were making a good return on their shares and were increasing their bank balances due to Wenger's parsimony, even though it was hurting the on-field success of the club.

[Coney]

@ budesonide

It's a rumour. I had thought that Dein was able to get money out of the old-style board members to buy players and to push the wages to what was required to make it all work - the Ashley Cole issue is why I think this. It was the one time I've noticed AW letting his guard down a bit by a comment.* I am hoping that having Kroenke on board and running things, the need for a few special buys will be realised in the form of some decent backbone type players to give the otherwise talented team the strenght to go the extra mile - or the extra 10 games at the end of the season.


* C***ley C*** had wanted an extra 5k for the agent bit and it appeared he had a verbal agreement from Dein - certainly Cole did appear to believe that which is why he later came out with his 'nearly swerved off the road' comment. Dick as he may be, I do think he had been led to believe that 5K would be there. The other factor for me is the comment by Wenger when asked about the issue and he (I think without meaning to reveal things) said words to the effect of how it would be ridiculous to lose an important player for just 5K. Now putting 2 and 2 together from that (and sure, it might be wrong) I am pretty certain that Dein wanted to arrange the extra 5k and the board blocked it, either for old fashioned reasons or to clip Dein's wings, and that caused the big issue. If Wenger spends again at a level we seem to want with Kroenke now in the saddle, I think that will make things clear. We will know at the end of the summer transfer period.

[Power n Glory]

Dein was the reason Cole didn't get the 5k from my understading. Cole said it was Dein blocking it because of a personal beef. Or am I wrong?

[Coney]

Dein was the reason Cole didn't get the 5k from my understading. Cole said it was Dein blocking it because of a personal beef. Or am I wrong?

I can't state this as a quaranteed fact, but I am pretty sure that at the time, Cole had understood that he had an agreement with Dein on this issue, so I would not expect him to be the blocker. However, as with a lot of this stuff, we don't have clear establishable facts to prove things either way. I speculate based on what I interpret the statements to mean when they make an unguarded comment. Guarded comments have to be taken with a bigger pinch of salt because they are carefully picking their words.

Maybe everything is bollocks. Ah well. We can but wait to see what the squad looks like at the end of the transfer period. 2 more months of speculation and innuendo to go... ;)

[budesonide]

I believe it would have been entirely possible for Wenger to spend reasonable amounts of money in the last 5 years to augment the squad with quality players, and if he did this, we may have won something.

I am not saying we needed to spend huge amounts of money like City, but more signings like Sagna and Vermaelen (i.e. players who didn't cost the earth, could slot in immediately and were the sort of quality players who could improve the squad) would definitely have helped. The fact that it appears Wenger put ideology over the welfare of the squad is a bit of an indictment his performance as manager in the last 5 years tbh.

Nevertheless, the board need to take responsibility for not putting extra pressure on Wenger to invest in the squad. However, they had an incentive to maintain the status quo, seeing as they were making a good return on their shares and were increasing their bank balances due to Wenger's parsimony, even though it was hurting the on-field success of the club.

:goodpost:


spot on, mate.

[Power n Glory]

I can't state this as a quaranteed fact, but I am pretty sure that at the time, Cole had understood that he had an agreement with Dein on this issue, so I would not expect him to be the blocker. However, as with a lot of this stuff, we don't have clear establishable facts to prove things either way. I speculate based on what I interpret the statements to mean when they make an unguarded comment. Guarded comments have to be taken with a bigger pinch of salt because they are carefully picking their words.

Maybe everything is bollocks. Ah well. We can but wait to see what the squad looks like at the end of the transfer period. 2 more months of speculation and innuendo to go... ;)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2005/jun/05/newsstory.sport5

Check this out. Cole blamed Dein the most and was also disappointed with Wenger for siding with the Board. But this was after getting caught with his pants down.

[Coney]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2005/jun/05/newsstory.sport5

Check this out. Cole blamed Dein the most and was also disappointed with Wenger for siding with the Board. But this was after getting caught with his pants down.

The thing is, once Cole was, as you say, caught with his pants down with Moronio, everything he said after that was going to be whatever it took to justify his moving to the chavs and he kicked everyone at the Arsenal that he could, to the extent that any possible credibility after that went down the toilet. Offhand remarks while he was still there carry a little more weight, but the sour grapes afterwards (that made him so popular with Arsenal fans) are something I would tend to discount.

Once the 5k had been stopped, Wenger would take the official line - he does that because he is a professional manager and will avoid criticism of the board. That is why I think his mention of "ridiculous for only 5K" was a slip and thus carries more weight as an unintentional revealing of his position. As a young dick, C***ley would not have understood the concept of behaving like a professional and thus not understood Wenger's position.

[Power n Glory]

There is no reason for him to single out Dein if that were true. He would have said he was disappointed by Dein.

[AKBapologist]

Huh? I read that as "there was no one to provide the authority for AW to do what he wanted in the transfer window" - not AW's fault if he wasn't supported properly in transfers, or if the board didn't have the back bone to. When your leadership structure is relying on middle management to run the club, something broken.

[Toronto Gooner]

So, as some of us have been saying all along, it has been a self-imposed financial restriction by AW. And, no-one ever said we have the the kind of money city or chelsea has to splash around.

Am I worng then to think that with a more flexible approach (or with DD around) we might have at least won a fuc*king carling cup?

So, when the board have always said there was money to spend if AW needed it, they were not bullshitting as some would hav us believe?

And that, our board is so spineless and visionless they haven't the cajones to tell AW to wake the fuc*k up?

As i said in a previous thread -- to counter a letters's assertion -- unless we slip into abject midtable mediocrity, this board don't have the balls or vision to get AW to shape up.
Actually I read the quote as meaning that Wenger is incapable of making up his mind.

[Toronto Gooner]

Huh? I read that as "there was no one to provide the authority for AW to do what he wanted in the transfer window" - not AW's fault if he wasn't supported properly in transfers, or if the board didn't have the back bone to. When your leadership structure is relying on middle management to run the club, something broken.
This would seem run counter to quotes that started this thread.

[AKBapologist]

When you appear to hold the burden of the clubs finical stability in your hands, I'm not surprised. AW can't do 30mill flops like City and United can and if he did, I he'd get roasted on here. What seems to be missing is the kind of nudge and experience bodies in the background that had the authority to advice AW. ATM, it seems AW's been left to run the club due to a weak board, probably neglecting pitch side stuff in the process.

[Power n Glory]

Yes, poor poor Arsene!

[Toronto Gooner]

When you appear to hold the burden of the clubs finical stability in your hands, I'm not surprised. AW can't do 30mill flops like City and United can and if he did, I he'd get roasted on here. What seems to be missing is the kind of nudge and experience bodies in the background that had the authority to advice AW. ATM, it seems AW's been left to run the club due to a weak board, probably neglecting pitch side stuff in the process.
I am not certain that I would 100% agree with the weak board concept. I suspect that they have ceded authority on the playing staff to Wenger. However, they have almost certainly kept control of the financial reins. However, I do agree that Wenger has not been able to afford a 30 million flop, as that was probably a huge part of his annual budget.

Whether as a consequence of financial constraints; board imposed policy; or Wenger-imposed policy; Arsenal have not spent close to 30 million for a player. However, over the last 5 to 10 years, Arsenal supporters have seen 4 English clubs readily spend that amount of money: Man U; Chelsea; Liverpool; and Man City. Furthermore, Arsenal are now every year competing against European teams that also willingly spend that amount of money on players: Real Madrid; Barcelona; Inter Milan; AC Milan; Bayern Munich. This "inability or unwillingness" to compete in the transfer market has been frustrating and could be a huge impediment to further progress. In my opinion, in the next 3 or 4 years, Arsenal will have to change "policy" and start competing in these stratospheric transfer markets in order to maintain competitiveness on the playing field.

[Japan Shaking All Over]

Wenger we all know is cautious when it comes to transfers........which in part is admirable is also to the same degree detrimental to the success of our club

Wenger has refused to follow suit as our main rivals........Arshavin remains our biggest signing and the other teams have bettered that many times over,

but still we hear Wenger say in one breath I have the money but in another say I can't spend because we have the stadium or in yet another the team is good enough and youth is the answer.......these statements in themselves show the mixed bag of ideas Wenger walks around with in his head

Every year Wenger will have to sell his ideas to the board and whether it is an American business man or a Russian mobster the sales pitch is going to have to be believable........the fact is now whether the board is going to go along with Wenger, because for me the old paint has been applied more than once , has dried and is now starting to flake.......AW time for a different colour,lets try a bold colour this time, not one of those weal pastels you seem to like!!

[Toronto Gooner]

Every year Wenger will have to sell his ideas to the board and whether it is an American business man or a Russian mobster the sales pitch is going to have to be believable........the fact is now whether the board is going to go along with Wenger, because for me the old paint has been applied more than once , has dried and is now starting to flake.......AW time for a different colour,lets try a bold colour this time, not one of those weal pastels you seem to like!!
This is the crux of the problem. Does Wenger have the authority to spend the transfer money however he sees fit or does he need the board's approval?

[budesonide]

This is the crux of the problem. Does Wenger have the authority to spend the transfer money however he sees fit or does he need the board's approval?


Eh? transfer money is fuc*king transfer money.

But according to AW, spending it will kill the likes of bendtner,denilson,diaby etc.

He says he knows what he is doing and he will do it HIS way!

[Özim]

Eh? transfer money is fuc*king transfer money.

But according to AW, spending it will kill the likes of bendtner,denilson,diaby etc.

He says he knows what he is doing and he will do it HIS way!
Got to love the way he's used the kill the youngsters line and now half of them want out making him look like a lemon.

He'll no doubt repeat the same with the next bunch of wannabe's.

[AKBapologist]

Eh? transfer money is fuc*king transfer money.

But according to AW, spending it will kill the likes of bendtner,denilson,diaby etc.

He says he knows what he is doing and he will do it HIS way!
Arsenal 50mill warchest...
Chelsea 150mill
Liverpool 100mill
United 150mill
City 100mill

Your deluded if you think we have anywhere near as much as our rivals.

[budesonide]

Arsenal 50mill warchest...
Chelsea 150mill
Liverpool 100mill
United 150mill
City 100mill

Your deluded if you think we have anywhere near as much as our rivals.

Once again -- WE DO NOT NEED THOSE KIND OF SUMS TO GET DECENT PLAYERS IN!!!

We NEED a FUC*KING manager with a FUCKING CLUE.

We DON'T NEED a SUGAR DADDY TO FUCKING TAKE SET-PIECES SERIOUSLY OR COCK-UP AGAINST BIRMING-FUCK*ING-HAM in a mickey-mouse cup final.

[AKBapologist]

LoL

On one hand, decent players are cheap, freely available but invisible to all the other clubs and if we had a decent manager we'd be signing them.

On the other hand, we'll never sign top class signings our rivals do always shopping bargain basement because wenger doesn't know there's loads of imaginary money to spend.

And then there's my corner. Watching as were no longer able to attract, afford or hold on to stars, where money has just proven, can buy you success regardless of the quality of your manager. With a sustainable policy that isn't all that sustainable (asking fans to foot the bill for changes in the financial environment) surrounded by fans unable to take a balanced view and seeking a quick fix (new manager).

The fundamental truth is, and I think you all know this, without city's and chelseas billions, we'd have won plenty over the last few years. It's insane to believe that wengers inability to compete in any meaningful way was within his control. Yes, he has his faults, tactical, idealism but honestly? Who doesn't?

[budesonide]

LoL

On one hand, decent players are cheap, freely but invisible to all the other clubs and if we had a decent manager we'd be signing them.

On the other hand, we'll never sign top class signings our rivals do always shopping bargain basement because wenger doesn't know there's loads of imaginary money to spend.

Bullshit.

We don't sign those players because Wenger CHOOSES NOT TO!

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’



And then there's my corner. Watching as were no longer able to attract or hold on to stars, where money has just proven, can buy you success regardless of the quality of your manager. With a sustainable policy that isn't all that sustainable (asking fans to foot the bill for failure) surrounded by fans unable to take a balanced view and seeking a quick fix (new manager).

again, BULLSHIT!

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there.

AW on the other hand thinks signing suchplayers will 'kill' his youngsters!


The fundamental truth is, and I think you all know this, without city's and chelseas billions, we'd have won plenty over the last few years. It's insane to believe that wengers inability to compete in any meaningful way was within his control. Yes, he has his faults, tactical, idealism but honestly? Who doesn't?

No we won't have. We can't fucking beat birmingham in a carling cup final!

What did chelsea win this season with all their billions?


Oh, and what are the budgets for newcastle,fulham,stoke etc all of whom we gave up cheap points to last season.

Who is the manager who has been handing out fat contracts to uproven and untested youngsters. Who is the manager prepared to pay 12mil for 18yr olds but then baulk at giving more than one year contracts to experienced pros who have served the club loyally for years?

[Power n Glory]

Samba came from the French league right? How much did Blackburn sign him for? Was he that good on the French league or was it good English coaching that turned him into the player we're now interested in?

There are players out there that we could have possibly made good use of but they've gone to the lower league clubs. We don't use our scouts as much as we used to because we're heavily invested in this youth set up.

[AKBapologist]

LoL

Going round in circles. Plain to see your one of the gullible folk who believe were a top club financially. I think/hope your in the minority.

[AKBapologist]

Samba came from the French league right? How much did Blackburn sign him for? Was he that good on the French league or was it good English coaching that turned him into the player we're now interested in?

There are players out there that we could have possibly made good use of but they've gone to the lower league clubs. We don't use our scouts as much as we used to because we're heavily invested in this youth set up.

And when we do for players like koscienly we get ridiculed.

[Power n Glory]

Sorry. Samba came from the German league and cost Blackburn just under half a million. You don't need to be rolling in it to make those sort of signings.

[AKBapologist]

PnG, the main reason were interested in him is because he has PL experience, yet strangely your critising him for not only doing exactly what he's being doing for the last few years (and let's not predent samba was or even is world class), but now that he's looking to get players with epl experience it's something to bash him over the head with.

Mental.

[Power n Glory]

And when we do for players like koscienly we get ridiculed.

That kid cost us £8m. Compare that price with Samba's. It doesn't matter anyway. Not sure if Samba would be the same player if he came straight to Arsenal from the German league.

Wenger has signed a host of defensive flops over the years. The problem isn't financial.

