Tony Adams: Graham was a better coach than Wenger

[Toronto Gooner]

All he does anyway is allude to Graham focusing more on the fundamental aspects of the game, the same aspects many of us think are currently missing from Wenger's side.

This is what Adams' is quoted as saying:
No disrespect to Arsene, but George’s coaching ability, defensive structure and technical ability, for me, is far better.

Well, no disrespect to Arsenal's most successful captain but is anyone going to say that George Graham's Arsenal sides were technically superior to Arsene Wenger's? When it comes to defensive structure, yes Graham's teams were better but they were also simpler: ball there, kick ball away; opponent in the way, apologise after kicking him.

Let's be honest, Wenger has developed the Arsenal football style way beyond anything players like Adams could have played. It is much more of a European/World style.

Graham's was a simpler system for a simpler (British) league in which Admas and co thrived. I will go out on a limb here and say that if Adams was CB now, he would NOT be signed by Arsenal because he does not have the technical ability to survive. [The same could be said for some of Arsenal's current defenders, I know.]

As I said earlier, and will repeat here, my intent was not to prove that Wenger's defence is better than Graham's, I wanted to show that Graham's defence was not as good as some have made it out to be.

Right now, everyone knows and accepts that Arsenal's defence needs to be strengthened. The fundamental question is whether the players coming in should be Adam's like (technically limited, kick first, Stoke-like) or Vermaelen like (technically skilled, pass first, World/European)?

[Toronto Gooner]

Not sure why Adams' opinion is being ridiculed, it's far more valid than any of ours.

I am not certain anyone is ridiculing his opinion: just challenging it. And why should his opinion be given greater credence than any others?

[Japan Shaking All Over]

This is what Adams' is quoted as saying:
No disrespect to Arsene, but George’s coaching ability, defensive structure and technical ability, for me, is far better.

Well, no disrespect to Arsenal's most successful captain but is anyone going to say that George Graham's Arsenal sides were technically superior to Arsene Wenger's? When it comes to defensive structure, yes Graham's teams were better but they were also simpler: ball there, kick ball away; opponent in the way, apologise after kicking him.

Let's be honest, Wenger has developed the Arsenal football style way beyond anything players like Adams could have played. It is much more of a European/World style.

Graham's was a simpler system for a simpler (British) league in which Admas and co thrived. I will go out on a limb here and say that if Adams was CB now, he would NOT be signed by Arsenal because he does not have the technical ability to survive. [The same could be said for some of Arsenal's current defenders, I know.]

As I said earlier, and will repeat here, my intent was not to prove that Wenger's defence is better than Graham's, I wanted to show that Graham's defence was not as good as some have made it out to be.

Right now, everyone knows and accepts that Arsenal's defence needs to be strengthened. The fundamental question is whether the players coming in should be Adam's like (technically limited, kick first, Stoke-like) or Vermaelen like (technically skilled, pass first, World/European)?

TG going all the way to prove his point on this one

[Özim]

Let's be honest, Wenger has developed the Arsenal football style way beyond anything players like Adams could have played. It is much more of a European/World style.

Graham's was a simpler system for a simpler (British) league in which Admas and co thrived. I will go out on a limb here and say that if Adams was CB now, he would NOT be signed by Arsenal because he does not have the technical ability to survive. [The same could be said for some of Arsenal's current defenders, I know

Sorry but that's simply not true, Adams played under Wenger and thrived in a far superior side to today's (one that played better football too).

His ability defensively more than made up for any lack technically, he was superb under Wenger.

The only reason he wouldn't be signed by us is that for some odd reason Wenger seems to think passing the ball around is more important than ability to defend for a defender, that's why we've barely got a decent defender today.

Also I'd choose an Adams type player over Vermaelen in a heartbeat, a defender's primary job is to defend not venture forward looking to score goals leaving wide open gaps behind him. Vermaelen after one half decent season (was good to start off with but tailed off badly in the 2nd half of the season) is being hailed as some sort of defensive leader and rock by some, that's yet to be proven.

[Toronto Gooner]

Sorry but that's simply not true, Adams played under Wenger and thrived in a far superior side to today's (one that played better football too).

His ability defensively more than made up for any lack technically, he was superb under Wenger.

The only reason he wouldn't be signed by us is that for some odd reason Wenger seems to think passing the ball around is more important than ability to defend for a defender, that's why we've barely got a decent defender today.

Also I'd choose an Adams type player over Vermaelen in a heartbeat, a defender's primary job is to defend not venture forward looking to score goals leaving wide open gaps behind him. Vermaelen after one half decent season (was good to start off with but tailed off badly in the 2nd half of the season) is being hailed as some sort of defensive leader and rock by some, that's yet to be proven.

So are you saying that Wenger does have the ability to coach defenders well?

We will have to agree to disagree regarding which type of defender to buy.

[Özim]

So are you saying that Wenger does have the ability to coach defenders well?

We will have to agree to disagree regarding which type of defender to buy.

Absolutely, it's pretty clear AW's understanding of the defensive game in severly lacking. Unless he has someone doing it on the pitch for him the defensive game under him is a shambles.

His philosophy is all about attacking, defending doesn't really seem to be a consideration from recent evidence.

With regards defenders, I just want to see someone who is committed and loves defending, not a playmaker at the back, players who love defending go in where it hurts and make it much harder for the opposition.

We've got too many of those players who want to play ball and don't really get those last ditch tackles in.

I loved seeing Campbell playing for us again last season, the difference between him and the others was obvious, he may have been past his best but he's the kind of player we should be looking at...a leader at the back who knows how to defend and is 100% commited.