PL Everton Vs Arsenal 22/10/2017 Sky Sports 1:30pm

[Makingtrax]

Bollocks. You judge the manager by whether or not he's achieving the club's goals.

Bollocks, those are the club's goals. Every club's goal is relative to their spending.

£74m Huddersfield isn't going to set top four as their goal . . it's staying up in the prem.

United, City and Chelsea spend the most, so they won't keep a manager long if they don't win the the title.

Internal targets for the club are nearly always parallel with spend. . . realistic. The fans are a whole other matter, as we read on AM.

 

[Makingtrax]

You're basically saying that the manager isn't a factor at all, and clubs should do away with them and concentrate their funds on player recruitment.

Don't know where you get that from?

 

[Toast]

Bollocks, those are the club's goals. Every club's goal is relative to their spending.

£74m Huddersfield isn't going to set top four as their goal . . it's staying up in the prem.

United, City and Chelsea spend the most, so they won't keep a manager long if they don't win the the title.

Internal targets for the club are nearly always parallel with spend. . . realistic. The fans are a whole other matter, as we read on AM.

31 May 2017
“Our ambition is to win the Premier League and other major trophies in Europe. It’s what the fans, players, staff, manager and board expect and we won’t rest until that is achieved." - Stan Kroenke.

"We’re committed to mounting a sustained league challenge and that will be our focus this summer and next season." - Arséne Wenger.

"“There is no complacency anywhere at this club. Our goal is to compete for and win trophies here and in Europe." - Ivan Gazidis.

5 August 2017
"When you have made 75 points (last season), your target is to get 10 points more. And with 10 points more, you are in there (the title race)." - Arsène Wenger
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those are the club's goals. You can whine about squad cost all you want, but that does nothing to change the fact that both Wenger and the club think those targets are achievable with the resources we have. We have every right to judge the manager and those above him by those standards.

Your argument is basically that Wenger and the club don't have a clue what we can and cannot achieve, because the intenet once told you something about vague correlations with squad cost and you therefore know best.

 

[redwhiteAustrian]

Good win, at least we haven't given up already.

Koeman left Everton, some further positive news for Wenger.

 

[samshere]

Don't know where you get that from?

If a manager can only ever perform as good as his squad, then it follows that the manager is a non entity and the squad is all that matters. Use the 8m a year to improve the squad. Unless you're saying that the manager can perform worse than what his squad dictates, but not better, so he offers only downward protection.

 

[Makingtrax]

31 May 2017
“Our ambition is to win the Premier League and other major trophies in Europe. It’s what the fans, players, staff, manager and board expect and we won’t rest until that is achieved." - Stan Kroenke.

"We’re committed to mounting a sustained league challenge and that will be our focus this summer and next season." - Arséne Wenger.

"“There is no complacency anywhere at this club. Our goal is to compete for and win trophies here and in Europe." - Ivan Gazidis.

5 August 2017
"When you have made 75 points (last season), your target is to get 10 points more. And with 10 points more, you are in there (the title race)." - Arséne Wenger
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those are the club's goals. You can whine about squad cost all you want, but that does nothing to change the fact that both Wenger and the club think those targets are achievable with the resources we have. We have every right to judge the manager and those above him by those standards.

Your argument is basically that Wenger and the club don't have a clue what we can and cannot achieve, because the intenet once told you something about vague correlations with squad cost and you therefore know best.

You can whine about press releases all you want but we've had this discussion over and over.

What the club say in public is one thing, what they say in private is another. The board are never going to say we can't match the spending of City, United and Chelsea so don't expect us to win this league anytime soon.

They're a business, and it's their job not to talk us down if they want sponsorship and ticket sales.

What's clear, is that if the board really thought they could beat the three richer teams, they would have sacked Wenger a long time ago.

The truth is they know how much less they've spent and feel they've done well with the resources at Wenger's disposal. That's why he's still here.