[budesonide]

LoL

Going round in circles. Plain to see your one of the gullible folk who believe were a top club financially. I think/hope your in the minority.

I dispair.

I am the one working with facts here. You are the one claiming inside knowledge of Arsenal's bank accounts.

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

Barcelona are in debt to their eyeballs, but they do spend lavishly where necessary to make sure they stay winners and a top team. They are not a top club financially by any means.

[budesonide]

That kid cost us £8m. Compare that price with Samba's. It doesn't matter anyway. Not sure if Samba would be the same player if he came straight to Arsenal from the German league.

Wenger has signed a host of defensive flops over the years. The problem isn't financial.

Compare him with how much Vidic or Skrtel cost their clubs.

[Power n Glory]

PnG, the main reason were interested in him is because he has PL experience, yet strangely your critising him for not only doing exactly what he's being doing for the last few years (and let's not predent samba was or even is world class), but now that he's looking to get players with epl experience it's something to bash him over the head with.

Mental.

The point is....drumroll.....he can't coach defence! What's the matter with you? How comes other coaches can grab a guy from other leagues and turn them into decent defenders? Vidic is another example.

This is why it's not just about finances.

[Toronto Gooner]

I dispair.

I am the one working with facts here. You are the one claiming inside knowledge of Arsenal's bank accounts.

......

Barcelona are in debt to their eyeballs, but they do spend lavishly where necessary to make sure they stay winners and a top team. They are not a top club financially by any means.
Err, Arsenal's accounts are part of the audited figures published every year. Whilst they do not provide specific details of individual bank accounts, they do provide the necessary information regarding finances.

As for Barcelona, there are several major differences between them and Arsenal. First, and probably most critical, is the fact that they are a member-owned organisation and not a publicly (albeit limited) traded company. Another huge fact is that they have (along with Real Madrid) a special deal with the television companies whereby these two clubs receive the lion's share of revenues. All-in-all Barcelona is able to fund its transfer activities through loans and debts because it has such a strong cash flow.

[budesonide]

Err, Arsenal's accounts are part of the audited figures published every year. Whilst they do not provide specific details of individual bank accounts, they do provide the necessary information regarding finances.

As for Barcelona, there are several major differences between them and Arsenal. First, and probably most critical, is the fact that they are a member-owned organisation and not a publicly (albeit limited) traded company. Another huge fact is that they have (along with Real Madrid) a special deal with the television companies whereby these two clubs receive the lion's share of revenues. All-in-all Barcelona is able to fund its transfer activities through loans and debts because it has such a strong cash flow.

And the reason barcalona have a strong cashflow is because they win! Hence they are an attractive comercial BRAND. And if they don't win they make sure they spend (lavishly -- they borrow if they have to) where necessary to make sure they win.

Once again:

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

The main issue is not financial.

[Power n Glory]

The point is, I think every other team seems able to muster up the resources to spend in areas that are essential. Most clubs wouldn't go into the season taking a gamble on the goalkeeper. Or not bother to buy a striker when you're in the title hunt and you're number one striker is out injured for the rest of the season.

[AKBapologist]

That kid cost us £8m. Compare that price with Samba's. It doesn't matter anyway. Not sure if Samba would be the same player if he came straight to Arsenal from the German league.

Wenger has signed a host of defensive flops over the years. The problem isn't financial.
Could make the same argument about toure, Ashley cole, hell wasn't upson from our academy?

[Ironing]

Upson's a turd. Little England stint and he's a great defender all of a sudden. Do me a fackin' favour.

[Toronto Gooner]

Could make the same argument about toure, Ashley cole, hell wasn't upson from our academy?
Upson cannot be classed as an Arsenal academy graduate as he joined from Luton at the age of 18.

[Boss]

As stated numerous times above, our biggest problem isn't financial.

Those who think it is are missing the point.

[KSE Comedy Club]

As stated numerous times above, our biggest problem isn't financial.

Those who think it is are missing the point.

Exactly :gp:

[Power n Glory]

Could make the same argument about toure, Ashley cole, hell wasn't upson from our academy?

Yeah, that's a desperate argument.

[AKBapologist]

Yeah, that's a desperate argument.
Using otherwise delegation fodder as an example for how wenger can't coach defences was a despate argument tbh. For every vidic, there's an Evans tbh. It's not an exact science,
We just suffer more when they turn out to be flops.

[KSE Comedy Club]

But we already know that wenger doesnt drill defences in training and it shows on the pitch.

What exactly is the argument here?

[Özim]

But we already know that wenger doesnt drill defences in training and it shows on the pitch.

What exactly is the argument here?
There can be no arguments, you only need to look at the defensive and goalkeeping issues in the last 6 years to confirm that.

He doesn't have a clue about defending and unless he finds someone who can organise on the pitch and gets a decent defensive coach in we're always going to be a mess at the back.

[KSE Comedy Club]

There can be no arguments, you only need to look at the defensive and goalkeeping issues in the last 6 years to confirm that.

He doesn't have a clue about defending and unless he finds someone who can organise on the pitch and gets a decent defensive coach in we're always going to be a mess at the back.

Yes I know.

:shrug:

[Power n Glory]

This is where debates get silly and you just have to stop.

In order to make a valid case about us needing financial backing, you have to gloss over Wenger's flaws as a coach.

[AKBapologist]

This is where debates get silly and you just have to stop.

In order to make a valid case about us needing financial backing, you have to gloss over Wenger's flaws as a coach.
I never glossed over wengers flaws as a coach. I repeatedly acknologed his flaws but when you have teams with poorer coaches winning things just because they have money, doesn't take long to twig.

Either way I'm sure I'll be proved right when he's gone, and we've appointed a wenger clone or worse because the folks up to lack ambition.

[Power n Glory]

You mean teams like Birmingham?

[selassie]

But we already know that wenger doesnt drill defences in training and it shows on the pitch.

What exactly is the argument here?

Yep and this is pricisely why you can't take Wenger seriously when he comes out with statements such as "The team needs taller players" or "Fixing our Set Piece issues is easy".

Whilst purchasing a certain type of Defender who currently plys there trade in PL could go someway to solving some of the defensive issues it won't solve them period.

Wenger's problem is he won't be told when others identify issues in the team. It's his way or no way at all, ideology prevails over logic.

Defence won't solve itself overnight.

[KSE Comedy Club]

I never glossed over wengers flaws as a coach. I repeatedly acknologed his flaws but when you have teams with poorer coaches winning things just because they have money, doesn't take long to twig.

Either way I'm sure I'll be proved right when he's gone, and we've appointed a wenger clone or worse because the folks up to lack ambition.

What money do Birmingham have?

[AKBapologist]

What money do Birmingham have?

Another desperate argument to derail the topic? Didn't west ham also knock united out if the cc 4-1 or something? Didn't united have issues with zizic away whilst we thrashed them at st Andrews?

If you look at accumulative performances, money spent correlates really strongly with trophies and league positions. SAF is probably earnt the money through success and may be the greatest manager of our generation hence holding his own againt Chelsea and city (for now) But elsewhere, you'll find that only we are really bucking the trend.

We need a bigger squad, more quality strikers as well as defenders. No surprise that as soon as RVP limped off, all notion of us having a goal threat dissapeared in that match.

[AKBapologist]

Relevant

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_6986447,00.html

Birmingham :bow:

[Power n Glory]

See what I mean? It gets silly.

[KSE Comedy Club]

Another desperate argument to derail the topic? Didn't west ham also knock united out if the cc 4-1 or something? Didn't united have issues with zizic away whilst we thrashed them at st Andrews?

If you look at accumulative performances, money spent correlates really strongly with trophies and league positions. SAF is probably earnt the money through success and may be the greatest manager of our generation hence holding his own againt Chelsea and city (for now) But elsewhere, you'll find that only we are really bucking the trend.

We need a bigger squad, more quality strikers as well as defenders. No surprise that as soon as RVP limped off, all notion of us having a goal threat dissapeared in that match.

Desperate attempt to derail the thread?

What the hell are you talking about!?

Your the one that said teams with money are the ones that are winning things, Birningham fall well below us money wise and still managed to win a trophy.

I was mearly asking a question entirly relevant to your post.

Anyway, what has this thread got to do with how much money a team has? I think you are getting confused with your own 'sugar daddy' thread.

This thread is about Wenger needing to be guided into spending money, not how much they have.

[Fist of Lehmann]

This is courtesy AKBapologist in the rumour thread. I thought it might get lost amidst all the shite in that thread.

Agents involved in potential deals with Arsenal and even some at the club itself, report that he is so scrupulous in weighing up his options that he might be described as dithering while his empire burns.

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’ No one at the club seems to have sufficient authority to do that now.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1P16lax8I)

So, as some of us have been saying all along, it has been a self-imposed financial restriction by AW. And, no-one ever said we have the the kind of money city or chelsea has to splash around.

Am I worng then to think that with a more flexible approach (or with DD around) we might have at least won a fuc*king carling cup?

So, when the board have always said there was money to spend if AW needed it, they were not bullshitting as some would hav us believe?

And that, our board is so spineless and visionless they haven't the cajones to tell AW to wake the fuc*k up?

As i said in a previous thread -- to counter a letters's assertion -- unless we slip into abject midtable mediocrity, this board don't have the balls or vision to get AW to shape up.

Just a semantic point, buddha'sonside.
But strictly speaking if you are cautious to the point of dithering then that's not self-imposed, that's a character flaw. In all probability Dein and Wenger worked well together because one's caution balanced the other's rashness. Some people just function better as a team, look at Clough's decline after splitting with Taylor.

Secondy, the last line bolded isn't part of Edelman's quote. That No one at the club seems to have sufficient authority to do that now is just the opinion of the Fail and therefore should be disregarded. The cunts just stuck it there to make it look like part of the quote.

Obviously the board, being his employers, have the nominal authority, but managers in England tradionally have much more control and autonomy than their continental counterparts, and generally are much more involved in other parts of he club than just picking the team. But whether they are handing down financial policy from on high, are complicit, or just taking a back seat and trusting the manager, who can say?

Largely I suspect that I don't give a fuck.

[AKBapologist]

And like I said serveral posts ago, he needs more *help* because unlike all the other clubs who spend freely
these days, we can't afford 30-50mill flops. Then some argued about how the money was there and if only wenger spent it, then other people pitching in with there very own "I hate wenger because" and now where here.

[Fist of Lehmann]

Now we're here, and I probably agree. At the very least a little help couldn't hurt.

But who is there that Wenger respects and would actually listen to, without feeling his position is being threatened?

Damned if I know.

[Power n Glory]

Wenger chose Gazidis for the role. He sactioned his appointment after a meeting.

Most managers don't get that sort of privilege.

[budesonide]

bloody hell -- i give up!

people are still chiming in with the 'poor arsene' schtick?

mourihno,guardiola,ferguson etc SPEND THE FUC*KING THE MONEY they have OR DEMAND THE MONEY to make sure they deliver! And if they fail they FACE THE MUSIC.

They don't WILLINGLY REFUSE TO SPEND AND SAY "I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING; JUDGE ME IN MAY" and then come may, try to redefine success!

If wenger, as a football manager cannot SPEND money he has been told he can if he wants to, then that is NOT A CHARACTER FLAW; it is gross incompetence and at best serious negligence of duty!

He is paid 6 fuc*king million a year!

Once again:

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

[Fist of Lehmann]

Don't forget to breathe my friend.

[AKBapologist]

Quite an impressive melt down there budesonide. :haha:

[Coney]

bloody hell -- i give up!

people are still chiming in with the 'poor arsene' schtick?

mourihno,guardiola,ferguson etc SPEND THE FUC*KING THE MONEY they have OR DEMAND THE MONEY to make sure they deliver! And if they fail they FACE THE MUSIC.

They don't WILLINGLY REFUSE TO SPEND AND SAY "I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING; JUDGE ME IN MAY" and then come may, try to redefine success!

If wenger, as a football manager cannot SPEND money he has been told he can if he wants to, then that is NOT A CHARACTER FLAW; it is gross incompetence and at best serious negligence of duty!

He is paid 6 fuc*king million a year!

Once again:

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

So you are not certain that Wenger is right then?

[budesonide]

Quite an impressive melt down there budesonide. :haha:

:censored:

[GP]

:censored:

You've gone mental.

[budesonide]

You've gone mental.

that was tongue-in-cheek my dear friend :banghead: :censored:


:sarcasm:


:tiphat:

[Darth Vela]

Fwiw, the reason we embarked on this youth based course was down to the lack of money we knew we'd have whilst paying off the debt, so this entire situation is ultimately down to the spending of those around us and our lack of financial muscle, even if it isn't the only reason.

Way I look at it, either this sustainable way of doing things is possible and it's Wengers inability to coach that's at fault, I'm talking his inability to get the right team mentality in here, not purely on his inability to coach purely defence, which given we went through a period of being rather solid at the back before Szczesny got injured and the usual collapse started is usually overstated, this is where I reckon the fault lays. Or the other option is that this way is simply not possible and we must outlay larger sums and an ever-increasing wage budget on players whilst hoping that we hit more often than flop in order to keep an even financial keel, I really don't buy this as we have the required talent at the club imo, lacking a little experience which is what spending the big cash would get us. It's what the money's spent on rather than how much is spent in the long run.

Also, making statments like 'Wenger said to judge him in May and now he's redefining success' make you look at the very least a little boneheaded given Wenger has said many times that we've failed and that it's entirely his fault, he's taken the judgement on the chin and is trying to rectify things, not the way statements like that make it appear.

[budesonide]

Also, making statments like 'Wenger said to judge him in May and now he's redefining success' make you look at the very least a little boneheaded given Wenger has said many times that we've failed and that it's entirely his fault, he's taken the judgement on the chin and is trying to rectify things, not the way statements like that make it appear.

How are they meant to appear? When season upon season we've gone into start seasons with the same flaws unrectified and the same collapses occurring?

At any other top club wenger will be out of job before he would have had the chance to say "many times that we've failed and that it's entirely his fault, he's taken the judgement on the chin and is trying to rectify things".

I am not the bonehead here --- making excuses for repeated failure stemming from the same mistakes is what is boneheaded.

[Darth Vela]

Wenger said he was wrong, admitted he made mistakes and that the lack of trophies was his fault, that directly contradicts the idea of a man redefining success, it makes him appear to be oblivious to any failure on our part whereas he's more acutely aware than most about it imo.

Apologies for using a rather pejorative term but not seeing that conflict is at the very least short-sighted, maybe not boneheaded.

The rest of the post is pretty irrelevant given what other clubs do when they're in different situations doesn't really make a blind bit of difference to us.

[Ironing]

lol he's made it his sig

[GP]

lol he's made it his sig

He's definitely gone mental

[budesonide]

Wenger said he was wrong, admitted he made mistakes and that the lack of trophies was his fault, that directly contradicts the idea of a man redefining success, it makes him appear to be oblivious to any failure on our part whereas he's more acutely aware than most about it imo.

Apologies for using a rather pejorative term but not seeing that conflict is at the very least short-sighted, maybe not boneheaded.

The rest of the post is pretty irrelevant given what other clubs do when they're in different situations doesn't really make a blind bit of difference to us.




1). Where has wenger said such things?

2). What did he say the previous seasons when the same flaws were being highlighted back then?

3). If he admitted to those mistakes seasons ago as you claim he has been doing, what did he do about it? Didn't he brush off any criticisms and concerns hence the "judge me in may" comment he made prior to the start of last season?

4) The rest of my post is plenty relevant -- because according to you, we have a manager who it takes five seasons to admit "he was wrong" and "admitted he made mistakes and that the lack of trophies was his fault". Other clubs have moved on plenty within that time --- and that makes a blind bit of difference to us" !

[Darth Vela]

1. It's out there, it was over the papers and I've seen it in a few interviews, you know how to use Google.

2. He talked about how the team wasn't ready and moaned about injuries in previous seasons, he thought there were enough reasons as to why the squad wasn't ready physically to justify a few of the guys on the fringe getting the benefit of the doubt so he tweaked things around in the sumer and revamped the defence as it was obvious that it wasn't working in that incarnation. As it happened, he was wrong and those players who weren't quite there let him down.

3. That's not at all what I'm saying, he was wrong on the level of players and whether they would serve to deliver trophies although given we were looking at making changes with confirmed bids for Reina and Jagielka I would suspect he wasn't quite as sure about the quality as he represented to us and probably even some of the players. That was this season, the previous seasons he was spouting off about how the team was nearly there and it would only be a matter of time, I agree that this statement turned out to be inaccurate but to say that he made it a year later when he patently didn't is either uninformed or...erm...short-sighted.

4. Should we keep faith in Wenger for longer because Martinez has been at Wigan for longer than he should be? That's about as logical as saying that Real Madrid win things and frequently change manager therefore we must do that in order to win. Incidentally, Wenger admitted he was wrong once it was shown that he was wrong, if you can judge that our mentality would definitely not be ready 5 years in advance without building the team you could afford to build (yeah, we were definitely unable to compete with Chelsea/Man U/Real back then) then whichever business you're in, you should switch as you could make a mint elsewhere.

[budesonide]

1. It's out there, it was over the papers and I've seen it in a few interviews, you know how to use Google.

2. He talked about how the team wasn't ready and moaned about injuries in previous seasons, he thought there were enough reasons as to why the squad wasn't ready physically to justify a few of the guys on the fringe getting the benefit of the doubt so he tweaked things around in the sumer and revamped the defence as it was obvious that it wasn't working in that incarnation. As it happened, he was wrong and those players who weren't quite there let him down.

3. That's not at all what I'm saying, he was wrong on the level of players and whether they would serve to deliver trophies although given we were looking at making changes with confirmed bids for Reina and Jagielka I would suspect he wasn't quite as sure about the quality as he represented to us and probably even some of the players. That was this season, the previous seasons he was spouting off about how the team was nearly there and it would only be a matter of time, I agree that this statement turned out to be inaccurate but to say that he made it a year later when he patently didn't is either uninformed or...erm...short-sighted.

4. Should we keep faith in Wenger for longer because Martinez has been at Wigan for longer than he should be? That's about as logical as saying that Real Madrid win things and frequently change manager therefore we must do that in order to win. Incidentally, Wenger admitted he was wrong once it was shown that he was wrong, if you can judge that our mentality would definitely not be ready 5 years in advance without building the team you could afford to build (yeah, we were definitely unable to compete with Chelsea/Man U/Real back then) then whichever business you're in, you should switch as you could make a mint elsewhere.


I asked those questions in specific order to elicit the exact post you've made.

You keep making excuses for wenger. But, hey, it is entirely your perogative.

[Darth Vela]

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

Good debating there.

If I say I deliberately wrote those words in that order was to make it look like you couldn't find a response and so had to come up with some smartarse remark, would you believe me?

[budesonide]

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

Good debating there.

You want me to debate you on the fact that you are willing to make excuses for a manager earning 6million a year by comparison to wigan's manager? Sorry to disappoint.

[budesonide]

Riiiiiiiiiiight.

if I say I deliberately wrote those words in that order was to make it look like you couldn't find a response and so had to come up with some smartarse remark, would you believe me?

No I wouldn't. But if you cannot see that I am arguing against making excuses for wenger, whilst you kept making excuses and inventing reasons throughout that post, then I sorry -- I can only admit that you are entitled to yur opinion.

[Darth Vela]

No, my point was that it is incredibly stupid to use comparisons like that.

There's plenty to debate in there otherwise, the changes he's made, how far he's gone and where things could be changed, whether his way was necessary, whether we could have done it another way, or you could just claim that you knew what people were going to say all along and save all that pesky logic and facts thing to others.

I'll stop there as it's late and we're about to descend into a slanging match.

[Darth Vela]

No I wouldn't. But if you cannot see that I am arguing against making excuses for wenger, whilst you kept making excuses and inventing reasons throughout that post, then I sorry -- I can only admit that you are entitled to yur opinion.

Well, if you can only see reasoned debates as either prosecuting or excusing then yeah we ain't going anywhere.

[budesonide]

Well, if you can only see reasoned debates as either prosecuting or excusing then yeah we ain't going anywhere.

Mate, all I have done in this thread is show that contrary to popular belief, AW has always had money to spend if he wanted to (and no, not city or chelsea kind of money) which he has chosen not to. The facts are clear -- that is not persecution!

Wenger has persistently claimed 'he knows what he is doing' and he was going to "do it his way". Those are pretty bold statements.

It turns out he doesn't know what he is doing -- no excuses. Let's not invent more excuses than what have already piled up over the last 5 seasons.

And the reason why, people use the the "judge me in may" statement he made at the start of last season is because of the summary dismissiveness he showed to any concerns or criticisms of his squad from then until the predictably spectacular capitulation of the team towards the end of the season.

Also, until the proper annual end-of-season collapse he was still dismissive of any criticism of his squad based on the fact that we were second in the league --- using that as definition of success when it became clear we don't have it in us to catch the league leaders. It turned out we couldn't even hold on to that second spot!

This dismissiveness and display of arrogance rightly leaves no room for sympathy in some quarters.

If you want to call that persecution --- be my guest.

It is akin to the guy who shoplifts to feed his hungry family who when busted pleads that he was only doing whatever was necessary; but it turns out he's consistently passed up opportunities to make an honest living for himself and his family.

[fakeyank]

Mate, all I have done in this thread is show that contrary to popular belief, AW has always had money to spend if he wanted to (and no, not city or chelsea kind of money) which he has chosen not to. The facts are clear -- that is not persecution!

Wenger has persistently claimed 'he knows what he is doing' and he was going to "do it his way". Those are pretty bold statements.

It turns out he doesn't know what he is doing -- no excuses. Let's not invent more excuses than what have already piled up over the last 5 seasons.

And the reason why, people use the the "judge me in may" statement he made at the start of last season is because of the summary dismissiveness he showed to any concerns or criticisms of his squad from then until the predictably spectacular capitulation of the team towards the end of the season.

Also, until the proper annual end-of-season collapse he was still dismissive of any criticism of his squad based on the fact that we were second in the league --- using that as definition of success when it became clear we don't have it in us to catch the league leaders. It turned out we couldn't even hold on to that second spot!

This dismissiveness and display of arrogance rightly leaves no room for sympathy in some quarters.

If you want to call that persecution --- be my guest.

It is akin to the guy who shoplifts to feed his hungry family who when busted pleads that he was only doing whatever was necessary; but it turns out he's consistently passed up opportunities to make an honest living for himself and his family.

Top post.

Let me also add that it is not only in terms of investment where we have failed. I think one of our major drawbacks have been the super laid back attitude of the players. AW could not even motivate the tossers for the CC final where we got dominated by a relegated team! Our squad is talented but it needs a few solid man managers starting with AW himself. I feel AW benefited a lot from the players that were already in the side or bought by other managers i.e. Adams, Keown, Bergkamp etc. Of course Vieira was a top buy but how many leaders are there in this current team or from the teams of the last 4 years. Unfortunately the closest name that comes to my mind is William Gallas- our capi..

[Japan Shaking All Over]

The point is....drumroll.....he can't coach defence! What's the matter with you? How comes other coaches can grab a guy from other leagues and turn them into decent defenders? Vidic is another example.

This is why it's not just about finances.


The point is....drumroll.....he can't coach defence!

well lets get someone decent in that can! and that does not necessarily mean get rid of Wenger but get better defensive coach to share the load because I am sure that Wenger oversees things and there are coaches that should be specialising in things and if there isn't you can bet that Stan, coming from his American sports background will be thinking why the hell not.

Steve Bould is praised for his work and has his name mentioned more often than not and he was almost the closet that Arsenal have had to a nutter at the back! (I say closet because I swear the likes of Keown or even earlier Willie Young were fed raw meat!!!)

[Olivier's xmas twist]

The fundamental truth is, and I think you all know this, without city's and chelseas billions, we'd have won plenty over the last few years.


The fact we have not finshed in the top 2 or ever looked like winning a trophy tells me we would never had regardless. The attitude of the Manager/players would not have let us win a thing.

All Chelsea and the mancs spending has done, is make us finish a place lower then we would have anyway.

[selassie]

The fact we have not finshed in the top 2 or ever looked like winning a trophy tells me we would never had regardless. The attitude of the Manager/players would not have let us win a thing.

All Chelsea and the mancs spending has done, is make us finish a place lower then we would have anyway.

Yup, add the fact this team has a comical way of completey falling apart under the slightest bit of pressure.

I think the Carling Cup Final told us all we need to know about this team, we weren't even unlucky to lose, we deserved to lose.

[Marc Overmars]

The fundamental truth is, and I think you all know this, without city's and chelseas billions, we'd have won plenty over the last few years.

Like...

[Power n Glory]

Keown was our defensive coach for a period but was moved on for some reason. We just had Campbell in our team and I'm not sure why he wasn't offered a player/coach role.

You've got another thread on here about Adams and said he doesn't want to return to Arsenal as a No.2.



“I would love to go back to Arsenal one day, but not as No 2 or a defensive coach.
“Arsene Wenger would not let me do enough. He does all the coaching, so I don’t think I could work under him. It’s a tougher job at Gabala than at Arsenal.” Adams told the Daily Express. (http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/251878/Tony-Adams-is-no-go)


http://news.arseblog.com/index.php/2011/06/adams-admits-aspiration-to-manage-arsenal/

I get the impression likes to do things his way. What are you going to tell a man like that? This is why I'm not buying into this 'poor old Wenger' rubbish.

[AKBapologist]

Ivan Gladis from the AST interview. "...Removing the manager from the financial aspects to me doesn't make a lot of sense because you have to discuss the worth of a player, and as I've said, everything is about efficiency when you have a limited spend, so you need to prioritise where your going to spend your money and how much an individual player is worth, so it's very difficult for me to imagine having a manager that says 'now that's the player I want now go get him' and you make up what you think the price is - there has to be a dialogue with the manger."


Chelsea and City, has made it harder to attract players of a higher quality for the rates and prices our resources would have otherwise allowed. With better transfers, and a weaker breath of competition, it's a no brainer we would have won more titles.



Edit: the more and more you hear the clear it becomes just how constrained transfers have been so far, feels like we've been running to the margins with what our resources would allow. Whelp.

[selassie]

Ivan Gladis from the AST interview. "...Removing the manager from the financial aspects to me doesn't make a lot of sense because you have to discuss the worth of a player, and as I've said, everything is about efficiency when you have a limited spend, so you need to prioritise where your going to spend your money and how much an individual player is worth, so it's very difficult for me to imagine having a manager that says 'now that's the player I want now go get him' and you make up what you think the price is - there has to be a dialogue with the manger."


Chelsea and City, has made it harder to attract players of a higher quality for the rates and prices our resources would have otherwise allowed. With better transfers, and a weaker breath of competition, it's a no brainer we would have won more titles.



Edit: the more and more you hear the clear it becomes just how constrained transfers have been so far, feels like we've been running to the margins with what our resources would allow. Whelp.

AKB, stop making it out to be so simplistic. It's not like the competition is completely unfair and is solely related to finances.

There is two sides to the argument here, sure with a stronger financial backing we may well have fared a little better over the past 5 years, but equally, if you handicap yourself tactically it really doesn't help either.

I really don't understand the context of this limited spend either? Limited in comparison to what? Limited in comparison to the revenue we bring in? Limited in comparison to some of our major rivals? Half of the problem we have is that the Board & Arsene come out with these cryptic sound bites about finances that don't really mean anything and can be interpreted anyway you want them to be.

[Power n Glory]

Nobody is saying we have unlimited funds either.

Confirms what I've been saying from the start and on other threads. People like to blame the board when talking about our transfer policy and make out as if Wenger has no authority. This quote shows that he is involved and it goes as far as making an estimate on a players value. Go back to the original thread post about Dein and Wenger and you might start to see the bigger picture.

[Özim]

We could have had 300 million available and we'd still be no better off because the manager has pretty much said repeatedly he doesn't believe spending is the answer, he feels it'll stop the youngster progressing and isn't fair on them. Moreover we have some serious coaching and discipline issues which never get dealt with.

He decided to go down the youth route and refuses to accept it hasn't really worked, it's only the kids who are choosing to leave that are putting a spanner in the works.

The above reasons are why I don't think AW would have lasted 5 minutes at Real, he won't spend big money on world stars, it's just not his way and that wouldn't go down well at Real especially if the results didn't go there way.

We don't need huge amounts of money to really challenge and achieve success, we need the money to be spent appropriately and some good coaching, the problem as we've heard from many people and seen with our own eyes is that our manager refuses to make the changes.

[Coney]

Wenger has pretty well indicated that there is to be a change in this approach and Gazedis has just done the same. Due to the media being likely (certain, in fact) to take anything they say and flog it to death (like GW?) they can't be specific but both of them have indicated as clearly as I think they can be that they will be slinging out some of the crap and buying in new stock. I thought this was what people wanted him to do.

[LDG]

Wenger has pretty well indicated that there is to be a change in this approach and Gazedis has just done the same. Due to the media being likely (certain, in fact) to take anything they say and flog it to death (like GW?) they can't be specific but both of them have indicated as clearly as I think they can be that they will be slinging out some of the crap and buying in new stock. I thought this was what people wanted him to do.

No. Most people want a new manager.

I'm somewhere in the middle. If he does what he should be doing, then I'll back him again. If he doesn't and we hit August with no change, I'll be clammouring for a sacking.

[Coney]

No. Most people want a new manager.

I'm somewhere in the middle. If he does what he should be doing, then I'll back him again. If he doesn't and we hit August with no change, I'll be clammouring for a sacking.

Well, when Arsene returns from his mental illness causing him not to buy experienced players, it will be like having a new manager.

[selassie]

Wenger has pretty well indicated that there is to be a change in this approach and Gazedis has just done the same. Due to the media being likely (certain, in fact) to take anything they say and flog it to death (like GW?) they can't be specific but both of them have indicated as clearly as I think they can be that they will be slinging out some of the crap and buying in new stock. I thought this was what people wanted him to do.

Old habits die hard.

Wenger & Gazidis always flex their muscles at Season ticket renewal time, given the 6% rise they are likely to do it more so than ever his summer.

I dunno...the cynic in me says that whilst Wenger has every intention of modifying his approach, when push comes to shove he'll go searching around Ligue One looking for those "Unpolished Gems".

Wenger doesn't take part in Todays market because he doesn't believe in it and the prices that go along with it. He will revert to type...im quite sure of that.

[LDG]

Old habits die hard.

Wenger & Gazidis always flex their muscles at Season ticket renewal time, given the 6% rise they are likely to do it more so than ever his summer.

I dunno...the cynic in me says that whilst Wenger has every intention of modifying his approach, when push comes to shove he'll go searching around Ligue One looking for those "Unpolished Gems".

Wenger doesn't take part in Todays market because he doesn't believe in it and the prices that go along with it. He will revert to type...im quite sure of that.

Well, that's where we got Adebayor, Sagna, Petit, Vieira etc etc. So it can work.

And I still think Koscielny will be a good buy. Squilacci was a risk, a bit like Silvestre....seeking only to plug a gap on the cheap...this is my only worry really. If he makes that kind of signing, i.e. "knock down price on the cheap but cos he's old makes him experienced" we're fucked.

But if rumour is true, we'll do a few of those rough diamonds, a few yongsters, and most importantly, a few experienced higher priced quality signings.

[selassie]

Well, that's where we got Adebayor, Sagna, Petit, Vieira etc etc. So it can work.

And I still think Koscielny will be a good buy. Squilacci was a risk, a bit like Silvestre....seeking only to plug a gap on the cheap...this is my only worry really. If he makes that kind of signing, i.e. "knock down price on the cheap but cos he's old makes him experienced" we're fucked.

But if rumour is true, we'll do a few of those rough diamonds, a few yongsters, and most importantly, a few experienced higher priced quality signings.

It can work when the balance of the team/squad is right, but more often than not it will not work when you are mixing developing players with players who have no experience of the league/CL.

I've nothing against Arsene buying from Ligue One or even youngsters, but he needs to do it in moderation and find the right balance in the team/squad.

Koscielny isn't a bad player..but he's a classic Wenger gamble, someone who was thrown in at the deep end. He's a developing player and one that was new to the League, he should have been eased into the team.

IMHO Last summer, Arsene should have bought Koscielny & a finished product type signing for Centre Back.

But anyway....I'll wait and see with Arsene in regards to his moves in the Market this summer but I'm not expecting anything significant.

[Fist of Lehmann]

The fact we have not finshed in the top 2 or ever looked like winning a trophy tells me we would never had regardless. The attitude of the Manager/players would not have let us win a thing.

All Chelsea and the mancs spending has done, is make us finish a place lower then we would have anyway.

Just one question though.
How is it that the multi-million spending of 2 separate clubs only push us down 1 place?

Logically if 2 clubs consistently spend more than us that should elevate them both above us?

[Toronto Gooner]

Just one question though.
How is it that the multi-million spending of 2 separate clubs only push us down 1 place?

Logically if 2 clubs consistently spend more than us that should elevate them both above us?
One of those clubs was already above Arsenal.

[AKBapologist]

Chelsea and City weren't above us until they started spending silly amounts of money.

[Toronto Gooner]

Okay.

[LDG]

Chelsea and City weren't above us until they started spending silly amounts of money.

Niether should they have been this season, even with the current squad.

[budesonide]

Niether should they have been this season, even with the current squad.

Me dear old friend, do ye not know that City and Chelsea's millions motivated fulham, aston villa etc. to nick points off us when we were sitting comfortably in 2nd place above the money bags?

:)

[AKBapologist]

Niether should they have been this season, even with the current squad.

To me it seemed like we were an RVP injury away from dropping out of the top 4 all together. I think we all over estimated the strength of our squad players tbh, and neither of those two stood still during winter.

[LDG]

Me dear old friend, do ye not know that City and Chelsea's millions motivated fulham, aston villa etc. to nick points off us when we were sitting comfortably in 2nd place above the money bags?

:)

Stupid me :doh:

[AKBapologist]

Stupid me :doh:

There form improved after making signings - improved the buzz around the stadium, improved competition

Ours (and United's for that matter, who were practically unbeaten in the first half of the season) form got worse when we didn't make any signings. Not buying a center back was a costly gamble, one our competitors wouldn't have thought about taking tbh.

[LDG]

There form improved after making signings - improved the buzz around the stadium, improved competition

Ours (and United's for that matter, who were practically unbeaten in the first half of the season) form got worse when we didn't make any signings. Not buying a center back was a costly gamble, one our competitors wouldn't have thought about taking tbh.

No. We bottled it. Full stop. In actual fact the defenders we had before January were available soon afterwards. And it didn't coinside with our poor form.

We sodded up the cup final (a game we should have comfortably won) and then bottled it.

Maybe we could have made a signing or two to push us on. But that was nothing to do with having a fucking sugar daddy FFS. That was to do with Wenger taking a gamble, and foolishly believing in his team.

There were many reasons why this team didn't win anything. The inability to spend 150million in January was not one of them. You're clouding your argument.

does everyone believe we should have strengthened in Jan?? Yes. Did we need a sugar daddy to do that?? No.

[Fist of Lehmann]

One of those clubs was already above Arsenal.

Ok. But then why mention their spending?

And was their spending not contributory to their already above us position anyway?

And even while 2nd were we not still challenging for first?

[Toronto Gooner]

I did not mention their spending.

However, I think that the premise is that Arsenal would have done better if they had spent more money (especially if it had been Chelsea or Man City levels).

[Fist of Lehmann]

I did not mention their spending.

However, I think that the premise is that Arsenal would have done better if they had spent more money (especially if it had been Chelsea or Man City levels).

:lol: I know you didn't! I'm talking about Charlie's post.

And I think the premise of Charlie's post was that we still wouldn't have won anything irrespective of Chelsea (and Man Utds) money.

[Toronto Gooner]

:lol: I know you didn't! I'm talking about Charlie's post.

And I think the premise of Charlie's post was that we still wouldn't have won anything irrespective of Chelsea (and Man Utds) money.
Okay, not enough coffee......

[fakeyank]

No. We bottled it. Full stop. In actual fact the defenders we had before January were available soon afterwards. And it didn't coinside with our poor form.

We sodded up the cup final (a game we should have comfortably won) and then bottled it.

Maybe we could have made a signing or two to push us on. But that was nothing to do with having a fucking sugar daddy FFS. That was to do with Wenger taking a gamble, and foolishly believing in his team.

There were many reasons why this team didn't win anything. The inability to spend 150million in January was not one of them. You're clouding your argument.

does everyone believe we should have strengthened in Jan?? Yes. Did we need a sugar daddy to do that?? No.

:gp:

[AKBapologist]

It's a risk Wenger or another manager wouldn't have had to take with unlimited funds. Hell, Koscienly, Squid and our entire back line falls into that bracket. And with the point I made eariler is there was a time when we signed decent players, for the price we're now picking up dross. This transfer/wage inflation is another result of City and Chelsea spunking millions.

Managers have there strengths and weaknesses tbh. I along with everyone else admit failings in coaching defence and even attack - but it's clear that these weaknesses are only in comparison to rivals who also have structural advantages. And unless you believe Mancini or Avarm Grant are better managers than AW, it's clear that to a great extent lack of money/inability of buying a squad of ready made super stars > all of our other failings.

[LDG]

It's a risk Wenger or another manager wouldn't have had to take with unlimited funds. Hell, Koscienly, Squid and our entire back line falls into that bracket. And with the point I made eariler is there was a time when we signed decent players, for the price we're now picking up dross. This transfer/wage inflation is another result of City and Chelsea spunking millions.

Managers have there strengths and weaknesses tbh. I along with everyone else admit failings in coaching defence and even attack - but it's clear that these weaknesses are only in comparison to rivals who also have structural advantages. And unless you believe Mancini or Avarm Grant are better managers than AW, it's clear that to a great extent Money > all of our other failings.

They bloody inflated it!!

That we chose not to follow suit is commendable.

WE HAD MONEY TO BUY IN JANUARY. WE DID NOT NEED A SUGAR DADDY TO GIVE IT TO US.

WE WERE NEARLY TOP OF THE LEAGUE IN JANUARY. WE WERE IN A FINAL. WE WERE IN THE FA CUP. WE WERE IN THE ECL.

The reason Wenger chose not to buy, we because he felt he could get buy without it. Foolish. But not because his hands were tied.

[budesonide]

It's a risk Wenger or another manager wouldn't have had to take with unlimited funds. Hell, Koscienly, Squid and our entire back line falls into that bracket. And with the point I made eariler is there was a time when we signed decent players, for the price we're now picking up dross. This transfer/wage inflation is another result of City and Chelsea spunking millions.

Managers have there strengths and weaknesses tbh. I along with everyone else admit failings in coaching defence and even attack - but it's clear that these weaknesses are only in comparison to rivals who also have structural advantages. And unless you believe Mancini or Avarm Grant are better managers than AW, it's clear that to a great extent lack of money/inability of buying a squad of ready made super stars > all of our other failings.

Once again, it is wenger that doesn't want to spend. If we want a manager that will spend and demand the money to deliver, then sack wenger. WE DON'T NEED A SUGAR DADDY to replace wenger with a manager with balls to take ambitious risks in the transfer market.

Wenger doesn't want to spend. Simple. We have a manager who is not comfortable spending money AND is happy going into seasons with inadequate squads saying "I know what I am doing"!

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

[AKBapologist]

They bloody inflated it!!

That we chose not to follow suit is commendable.

WE HAD MONEY TO BUY IN JANUARY. WE DID NOT NEED A SUGAR DADDY TO GIVE IT TO US.

WE WERE NEARLY TOP OF THE LEAGUE IN JANUARY. WE WERE IN A FINAL. WE WERE IN THE FA CUP. WE WERE IN THE ECL.

The reason Wenger chose not to buy, we because he felt he could get buy without it. Foolish. But not because his hands were tied.
My original argument is that at a rich club, managers could just say "I want that player" - listening to the AST interview, it's clear that's not the case at Arsenal. No idea on the specifics of Samba (and even at the time I thought it was a dumb move not getting a backup) but tbh, the problems at the back where the seeds were sown last summer with squilachi's purchase. A general degradation of the quality of our signings has been significant factor in us under performing each year.

[AKBapologist]

Once again, it is wenger that doesn't want to spend. If we want a manager that will spend and demand the money to deliver, then sack wenger. WE DON'T NEED A SUGAR DADDY to replace wenger with a manager with balls to take ambitious risks in the transfer market.

Wenger doesn't want to spend. Simple. We have a manager who is not comfortable spending money AND is happy going into seasons with inadequate squads saying "I know what I am doing"!

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

Did you even watch the AST interview?

More than ever it was stressed just how financially constricted we were. Any other manager coming here would have to operate in the same way as far as transfers are concerned. Structural problem. Wenger could dip into a one time repositry to buy players and will do so this summer, but NO MANAGER OF ARSENAL AT THIS CURRENT POINT IN TIME CAN BUY PLAYERS WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF VALUE. A handicap our rivals do not have!


Ivan Gladis from the AST interview. "...Removing the manager from the financial aspects to me doesn't make a lot of sense because you have to discuss the worth of a player, and as I've said, everything is about efficiency when you have a limited spend, so you need to prioritise where your going to spend your money and how much an individual player is worth, so it's very difficult for me to imagine having a manager that says 'now that's the player I want now go get him' and you make up what you think the price is - there has to be a dialogue with the manger."

[Kano]

Once again, it is wenger that doesn't want to spend. If we want a manager that will spend and demand the money to deliver, then sack wenger. WE DON'T NEED A SUGAR DADDY to replace wenger with a manager with balls to take ambitious risks in the transfer market.

Wenger doesn't want to spend. Simple. We have a manager who is not comfortable spending money AND is happy going into seasons with inadequate squads saying "I know what I am doing"!

The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

i dont get what you're trying to say

[Boss]

ManU have averaged 2M spend over the last few seasons (since Glazer) and if not for the interest payments would have generally made a profit so money has less of an impact than thought.

Ferguson is so far ahead that he makes Wenger look like an amateur just starting out in the managerial game.

[AKBapologist]

ManU have averaged 2M spend over the last few seasons (since Glazer) and if not for the interest payments would have generally made a profit so money has less of an impact than thought.

Ferguson is so far ahead that he makes Wenger look like an amateur just starting out in the managerial game.
I think our net spend has been something like -25mill in the same period. But anyway, beyond SAF, who else comes close? Your making it sound like every other manager out there is doing better than AW in every aspect. A bit annoying tbh.

[budesonide]

Did you even watch the AST interview?

More than ever it was stressed just how financially constricted we were. Any other manager coming here would have to operate in the same way as far as transfers are concerned. Structural problem. Wenger could dip into a one time repositry to buy players and will do so this summer, but NO MANAGER OF ARSENAL AT THIS CURRENT POINT IN TIME CAN BUY PLAYERS WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF VALUE. A handicap our rivals do not have!

:banghead:

Mate,

name one post in this thread that says we have unlimited funds to throw away.

and then name one post in this thread that says we cannot win stuff because of we don't have chelsea or city's money --- you will find out that it's only your posts that make such claims.

moreso, your definition of a sugar-daddy doesn't even make sense.

[Fist of Lehmann]

£80m for Conaldo tbh. Absolutely great business.

[AKBapologist]

@budesonide - I'm in concurrent arguments, one with you, and one with someone else.

NO manager at arsenal can behave in the transfer markets, in the way you describe, according to gladis. Sacking Wenger will not produce different results in the transfer window. And in the clubs that do buy who ever they want to, they are backed by unlimited funds and thus purchases can be made with NO RISK.

What's there not to understand?

[budesonide]

£80m for Conaldo tbh. Absolutely great business.


Would you be surprised if messi went for 250million?

[Fist of Lehmann]

Err...yes?

Pretty surprised I'd say.

[Toronto Gooner]

NO manager at arsenal can behave in the transfer markets, in the way you describe, according to gladis.
In reality, how many managers can act in the "money is not barrier" business model? Those of Man City; Chelsea; Real Madrid: yes. Perhaps Barcelona and Man U but I am not 100% convinced with either. I suspect that Guardiola and Ferguson can spend the money they do because they are successful and that the funds would dry up the instant the success ends. Also, both clubs have benefited from making serious coin from player sales.

But outside of those, every manager has to weigh the cost/benefit of each purchase.

[Toronto Gooner]

Would you be surprised if messi went for 250million?
Absolutely surprised, regardless of his quality.

[budesonide]

@budesonide - I'm in concurrent arguments, one with you, and one with someone else.

NO manager at arsenal can behave in the transfer markets, in the way you describe, according to gladis. Sacking Wenger will not produce different results in the transfer window. And in the clubs that do buy who ever they want to, they are backed by unlimited funds and thus purchases can be made with NO RISK.

What's there not to understand?

Yes they can. Spending 20million on a quality centreback instead of 10million on an unknown french nobody could have made a bloody difference.

If we had spent 25million on torres seasons ago, we may not now be trying to get wenger to spend some fucking money on quality players.

And yes, we can spend 20 million -- dare I say even 30million --- on a worldclass player if we wanted to based on our spending the past few seasons. Wenger doesn't see the value of that. ANOTHER MANGER WITH BALLS WOULD!
And that is all that is needed.

Wenger would rather spend the 20/30 million on five unknown kids and 3 squillaci's and pay them handsomely whilst at it too.

That is the difference. Wenger seems to know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

[AKBapologist]

In reality, how many managers can act in the "money is not barrier" business model? Those of Man City; Chelsea; Real Madrid: yes. Perhaps Barcelona and Man U but I am not 100% convinced with either. I suspect that Guardiola and Ferguson can spend the money they do because they are successful and that the funds would dry up the instant the success ends. Also, both clubs have benefited from making serious coin from player sales.

But outside of those, every manager has to weigh the cost/benefit of each purchase.
I agree with everything you said.

[budesonide]

Absolutely surprised, regardless of his quality.

yeah I guess, paying over-the-top for quality is a waste.

[AKBapologist]

And yes, we can spend 20 million -- dare I say even 30million --- on a worldclass player if we wanted to based on our spending the past few seasons. Wenger doesn't see the value of that. ANOTHER MANGER WITH BALLS WOULD!
And that is all that is needed.

Wrong.

[Cripps_orig]

If spending £30m on one player this summer puts us in financial trouble then i must seriously question our financial state.

We dont need players. We have enough of those. We need quality players and that we have hardly any of and that unfortunately costs money.

Keep buying midtable players for cheap and we eventually become a mid table side.

[budesonide]

I agree with everything you said.

and some managers can be too cautious at it!

just as some managers can be too ambitious at it!

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’

So wenger can be less cautious and grow a pair and spend what he has got to address serious problem areas in the squad. WE DO NOT NEED A SUGAR-DADDY for that.

[budesonide]

Wrong.

ok, boss.

[budesonide]

If spending £30m on one player this summer puts us in financial trouble then i must seriously question our financial state.

We dont need players. We have enough of those. We need quality players and that we have hardly any of and that unfortunately costs money.

Keep buying midtable players for cheap and we eventually become a mid table side.

Top post mate!

[Kano]

‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’


seriously youve gone mental

[selassie]

Did you even watch the AST interview?

More than ever it was stressed just how financially constricted we were. Any other manager coming here would have to operate in the same way as far as transfers are concerned. Structural problem. Wenger could dip into a one time repositry to buy players and will do so this summer, but NO MANAGER OF ARSENAL AT THIS CURRENT POINT IN TIME CAN BUY PLAYERS WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF VALUE. A handicap our rivals do not have!

The problem is nobody knows or can define financially constricted or limited spend. We're financially constricted in comparison to Chelsea & Citeh because they have unlimited funds so to speak, but are we really that restricted compared to everybody else.

That quote from Ivan just backs up what everybody already knows anyway, Arsene sets his valuation on a player & if the selling club wants more Arsene wont entertain the deal.

I say this quite a bit on here but "a glass of water is worth a fortune to a man dieing of thirst". This is how I view our situation at times and why I'm baffled to why Arsene isn't a little more flexible in the market.

[AKBapologist]

ok, boss.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the impression I got from watching the AST interview was that:

We have to be "efficient" in the transfer market

We have a limited budget for new players, have to live within our means

We have a one time fund for purchases (IE, we can't spunk +20mill on players every window, we may do it this summer because FFP starts next season)

And that includes consideration on wages, fee's and everything else as there's no distinction as far as the board is concerned. So 2 10mill player signings takes about 30mill from whatever kitty we had.

Seemed quite depressing to hear actually.

[Toronto Gooner]

If spending £30m on one player this summer puts us in financial trouble then i must seriously question our financial state.

We dont need players. We have enough of those. We need quality players and that we have hardly any of and that unfortunately costs money.

Keep buying midtable players for cheap and we eventually become a mid table side.
Okay, who and when was the last top level player that Man U bought?
Smalling
Lindegaard
Bebe
Hernandez
Obertan
Diouf

Valencia
Owen

[budesonide]

seriously youve gone mental

sure, if that's what you call stating facts and repeating them to those who keep ignoring them. :rolleyes:

[AKBapologist]

The problem is nobody knows or can define financially constricted or limited spend. We're financially restricted in comparison to Chelsea & Citeh because they have unlimited funds so to speak, but are we really that restricted compared to everybody else.

That quote from Ivan just backs up what everybody already knows anyway, Arsene sets his valuation on a player & if the selling club wants more Arsene wont entertain the deal.

Ivan was asked if AW could be disentangled from the financial process of buying players, he said AW couldn't because the club didn't work that way.

[Kano]

sure, if that's what you call stating facts and repeating them to those who keep ignoring them. :rolleyes:

i think the message might just be in your signature

but i could be wrong

[AKBapologist]

I've got signatures blocked anyway :haha:

[budesonide]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the impression I got from watching the AST interview was that:

We have to be "efficient" in the transfer market

We have a limited budget for new players, have to live within our means

We have a one time fund for purchases (IE, we can't spunk +20mill on players every window, we may do it this summer because FFP starts next season)

And that includes consideration on wages, fee's and everything else as there's no distinction as far as the board is concerned. So 2 10mill player signings takes about 30mill from whatever kitty we had.

Seemed quite depressing to hear actually.


what, so efficient means spending 30million on stop gaps for seriously deficient areas of the squad on 5 nobodies and paying them handsomely to deliver nothing?

over the last 5 seasons you are saying we couldn't have spent at least 25mil on a top striker or defender? And if we did that wouldn't be efficient? :rolleyes:

[selassie]

Ivan was asked if AW could be disentangled from the financial process of buying players, he said AW couldn't because the club didn't work that way.

And the reason a growing number of folks don't want AW involved in the negotiations is because his record in the market over the past few seasons has been pretty shoddy.

In fact it's been reported we've missed out on a few let's say "higher profile" targets because of AW's absolute belief that a player is overpriced by a few million or whatever the price is.

[Fist of Lehmann]

yeah I guess, paying over-the-top for quality is a waste.

Well yeah. By definition paying over the top for anything is a waste.

Not a total waste, but the more over the top, the more the waste.

I can't speak for TG but I'd be surprised in the sense of: "HOLY FUCK THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY, DUDE!"

And surprised that he'd be willing to go anywhere else.

[Toronto Gooner]

Ivan was asked if AW could be disentangled from the financial process of buying players, he said AW couldn't because the club didn't work that way.
Let's be realistic: If Wenger were disentangled from the financial analysis of the cost/benefit of a particular player, he would become no better than us fans, who put forward the names of players we would love to see playing for Arsenal but who have absolutely no idea of the total cost (transfer fee, wages, legals fees, etc.) of said players, and how they will fit into the overall financial strategic plan of the club.

[Coney]

Ivan was asked if AW could be disentangled from the financial process of buying players, he said AW couldn't because the club didn't work that way.

Not quite. He said that the valuation of players and what they were worth to us as well as other clubs required input from the manager and for a club to do that without involving the manager would not make sense, which is why we worked that way.

[budesonide]

so you are saying some real block-heads do not see that then? And they keep repeating what they want to believe?

Oh, I forgot -- it's goonersweb.

[selassie]

Okay, who and when was the last top level player that Man U bought?
Smalling
Lindegaard
Bebe
Hernandez
Obertan
Diouf

Valencia
Owen

Man United already have the quality in there squad, look at their trophy cabinet. They by in large don't need Hollywood buys because they already have top quality players in there squad.

We have much more of a pressing need to spend on Qulaity than them, that much is obvious.

[Cripps_orig]

Okay, who and when was the last top level player that Man U bought?
Smalling
Lindegaard
Bebe
Hernandez
Obertan
Diouf

Valencia
Owen
No idea nor do i really care cos i dont support them.

Point is though, they have splashed out big for players ie Rooney, Rio, Berbatov etc and then filled in the gaps around them with the other not as good players but all have a tremendous work rate.

The spine of their team cost big money. The rest, not so much.

Thats what i want for Arsenal. Have a quality spine (GK, CB, CM and CF) and then fill in the 7 other places with as many french/african nobodies as he wants. Decent ones obviously.

The fact we already have a world class Cesc and RVP means half the job is done already. Make sure Cescs head is at Arsenal and not Barca and hopefully RVPs injuries are behind him.

All Wenger needs to do now is to spend big on a qualty CB and get a keeper. A world class one. If Bendtner goes then another striker is needed.

[budesonide]

Let's be realistic: If Wenger were disentangled from the financial analysis of the cost/benefit of a particular player, he would become no better than us fans, who put forward the names of players we would love to see playing for Arsenal but who have absolutely no idea of the total cost (transfer fee, wages, legals fees, etc.) of said players, and how they will fit into the overall financial strategic plan of the club.

Nonsense!

Wenger said if he was given 100million to spend he will give it back. :coffee:

[selassie]

Let's be realistic: If Wenger were disentangled from the financial analysis of the cost/benefit of a particular player, he would become no better than us fans, who put forward the names of players we would love to see playing for Arsenal but who have absolutely no idea of the total cost (transfer fee, wages, legals fees, etc.) of said players, and how they will fit into the overall financial strategic plan of the club.

Sure he shouldn't be in the dark in regards to the players, but he also shouldn't take 100% control of the situation IMHO.

AW has a unique job, he wouldn't have as much control in so many matters anywhere else.

[budesonide]

No idea nor do i really care cos i dont support them.

Point is though, they have splashed out big for players ie Rooney, Rio, Berbatov etc and then filled in the gaps around them with the other not as good players but all have a tremendous work rate.

The spine of their team cost big money. The rest, not so much.

Thats what i want for Arsenal. Have a quality spine (GK, CB, CM and CF) and then fill in the 7 other places with as many french/african nobodies as he wants. Decent ones obviously.

The fact we already have a world class Cesc and RVP means half the job is done already. Make sure Cescs head is at Arsenal and not Barca and hopefully RVPs injuries are behind him.

All Wenger needs to do now is to spend big on a qualty CB and get a keeper. A world class one. If Bendtner goes then another striker is needed.

Cripps on fire!

[Toronto Gooner]

Well yeah. By definition paying over the top for anything is a waste.

Not a total waste, but the more over the top, the more the waste.

I can't speak for TG but I'd be surprised in the sense of: "HOLY FUCK THAT'S A LOT OF MONEY, DUDE!"

And surprised that he'd be willing to go anywhere else.
Actually, Fist you took the words right out of my fingers.... There is over-the-top and there is ridiculously insane.

The first question would have to be is Messi worth 250 million? Is that the transfer fee or the whole package? If the former (which I suspect), then how much more will he cost due to the wages?

The next question is will Arsenal be able to recoup the money expended through the incremental increase in revenue that Messi will bring? Given that (currently) the club:
(1) sells out the stadium, there will be no increase in seat sales; and
(2) already plays in CL, there will be no substantial increase in revenue there, unless he wins the CL for the club every year of his contract.

So the only ways of increasing revenue would be by increased shirt sales and non-competitive games and tours. I do not think that the money from these two endeavours would generate enough revenue to get close to breaking even.
(3) the

[AKBapologist]

Let's be realistic: If Wenger were disentangled from the financial analysis of the cost/benefit of a particular player, he would become no better than us fans, who put forward the names of players we would love to see playing for Arsenal but who have absolutely no idea of the total cost (transfer fee, wages, legals fees, etc.) of said players, and how they will fit into the overall financial strategic plan of the club.

Yep, Gladis said as much.
Where as in the super rich clubs, manager picks the best players that could improve the squad independent of market value. Massive advantage.

[budesonide]

Actually, Fist you took the words right out of my fingers.... There is over-the-top and there is ridiculously insane.

The first question would have to be is Messi worth 250 million? Is that the transfer fee or the whole package? If the former (which I suspect), then how much more will he cost due to the wages?

The next question is will Arsenal be able to recoup the money expended through the incremental increase in revenue that Messi will bring? Given that (currently) the club:
(1) sells out the stadium, there will be no increase in seat sales; and
(2) already plays in CL, there will be no substantial increase in revenue there, unless he wins the CL for the club every year of his contract.

So the only ways of increasing revenue would be by increased shirt sales and non-competitive games and tours. I do not think that the money from these two endeavours would generate enough revenue to get close to breaking even.
(3) the

No one suggested arsenal should splash that kind on money on messi!

we are not in the position to. But we can do far better than the dross we have been signing. As cripps said, if spending 30million on a quality striker or defender makes us go under, then fuc*K, we can't call oursleves a top football club or charge the ticket prices we do.

[Toronto Gooner]

Nonsense!

Wenger said if he was given 100million to spend he will give it back. :coffee:
Wonderful non sequitur: I was responding to comments about taking Wenger out of the financial analysis of players. and you respond with a quote from Wenger based on his continued involvement in that financial analysis.

[AKBapologist]

As cripps said, if spending 30million on a quality striker or defender makes us go under, then fuc*K, we can't call oursleves a top football club or charge the ticket prices we do.
:Slowclap:

Your finally starting to get it.

[Toronto Gooner]

No one suggested arsenal should splash that kind on money on messi!

we are not in the position to. But we can do far better than the dross we have been signing. As cripps said, if spending 30million on a quality striker or defender makes us go under, then fuc*K, we can't call oursleves a top football club or charge the ticket prices we do.
This was your "question": Would you be surprised if messi went for 250million?

I merely took that as if it were Arsenal who paid that sort of money.

[Kano]

that 100 million quote should be given more context i think


“Danny and I had dinner with Arsène in June,” PHW said. “Danny said, ‘What would you do if I gave you £100 million to spend?’ and Arsène said, ‘I would give it back to you.’ He has an economics degree from Strasbourg University and understands these things better than the board. He doesn’t want the club to go bankrupt.”

[budesonide]

Wonderful non sequitur: I was responding to comments about taking Wenger out of the financial analysis of players. and you respond with a quote from Wenger based on his continued involvement in that financial analysis.

You have dodged the issue -- and made a grossly ridiculous glib remark of the reasoned argument most posters are making in this thread by suggesting wenger will choose players will-nilly just like the ordinary fan would if he out of the loop reharding the finances of the club. That is utter bull.

Hence my retort that wenger has made it clear he doesn't care for spending whether he has the money or not.

[budesonide]

that 100 million quote should be given more context i think

That wasn't the question asked? Was it? Who said spending that 100 million will make the club in question go bankrupt? And which sensible manager would if it will make their club go bankrupt?

[Fist of Lehmann]

(3) the

The...? Come on man, don't leave us hanging!

You're right inasmuch as £250m would make no sense on a cost to revenue basis.
But there is an argument that football clubs should be run to make people happy, not to make money.

Signing Messi for £250m would make people deliriously happy, until the financial shit hit the fan that is.

[AKBapologist]

That wasn't the question asked? Was it? Who said spending that 100 million will make the club in question go bankrupt? And which manager would if it will make their club go bankrupt?

http://images.teamtalk.com/09/03/800x600/Harry-Redknapp-Sunderland-v-Spurs_1969038.jpg

[Cripps_orig]

Cripps on fire!

7 months of pent up frustrations does that.

Is it pent or vent?

[AKBapologist]

The...? Come on man, don't leave us hanging!

You're right inasmuch as £250m would make no sense on a cost to revenue basis.
But there is an argument that football clubs should be run to make people happy, not to make money.

Signing Messi for £250m would make people deliriously happy, until the financial shit hit the fan that is.

Which is why having deep pockets is awesome, from the fans point of view. Not sure why more fans aren't calling for it tbh. Running football clubs like corporations stinks.

[budesonide]

This was your "question": Would you be surprised if messi went for 250million?

I merely took that as if it were Arsenal who paid that sort of money.

That question was in response to another question asking whether ronaldo was worth 80mill. That was all.

[AKBapologist]

That wasn't the question asked? Was it? Who said spending that 100 million will make the club in question go bankrupt? And which sensible manager would if it will make their club go bankrupt?
The short term pressures of footie have caused plenty of managers to gamble, crashing out of the league. Liverpool would have been in a lot of trouble if it weren't for the new owners...

[budesonide]

The short term pressures of footie have caused plenty of managers to gamble, crashing out of the league. Liverpool would have been in a lot of trouble if it weren't for the new owners...

So would Man U; Barca, Real, etc. But they are still around.

And so would some of the biggest companies in the world. But there is a sensible and balanced way of going about it. And that is what most posters in this thread have been arguing.

[AKBapologist]

So would Man U; Barca, Real, etc. But they are still around.

And so would some of the biggest companies in the world. But there is a sensible and balanced way of going about it. And that is what most posters in this thread have been arguing.

It's a contraction born on the belief that we can make multiple 30mill signings on a whim when every day it's clearer that we can't.
I think we can make one marquee signing this summer, but it'll be a one off.

[Joker]

that 100 million quote should be given more context i think

This is typical of the board setting up a false dichotomy, of either A) maintaining current levels of spending or B) Spending £100M. There is a middle ground, where you spend money on quality, experienced players who are both old enough to be able to slot into the first team immediately, and yet are not yet at the peak of their careers so there is room for improvement. As I've said before, players like Sagna and Vermaelen fitted the bill. They didn't cost the earth, but have provided value for money. How would making signings of this sort make us bankrupt?

[Fist of Lehmann]

Appropos of this, did you also see the quote where Wenger says:

"I can't believe people would think I have £100m in the bank and be stupid enough not to spend it."

[AKBapologist]

Appropos of this, did you also see the quote where Wenger says:

"I can't believe people would think I have £100m in the bank and be stupid enough not to spend it."
Easy to ignore, selective quoting ftw.

[Toronto Gooner]

You have dodged the issue -- and made a grossly ridiculous glib remark of the reasoned argument most posters are making in this thread by suggesting wenger will choose players will-nilly just like the ordinary fan would if he out of the loop reharding the finances of the club. That is utter bull.

Hence my retort that wenger has made it clear he doesn't care for spending whether he has the money or not.
My bad.

If you actually read my comment you would see that it implies that Wenger would make his decisions regarding players without consideration of the cost or where it fits within the financial plan for the club. Would he be like the fans who want this expensive flavour of the month player or that one? I doubt it. The fact is that fans put forth players based on our perceived benefit to the club through their play and do not do an analysis that includes total costs (fee, wages, impact on other wages). Removing Wenger from any consideration of the financial consequences to the club would put him in a similar position as the fans, and would set up an inevitable clash where he says "I want this player" and the club says "We cannot afford him".

The reality is that Wenger (and every other manager of clubs not financed by oil wells or governments) has to consider all aspects involved in buying a player.

[budesonide]

Appropos of this, did you also see the quote where Wenger says:

"I can't believe people would think I have £100m in the bank and be stupid enough not to spend it."

Yes, I have seen that --- no one said he has got 100million to spend!

[Toronto Gooner]

The...? Come on man, don't leave us hanging!

You're right inasmuch as £250m would make no sense on a cost to revenue basis.
But there is an argument that football clubs should be run to make people happy, not to make money.

Signing Messi for £250m would make people deliriously happy, until the financial shit hit the fan that is.
There is no (3). I forgot to delete it before posting. Sorry.

I agree that football is about making people happy. In my opinion, football is now part of the entertainment business and therefore it has to work within the constraints applied to that business.

[Toronto Gooner]

The short term pressures of footie have caused plenty of managers to gamble, crashing out of the league. Liverpool would have been in a lot of trouble if it weren't for the new owners...
Who is to say that they will not be back there is a season or two. They have spent some big coin, are promising to spend more and now Dalglish has to deliver. I do not believe that they are a lock on getting CL or even Europa next season, unless the latter comes though a cup win.

[AKBapologist]

Who is to say that they will not be back there is a season or two. They have spent some big coin, are promising to spend more and now Dalglish has to deliver. I do not believe that they are a lock on getting CL or even Europa next season, unless the latter comes though a cup win.
No idea about Liverpools finances tbh, although I got the impression that the current owners where more like ours, but a little (lot) more pragmatic in terms of the business model. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I think this summer will be more nuts than usual, as this will be the last chance to overspend.

[Fist of Lehmann]

Yes, I have seen that --- no one said he has got 100million to spend!

That wasn't the point. The point was the people trot out the "I'd give it back" quote to indicate his unwillingness to spend. Yet rarely do they trot out the "They must think me stupid" quote to suggest that he'd spend it if he had it.

Wenger says a lot of things. Some of them can be construed as contradictary. Better to take them all with a pinch of salt.

[Toronto Gooner]

No idea about Liverpools finances tbh, although I got the impression that the current owners where more like ours, but a little (lot) more pragmatic in terms of the business model. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I think this summer will be more nuts than usual, as this will be the last chance to overspend.
New England Sports Ventures are an interesting company. Until they bought Liverpool, its main claim to fame was ownership of the Boston Red Socks. It also owns the stadium the Red Socks play in and a sports TV channel.

Right now, the Red Socks have the third highest total payroll (after the Yankees and Phillies), and the highest average player salary $162 million and $5.9 million p.a., respectively.

[budesonide]

That wasn't the point. The point was the people trot out the "I'd give it back" quote to indicate his unwillingness to spend. Yet rarely do they trot out the "They must think me stupid" quote to suggest that he'd spend it if he had it.

Wenger says a lot of things. Some of them can be construed as contradictary. Better to take them all with a pinch of salt.

Wrong!

With even highschool-level analysis you can separate the red-herrings from his actual statements.

Everyone knows he hasn't got 100 million to spend!

And there is evidence to show that, even when the money is there he has to be pushed to do so!

That is what most of the debate here has been about. There is a balance to be had!

[Boss]

That wasn't the point. The point was the people trot out the "I'd give it back" quote to indicate his unwillingness to spend. Yet rarely do they trot out the "They must think me stupid" quote to suggest that he'd spend it if he had it.

Wenger says a lot of things. Some of them can be construed as contradictary. Better to take them all with a pinch of salt.

If you want to look at his actions instead of words, look at how he's weakened our team in most transfer windows over the last few years; how his team continually makes the same basic errors it made at the start of our youth project; how his players don't seem to improve but rather regress without any consequence; and then try to argue about him being held back by finance.

Not sure why there is a 10 page argument over Wenger has had nothing to spend or not when it's not really the issue that's holding us back.

[Fist of Lehmann]

Wrong!

With even highschool-level analysis you can separate the red-herrings from his actual statements.

Everyone knows he hasn't got 100 million to spend!

And there is evidence to show that, even when the money is there he has to be pushed to do so!

That is what most of the debate here has been about. There is a balance to be had!

So now you're telling what my own point was?

Impressive.

[budesonide]

So now you're telling what my own point was?

Impressive.

No, Iam not, boss.

All i am saying is, you missed the point in the first instance. No one did. So the reply you posted earlier was in fact not the issue at all -- it was infact not even evidence of contradiction on wenger's part. If anything, it was just more evidence of the strawmen and red-herrings characteristc of wenger's all or nothing philosophy. :tiphat:

[Kano]

That wasn't the question asked? Was it? Who said spending that 100 million will make the club in question go bankrupt? And which sensible manager would if it will make their club go bankrupt?

you're pretty desperate to make your point, what with all the bolds, underlines and caps i keep seeing. obviously means a lot to get your point across.

putting that quote back into context wasnt in response to any question, just providing the full quote. i'd seen it used a few times on here used to suggest wenger doesnt want to spend anything, ever.

[budesonide]

you're pretty desperate to make your point, what with all the bolds, underlines and caps i keep seeing. obviously means a lot to get your point across.

putting that quote back into context wasnt in response to any question, just providing the full quote. i'd seen it used a few times on here used to suggest wenger doesnt want to spend anything, ever.

Let me break it down for you mate:

That quote that wenger won't spend 100mill if it was given to him which as been used in this thread is valid! Why?

1) the context you provided SHOWED that wenger threw in a STRAWMAN and not answer the question honestly. How?

2). he was asked a simple hypothetical question! What will you do (as a football manager) if you were given a 100million?

He responds by saying he will give it back BECAUSE HE WOULDN'T WANT TO BANKRUPT YOUR CLUB.

3). What did that question had to do with bankruptcy? Nothing! Except Wenger automatically assumes that spending 100million is too excessive and will bankrupt a club!

4). Was Danny stupid enough to ask him that question knowing the hypothetical club that is giving the said 100mill are not in any position to do so? I don't think so.

5) No sensible manager will say to their director "hey, I will spend that money lavishly and so what if your club goes bankrupt!" No manager would say or do that UNLESS they are forced to ala man city and chelsea.

So you see, in fact, wenger will give the money back because fundamentally HE DOES NOT BELIEVE in big spending to manage a club. In fact, as my sig shows, HE IS TOO CAUTIOUS.

:tiphat:

[budesonide]

as for being desperate to get my point across -- let me just say, it is a debate section and if i have to stress and repeat blatant facts unconventionally amidst clear and repeated falsehoods then so be it.

[Power n Glory]

I watched the AST meeting and this is what I gathered. AKBapologist has missed a lot and Gazidis was stressing a different point.


Ivan Gladis from the AST interview. "...Removing the manager from the financial aspects to me doesn't make a lot of sense because you have to discuss the worth of a player, and as I've said, everything is about efficiency when you have a limited spend, so you need to prioritise where your going to spend your money and how much an individual player is worth, so it's very difficult for me to imagine having a manager that says 'now that's the player I want now go get him' and you make up what you think the price is - there has to be a dialogue with the manger."

This quote has been misrepresented. For starters, the point in bold shows that Wenger is involved with the transfers and people can't keep making excuses for him as if when negotiations are taking place, he's out of the loop or off on holiday. The valuation of the player, how much of a priority it is to sign that player for that position is all discussed. That's what Gazidis was getting at when talking. At the meeting, a fan suggested Wenger shouldn't be involved in the negotiations because he ignores the market value of players and it's why we end up signing no one in most cases. He also said that the fans pay the going market rate for season tickets at Arsenal and have no choice but to pay, we can't dictate the price. Wenger should do the same and bite the bullet when it comes to transfers.

Gazidis replied with the above quote and also came back with an example. If Wenger had his eyes on a specific player and Gazidis went out and spent the whole budget on this one player, Wenger wouldn't be happy because there are other players we'd need to sign and budget for.

Can you see the problem? In most cases, we don't spend all the money and don't sign players. He did say we have money left over from unused resources. He also said it's up to Wenger to identify the key areas that need work and to set the priority on who to spend on, what position and how much. That makes sense and we shouldn't have a club where board members make decisions on who we buy. We have limits of course. We have to budget. But as seen with the goalkeeping situation at the start of the season, Wenger wouldn't budge on a couple of million because he didn't think it was worth it and the position wasn't a priority because he had faith in Almunia, Fabianski and Schezney. He won't be desperate to make certain signings if he believes we already have the quality in the club and that relates back to his quotes about signing 'super quality' players and killing talent.

When going for Alonso, I believe he had Whilshere and Ramsey in the back of his mind. It's no secret. We know his feelings on 'killing' talent and this is why we're not as active as we should be in the window. He could be thinking of Young Jack and Rambo now as we discuss Cesc and Nasri's futures. He did test them both out during the end of the season.

We all know we don't have unlimited resources and we've never thrown our hat in the ring to bid for players that would cost a fortune. Last winter, guys like Babel, Sessegnon, Steven Pienaar, Makoun, Sidwell, Curtis Davis went to other clubs for less than £10m. Snta Cruz, Ireland and Martins went to other clubs on loan. But the problem is, Wenger has too much faith in his current crop. I hope that changes this summer.

[Fist of Lehmann]

I find, that in the final summation, I cannot give any modicum of fuck whatsoever.

[budesonide]

I watched the AST meeting and this is what I gathered. AKBapologist has missed a lot and Gazidis was stressing a different point.



This quote has been misrepresented. For starters, the point in bold shows that Wenger is involved with the transfers and people can't keep making excuses for him as if when negotiations are taking place, he's out of the loop or off on holiday. The valuation of the player, how much of a priority it is to sign that player for that position is all discussed. That's what Gazidis was getting at when talking. At the meeting, a fan suggested Wenger shouldn't be involved in the negotiations because he ignores the market value of players and it's why we end up signing no one in most cases. He also said that the fans pay the going market rate for season tickets at Arsenal and have no choice but to pay, we can't dictate the price. Wenger should do the same and bite the bullet when it comes to transfers.

Gazidis replied with the above quote and also came back with an example. If Wenger had his eyes on a specific player and Gazidis went out and spent the whole budget on this one player, Wenger wouldn't be happy because there are other players we'd need to sign and budget for.

Can you see the problem? In most cases, we don't spend all the money and don't sign players. He did say we have money left over from unused resources. He also said it's up to Wenger to identify the key areas that need work and to set the priority on who to spend on, what position and how much. That makes sense and we shouldn't have a club where board members make decisions on who we buy. We have limits of course. We have to budget. But as seen with the goalkeeping situation at the start of the season, Wenger wouldn't budge on a couple of million because he didn't think it was worth it and the position wasn't a priority because he had faith in Almunia, Fabianski and Schezney. He won't be desperate to make certain signings if he believes we already have the quality in the club and that relates back to his quotes about signing 'super quality' players and killing talent.

When going for Alonso, I believe he had Whilshere and Ramsey in the back of his mind. It's no secret. We know his feelings on 'killing' talent and this is why we're not as active as we should be in the window. He could be thinking of Young Jack and Rambo now as we discuss Cesc and Nasri's futures. He did test them both out during the end of the season.

We all know we don't have unlimited resources and we've never thrown our hat in the ring to bid for players that would cost a fortune. Last winter, guys like Babel, Sessegnon, Steven Pienaar, Makoun, Sidwell, Curtis Davis went to other clubs for less than £10m. Snta Cruz, Ireland and Martins went to other clubs on loan. But the problem is, Wenger has too much faith in his current crop. I hope that changes this summer.

Top post mate!

Essentially the board cannot force wenger to spend a specific amount of money on any player because his valuation of the player in terms of cost and how important they will be to the team ultimately trumps all.

So, without a football man like DD in the picture, no-one can get wenger to reconsider paying "over-the-odds" for any given player, however absolutely necessary that signing for a specific position must be!

Hence the reason why wenger will dismiss any concerns about his sqaud going into a season by saying he knows what he is doing, he will do it his way, and my personal favorite "judge me in May".

The board, rightly or wrongly have ceded such authority to him because, after all, he is our most successful manager!

But at what point and at what cost will this be allowed to continue.

[Kano]

Let me break it down for you mate:

That quote that wenger won't spend 100mill if it was given to him which as been used in this thread is valid! Why?

1) the context you provided SHOWED that wenger threw in a STRAWMAN and not answer the question honestly. How?

2). he was asked a simple hypothetical question! What will you do (as a football manager) if you were given a 100million?

He responds by saying he will give it back BECAUSE HE WOULDN'T WANT TO BANKRUPT YOUR CLUB.

3). What did that question had to do with bankruptcy? Nothing! Except Wenger automatically assumes that spending 100million is too excessive and will bankrupt a club!

4). Was Danny stupid enough to ask him that question knowing the hypothetical club that is giving the said 100mill are not in any position to do so? I don't think so.

5) No sensible manager will say to their director "hey, I will spend that money lavishly and so what if your club goes bankrupt!" No manager would say or do that UNLESS they are forced to ala man city and chelsea.

So you see, in fact, wenger will give the money back because fundamentally HE DOES NOT BELIEVE in big spending to manage a club. In fact, as my sig shows, HE IS TOO CAUTIOUS.

:tiphat:

you realise its not a direct quote but paraphrased by someone else, ie PHW? y'know, shortened for the sake of the quite small article.

throw in a couple more bolds next time cos i might have missed your point.

[budesonide]

you realise its not a direct quote but paraphrased by someone else, ie PHW? y'know, shortened for the sake of the quite small article.

throw in a couple more bolds next time cos i might have missed your point.

oh dear;

so what context were you trying to get across or prove then?

[AKBapologist]

Is it just me or didn't png just bold a different part of the quote and decide that he'll rant about that instead? :haha:

[Power n Glory]

Is it just me or didn't png just bold a different part of the quote and decide that he'll rant about that instead? :haha:

Didn't I point out that we have limited funds as well? That we have to budget? What is wrong with you, man?

[Kano]

oh dear;

so what context were you trying to get across or prove then?

that its easy to take an indirect paraphrased quote and use it as an add on to an argument as fact

[budesonide]

Didn't I point out that we have limited funds as well? That we have to budget? What is wrong with you, man?

what you are forgetting is that, since we don't have pockets as deep as man city or chelsea, we cannot compete unless we get a sugar-daddy who will give wenger an open cheque and sit back yet somehow force him to spend it. :tiphat:

[budesonide]

that its easy to take an indirect paraphrased quote and use it as an add on to an argument as fact

for it to be that easy, you will have to ignore common sense, basic understanding of english, review of past history and track-record, and an understanding of the quote in my sig.

The context is wenger is an ultra-conservative manager when it comes to spending; the phrase "he will give it back" does not need much contextualizing.

Hence, point 5 in my previous post.

[Kano]

i had to ignore you sig, seeing it in every post was getting beyond annoying tbh

[budesonide]

entirely your perogative, matey :tiphat:

[Power n Glory]

Terry - we had a convo last week about Wenger's involvement with contract negotiations, the policy, player value and such. I hope you now get the point I was originally driving at.

[Kano]

from what i recall you said he makes the final call and i said he was involved but didnt push the button?

that convo went nowhere really so ive no interest in digging it back up in detail

[Power n Glory]

from what i recall you said he makes the final call and i said he was involved but didnt push the button?

that convo went nowhere really so ive no interest in digging it back up in detail

Damn right because at no point did I say he made the final call but we'll leave that alone.

[selassie]

I watched the AST meeting and this is what I gathered. AKBapologist has missed a lot and Gazidis was stressing a different point.



This quote has been misrepresented. For starters, the point in bold shows that Wenger is involved with the transfers and people can't keep making excuses for him as if when negotiations are taking place, he's out of the loop or off on holiday. The valuation of the player, how much of a priority it is to sign that player for that position is all discussed. That's what Gazidis was getting at when talking. At the meeting, a fan suggested Wenger shouldn't be involved in the negotiations because he ignores the market value of players and it's why we end up signing no one in most cases. He also said that the fans pay the going market rate for season tickets at Arsenal and have no choice but to pay, we can't dictate the price. Wenger should do the same and bite the bullet when it comes to transfers.

Gazidis replied with the above quote and also came back with an example. If Wenger had his eyes on a specific player and Gazidis went out and spent the whole budget on this one player, Wenger wouldn't be happy because there are other players we'd need to sign and budget for.

Can you see the problem? In most cases, we don't spend all the money and don't sign players. He did say we have money left over from unused resources. He also said it's up to Wenger to identify the key areas that need work and to set the priority on who to spend on, what position and how much. That makes sense and we shouldn't have a club where board members make decisions on who we buy. We have limits of course. We have to budget. But as seen with the goalkeeping situation at the start of the season, Wenger wouldn't budge on a couple of million because he didn't think it was worth it and the position wasn't a priority because he had faith in Almunia, Fabianski and Schezney. He won't be desperate to make certain signings if he believes we already have the quality in the club and that relates back to his quotes about signing 'super quality' players and killing talent.

When going for Alonso, I believe he had Whilshere and Ramsey in the back of his mind. It's no secret. We know his feelings on 'killing' talent and this is why we're not as active as we should be in the window. He could be thinking of Young Jack and Rambo now as we discuss Cesc and Nasri's futures. He did test them both out during the end of the season.

We all know we don't have unlimited resources and we've never thrown our hat in the ring to bid for players that would cost a fortune. Last winter, guys like Babel, Sessegnon, Steven Pienaar, Makoun, Sidwell, Curtis Davis went to other clubs for less than £10m. Snta Cruz, Ireland and Martins went to other clubs on loan. But the problem is, Wenger has too much faith in his current crop. I hope that changes this summer.

:gp:

This.

p.s. This pretty much explains everything I was trying to explain earlier and backs up my point about Arsene operating in his "Own Transfer Market", a market that simply doesn't marry up with the "Current Transfer Market". It's not about spending 30million, it's about him being flexible with his Player valuations.

[LDG]

A squashed phallus.

[Fist of Lehmann]

Hmmm yes, you make an interesting point.

[Toronto Gooner]

backs up my point about Arsene operating in his "Own Transfer Market", a market that simply doesn't marry up with the "Current Transfer Market". It's not about spending 30million, it's about him being flexible with his Player valuations.
The problem with this is whether Wenger should be flexible and the valuation put forward by fans? Or the valuation put forward by the player's club? Or agent?

For example, Barcelona wanted to pay around 33 million for Fabregas but Arsenal put a valuation of 60 million on him. Should Wenger be "flexible" and agree to Barcelona's price?

[Coney]

A squashed phallus.

I'm so glad I was not the only person who thought that when I first saw the subject title.

[budesonide]

The problem with this is whether Wenger should be flexible and the valuation put forward by fans? Or the valuation put forward by the player's club? Or agent?

For example, Barcelona wanted to pay around 33 million for Fabregas but Arsenal put a valuation of 60 million on him. Should Wenger be "flexible" and agree to Barcelona's price?

no; wenger should move with the times and work with the general market valuation! Is today's market infalted? Absolutely!

But, if it is an urgent position you need to fill then once in while you have to bite the bullet and pay slightly over the odds for the quality you needed to keep competitive.

Letting the deal for xavi alonso die over a couple of millions was stupid imo! So was letting the deal for schwarzer fall through over just a million pds. Xavi alonso would have been massive massive for the club imho. And if we had bought a worldclass striker around the same valuation to top that then who knows?

As cripps said back in the thread, Man U bought rio,rooney and a couple more for big money over a few seasons and have since being supplementing them with fodder.

And no, no-one is saying splash a 100million in one go or on one player.

We pay the highest ticket prices around on the market; so the club should give an indication of wanting to compete in today's market IF the squad needs it desperately enough.

[AKBapologist]

1) I don't think we can afford to spend 30mill a season (net) on transfers, the last club to do that year in and year out in the EPL, who weren't mega rich was Liverpool - they would have had to go into administration if they weren't bailed out.

2) If we could, we certainly wouldn't have needed to raise ticket prices - for an under performing club who are already the most expensive sport venue in the world to raise ticket prices to do so whilst not financially needed to and having a surplus of +Xmill pounds a season would be nuts. As proven by fans and media reaction this summer.

3) We can probably dip into a one off fund, as explained by swiss ramble (http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2011/05/arsenals-transfer-budget.html), but that fund would include first years worth of wages, fees, legal etc, so we can either add several 0-10mill squad like players, or one or two 30mill *stars* depending on how many we sell.


Furthermore, if you look under the bonnet, there are some underlying issues that suggest that the financial picture is not quite so wonderful as it has been painted. In fact, if you exclude the £11 million property profit and the £38 million made from player sales, then the remaining football profit in 2009/10 would only be £7 million. That’s still very respectable, especially as it is net of £14 million interest payments, but the interims really bring the ongoing challenges to the fore.

For the first six months of 2010/11, the club actually made a loss of £6 million, largely because property profits fell to £3 million, while the profit on player sales sharply declined to £4 million, mainly from the sale of Eduardo to Shakhtar Donetsk. In fact, the pure football business produced a loss of £13 million.

To be fair, part of that is due to timing differences with two less home games than the previous season and TV merit payments, but it does suggest that the business model is not quite as robust as previously thought. There has been an undue reliance on player sales with an average £25 million a year being generated from this activity since 2006. Good business, but it makes it hard to build a winning team.

4) Which means because we've been living within our means, we've been extremely restricted in what we could do in any transfer market and I doubt any manager would have had the latitude to do spend a whole lot more than we had, regardless of whether he valued certain signings more than AW did.

There's this repetitive fallibly going around, probably born out the believe that we're a "big club" and made year over year profits (actually, most of it was from one time development sales) - that we can spend money, maybe not Chelsea or United money, but liverpool or Tottenham money on new signings every year and be ok... I honestly don't think we can, and when average managers can become world beaters by cherry picking stars, when statistically, we've had a smaller (playing) squad than our rivals, when we've the average cost to quality ratio has risen whilst our spending power has stayed the same, I believe this to be our biggest disadvantage over the last few years. The ONLY things we can hope for is for the FFP to be successful and other clubs to be forced to cut spending, or failing that, a sugar daddy to step up to enable our club to continuously operate at a loss.

[Kano]

selective quoting.

that swiss ramble concludes that we probably have around 40-50 mill available to spend.


(c) as we have seen, money is available to improve the squad, probably around £50 million.

that article works on a number of assumption, as he happily admits, so its hard to base an argument using that, even though it is an interesting read.

[AKBapologist]

And 5)
No, we don't need more squad players, we need 3-4 quality signings that are as good as players in our first 11, or better to give ourselves a firm chance of winning something. CB, LB, Striker and CDM (if none of the youths cut the mustard) - Babel, Sessegnon, Steven Pienaar, Makoun, Sidwell, Curtis Davis? No thanks.

[AKBapologist]

selective quoting.

that swiss ramble concludes that we probably have around 40-50 mill available to spend.



that article works on a number of assumption, as he happily admits, so its hard to base an argument using that, even though it is an interesting read.

I acknowledge that we might have a spend, but we certainly can't spend £50mill every season on transfers (net) can we? Infact, it states that our per season funds are heavily dependant on player sales.

[Kano]

I acknowledge that we might have a spend, but we certainly can't spend £50mill every season on transfers (net) can we?

that's the bottom line figure he seems to come to.

put it this way, we spent between £20-£30 mill all inclusive last summer, with Squilaci, Kos and Chamakh (higher wages probably with no fee).

[Toronto Gooner]

1) who are already the most expensive sport venue in the world
Last time I looked, North America was still part of the world. Check out this list of sports venues/clubs, and tell me how Arsenal measure up.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/35780689/North_America_s_Priciest_Sports_Tickets

For added interest, the Toronto Maple Leafs' (a team that has not won the Stanley Cup since 1967, and has not qualified for the playoffs for the last 7 years) ticket prices averaged the equivalent of 72 stg in the 2009/10 season.

[budesonide]

1) I don't think we can afford to spend 30mill a season (net) on transfers, the last club to do that year in and year out in the EPL, who weren't mega rich was Liverpool - they would have had to go into administration if they weren't bailed out.

2) If we could, we certainly wouldn't have needed to raise ticket prices - for an under performing club who are already the most expensive sport venue in the world to raise ticket prices to do so whilst not financially needed to and having a surplus of +Xmill pounds a season would be nuts. As proven by fans and media reaction this summer.

3) We can probably dip into a one off fund, as explained by swiss ramble (http://swissramble.blogspot.com/2011/05/arsenals-transfer-budget.html), but that fund would include first years worth of wages, fees, legal etc, so we can either add several 0-10mill squad like players, or one or two 30mill *stars* depending on how many we sell.



4) Which means because we've been living within our means, we've been extremely restricted in what we could do in any transfer market and I doubt any manager would have had the latitude to do spend a whole lot more than we had, regardless of whether he valued certain signings more than AW did.

There's this repetitive fallibly going around, probably born out the believe that we're a "big club" and made year over year profits (actually, most of it was from one time development sales) - that we can spend money, maybe not Chelsea or United money, but liverpool or Tottenham money on new signings every year and be ok... I honestly don't think we can, and when average managers can become world beaters by cherry picking stars, when statistically, we've had a smaller (playing) squad than our rivals, when we've the average cost to quality ratio has risen whilst our spending power has stayed the same, I believe this to be our biggest disadvantage over the last few years. The ONLY things we can hope for is for the FFP to be successful and other clubs to be forced to cut spending, or failing that, a sugar daddy to step up to enable our club to continuously operate at a loss.

1). You don't think so.
And, no-one said we should do that year in year out. Which is why I used Man U as an example -- splashing out on the odd occasion for the top player you need instead of spending that on 2 nobodies and 3 obscure teenagers.

2). So raising ticket prices means we cannot afford to spend where necessary to augment or strengthen the squad?

3). There is something known as manageable debt. Any big company or business in the world uses it! Otherwise no company can survive on the market with borrowing wisely to compete or survive.

What we are doing means, eventually we will get left behind completely; And when we decide to eventually go with the flow it might be too late!

No one is saying we should borrow a 100 BILLION to splash out -- that is not the argument here.

Your argument that we are so poor is utter tosh too with all due respect.

4). The so-called self-sustainable model we are adhering to is short-sighted and impractical as we are finding out. Hence why there is indication form the club this season that we might spend a lot more this season thatn we have been doing.

[AKBapologist]

Last time I looked, North America was still part of the world. Check out this list of sports venues/clubs, and tell me how Arsenal measure up.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/35780689/North_America_s_Priciest_Sports_Tickets

For added interest, the Toronto Maple Leafs' (a team that has not won the Stanley Cup since 1967, and has not qualified for the playoffs for the last 7 years) ticket prices averaged the equivalent of 72 stg in the 2009/10 season.


Whats the average ticket price at the Emirates? Tickets currently range from £34 to £96

NY Yankees ticket average is £45 according to that article?

Anyway, If it's not the most expensive sporting venue in the world, it's the most expensive football venue in the world, which isn't something to be proud of either.

[AKBapologist]

1). You don't think so.
And, no-one said we should do that year in year out. Which is why I used Man U as an example -- splashing out on the odd occasion for the top player you need instead of spending that on 2 nobodies and 3 obscure teenagers.

2). So raising ticket prices means we cannot afford to spend where necessary to augment or strengthen the squad?

3). There is something known as manageable debt. Any big company or business in the world uses it! Otherwise no company can survive on the market with borrowing wisely to compete or survive.

What we are doing means, eventually we will get left behind completely; And when we decide to eventually go with the flow it might be too late!

No one is saying we should borrow a 100 BILLION to splash out -- that is not the argument here.

Your argument that we are so poor is utter tosh too with all due respect.

4). The so-called self-sustainable model we are adhering to is short-sighted and impractical as we are finding out. Hence why there is indication form the club this season that we might spend a lot more this season thatn we have been doing.

You seem to contradict yourself in your own post inadvertently agreeing with me in the same post.

Our stadium means we're already running a considerable managible debt... Yep, that big 60k seater? We're still paying for it, we can't pay it off early and it pretty much underpins a lot of how we behave.

The argument is that any manager would have had to behave in the way we did... That 50mill in the kitty, the one you hear all the papers quoting, the one we're about to spend? That's mostly the result of player sales, no big clubs break even over the last several years, let alone have a net transfer surplus.

And no, we can't/won't generate funds out of thin air, this season, next season, with AW or without him, yes, the "so-called self-sustainable model we are adhering to is short-sighted and impractical as we are finding out." - but we're not changing the model to spend a relatively modest amount in the transfer window - this is all funds we've generated organically, not more debt, not magic pockets from rich owners.

To change this, we need a different ownership model.

[AKBapologist]

that's the bottom line figure he seems to come to.

put it this way, we spent between £20-£30 mill all inclusive last summer, with Squilaci, Kos and Chamakh (higher wages probably with no fee).

14.5mill on transfers in, 7.7mill in transfers out, 6.8mill net - we probably lowered our wage bill with the number of players we released. http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/arsenal-transfers.html

[budesonide]

You seem to contradict yourself in your own post inadvertently agreeing with me in the same post.

Our stadium means we're already running a considerable managible debt... Yep, that big 60k seater? We're still paying for it, we can't pay it off early and it pretty much underpins a lot of how we behave.

The argument is that any manager would have had to behave in the way we did... That 50mill in the kitty, the one you hear all the papers quoting, the one we're about to spend? That's mostly the result of player sales, no big clubs break even over the last several years, let alone have a net transfer surplus.

And no, we can't/won't generate funds out of thin air, this season, next season, with AW or without him, yes, the "so-called self-sustainable model we are adhering to is short-sighted and impractical as we are finding out." - but we're not changing the model to spend a relatively modest amount in the transfer window - this is all funds we've generated organically, not more debt, not magic pockets from rich owners.

To change this, we need a different ownership model.

Selective reading mate. Read points 3 and 4 again ( and pay attention to the 100 BILLION comment).

tah

[budesonide]

As to wenger not spending what he has got, go back and read PNG's post and ny reply to that post again. Because frankly I cannot repeat it again to you.

A sugar-daddy IS NOT a business model.

[AKBapologist]

Selective reading mate. Read points 3 and 4 again ( and pay attention to the 100 BILLION comment).

tah

It's not selective reading, just responding to the bits that make sense. At this point I feel you've chosen to believe what you've wanted to believe even though the center of your argument has shifted from we could (be less idealistic in terms of our spending model), to we should given the available evidence. So, i'm just going to end it here.


On a separate note, is any one person actually worth £100billion? Didn't that mexican come close

[AKBapologist]

A sugar-daddy IS NOT a business model.

Given that a footie club isn't a for-profit corporation, and fans aren't customers, that's mighty convenient.

[budesonide]

It's not selective reading, just responding to the bits that make sense. At this point I feel you've chosen to believe what you've wanted to believe even though the center of your argument has shifted from we could (be less idealistic in terms of our spending model), to we should given the available evidence. So, i'm just going to end it here.


On a separate note, is any one person actually worth £100billion? Didn't that mexican come close

My argument hasn't shifted. IF WENGER WANTED TO SPEND 30MILLION ON A TOPCLASS PLAYER HE CAN. HE CHOOSES NOT TO! He rather spends it on multiple teenagers and nobodies because he thinks it is LESS RISKY (and fits his idea of a self-sustainable model).

[AKBapologist]

My argument hasn't shifted. IF WENGER WANTED TO SPEND 30MILLION ON A TOPCLASS PLAYER HE CAN. HE CHOOSES NOT TO! He rather spends it on multiple teenagers and nobodies because he thinks it is LESS RISKY (and fits his idea of a self-sustainable model).

And now this sustainable business model is all wengers idea, I bet he even strong armed the club into building this stadium to fit his ego. :haha:


Nope, sorry, this model isn't a choice.

[budesonide]

And now this sustainable business model is all wengers idea, I bet he even strong armed the club into building this stadium to fit his ego. :haha:


Nope, sorry, this model isn't a choice.

Oh dear!

1). Read the quote in my sig again. WENGER HAS TO BE FORCED TO SPEND! And read PNG's post and my response earlier to Gazidis' comments.

2). No, the self-sustainable model IS NOT his idea! BUt if he wanted to spend 30million on a player, HE CAN.

But he does not think it is worth it. Which why he says "I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING" and "I WILL DO IT MY WAY".

3). Wenger is free to strenghten the squad to HIS VALUATION AND HIS VALUATION ALONE!

And no, he hasn't got a 100million budget each season to splash -- which is irrelevant and not necessary anyway (THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD).

I have tried to debate you separately on both the sugar-daddy issue and wenger's overly cautious approach at the same time. I still can't get through to you!

[Coney]

A sugar-daddy IS NOT a business model.

Tell that to the tart at number 48.

[AKBapologist]

Oh dear!

1). Read the quote in my sig again. WENGER HAS TO BE FORCED TO SPEND! And read PNG's post and my response earlier to Gazidis' comments.

2). No, the self-sustainable model IS NOT his idea! BUt if he wanted to spend 30million on a player, HE CAN.

But he does not think it is worth it. Which why he says "I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING" and "I WILL DO IT MY WAY".

3). Wenger is free to strenghten the squad to HIS VALUATION AND HIS VALUATION ALONE!

And no, he hasn't got a 100million budget each season to splash -- which is irrelevant and not necessary anyway (THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD).

I have tried to debate you separately on both the sugar-daddy issue and wenger's overly cautious approach at the same time. I still can't get through to you!

1) I have signatures blocked, and that quote is totally irrelevant hyperbole and has been contradicted by dozens of other quotes from AW, Gladis, PHW and others so excuse me if I ignore it OK?

2) He could make one off, 30mill signing, or spend evenly between a number of players, he has had seasons like 07/08 where he purchased Lassana Diarra, Ramsey and Nasri, for at the time, pretty much the going rate, but getting the same quality of payers for similar price since then has been immensely difficult. What's more, those transfers where heavily subsided that season, and in subsequent seasons, by PLAYER SALES.

3) Infact the money we currently have, the surplus we're about to spend - is only there because of *Wengers*. Buying low, selling high, youth policy etc. Nothings suddenly changed, we're not loosening the purse strings, or going into more debt - we can't because we're not rich, and you've shown me NO EVIDENCE WHAT SO EVER to suggest otherwise. So buddy, you can repeat the same tired, tired quote over and over, but until you want to show prove that we can spend more than we earn, everything you've been saying is MUD.

[Power n Glory]

:clap:

It doesn't matter how many quotes you find, some people would rather believe he's a victim of circumstance and in a powerless position.

We've had quotes from Wenger saying that we have money but he chooses to nurture young talent. Quotes from various board members saying we have money to spend. Quotes from Wenger about sitting in on contract negotiations when needed, heck, a few months back I heard something on the Tuesday Club about Wenger saying he sits in on the catering budget meetings! Which other manager does that?

But given all this, you'll still find some that believe he's just a puppet. He's one of the longest standing managers in Prem League history, has changed the culture of Arsenal, convinced the club to make huge changes such as building the youth development academy to the move to the Emirates, yet some believe he's some sort of pawn. I don't believe that for a second.

Look back on his quotes during his early days as a manager and you'll see he's doing what he's always wanted to do. He's trying to build an Ajax. That's great for us and great for him, but we need someone at Board level that knows just as much about football as he does. American guys that know about Sports management won't help because they'll depend on him for guidance just like how the Board do now. They can't get rid of Wenger because he's their walking stick. Dein was a football man and Mr Arsenal which is why he could put Wenger in check. Wenger respected his footballing opinion and we need someone else like that.

Worth repeating this post. No point in going on with this debate because key points are purposely being ignored to suit certain positions. You can't have a debate like that.

[Kano]

14.5mill on transfers in, 7.7mill in transfers out, 6.8mill net - we probably lowered our wage bill with the number of players we released. http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/arsenal-transfers.html

weren't you saying that the figures we spend is inclusive of wages? that figure of 14.5 is then not valid. there have been new improved contracts signed, which would either balance out that decrease or increase the total amount.

every season a certain amount of players leave, trimming at the edges, just as will happen this summer.

[AKBapologist]

weren't you saying that the figures we spend is inclusive of wages? that figure of 14.5 is then not valid. there have been new improved contracts signed, which would either balance out that decrease or increase the total amount.

every season a certain amount of players leave, trimming at the edges, just as will happen this summer.

I guess that's where things get complicated and why concepts like "transfer funds" to those guys are meaningless, they probably extend, pay and grant new wages as well as commission transfers from the same pot.

At PnG, the argument has never been that AW isn't complisit, it's that any manager would have to follow the same rules.