 

[Makingtrax]

If a manager can only ever perform as good as his squad, then it follows that the manager is a non entity and the squad is all that matters. Use the 8m a year to improve the squad. Unless you're saying that the manager can perform worse than what his squad dictates, but not better, so he offers only downward protection.

Of course managers can outperform their spending. Wenger's spent almost half what the rich three have spent over the last 20 years.

He's frequently beaten them in the league race. But recently since their spending has increased, never all three at once until 2015/16. He's frequently beaten them in the FA Cup as well. The likes of Koeman could never match his achievements.

Not sure what you're expecting, but the guy's done really well. He's a victim of his own success.

 

[Toast]

You can whine about press releases all you want but we've had this discussion over and over.

What the club say in public is one thing, what they say in private is another. The board are never going to say we can't match the spending of City, United and Chelsea so don't expect us to win this league anytime soon.

They're a business, and it's their job not to talk us down if they want sponsorship and ticket sales.

What's clear, is that if the board really thought they could beat the three richer teams, they would have sacked Wenger a long time ago.

The truth is they know how much less they've spent and feel they've done well with the resources at Wenger's disposal. That's why he's still here.

You have no idea whatsoever what they say behind closed doors. Their public statements is what we have to go on and they are very clear.

Interestingly, when we really couldn't compete with Chelsea, City and United the club was rather honest about that fact. Back then they said that getting into the CL places was our goal. It's not until the money came rolling in that the goals set by the club became more ambitious. Nobody forced them to be more ambitious. They assessed the new situation and decided the club is now in a position to realistically challenge for the league title.

The logical conclusion to draw from the board not sacking Wenger is that they think they can achieve their goals with Wenger at the helm and/or that Wenger at least isn't failing badly enough to risk trying it a different way. It is completely illogical to assume Wenger staying on means the board thinks the club can't compete.

You assume that the club lies in its press statements. You assume they say something different behind closed doors. You assume they think we've done the best we can. You'll assume whatever suits your argument, but you don't have any evidence for it.

In the scenario you have concocted for yourself the club at some point, and completely of its own volition, decided to outwardly start lying to the fans while internally simply resigning itself to the fact that they would never deliver on the promises they were making. And you think that is good business sense. You think it helps to sell tickets and attract sponsors if you consistenly fail to hit your own targets.

Bottom line, you personally don't believe we can compete. That's fine. The club disagrees with you. Why can't you accept that?

 

[Mo Britain]

You can whine about press releases all you want but we've had this discussion over and over.

What the club say in public is one thing, what they say in private is another. The board are never going to say we can't match the spending of City, United and Chelsea so don't expect us to win this league anytime soon.

They're a business, and it's their job not to talk us down if they want sponsorship and ticket sales.

What's clear, is that if the board really thought they could beat the three richer teams, they would have sacked Wenger a long time ago.

The truth is they know how much less they've spent and feel they've done well with the resources at Wenger's disposal. That's why he's still here.

I agree with much of what you say BUT I would put it to you that the reason the board can't match the spending of the three clubs you mention is simply that the majority shareholder of our club has not contributed a penny since buying his first share - taken money out in fact - and to admit a lack of ambition would be effectively to concede this, and confirm the fans in their view that he is not an acceptable owner from where we stand.

 

[James Bond]

Always believed that's how they should be judged. Is there another way? Everything's relative.

Mourinho takes the richest £600m squad and comes 6th in 2016/17 . . . poor

Koeman has been given £140m to spend in the summer and takes the team into the relegation zone. . . . poor

Wenger spends half what the richest three teams have spent over 21 years and wins 16 trophies . . excellent.

Wenger was given/spent 100M in the summer of 2016-2017 and takes the team out of CL football by finishing 5th. Offered/signs extension by Charity FC.

Harsh world for everyone but Arsène it seems.

 

[Makingtrax]

You have no idea whatsoever what they say behind closed doors. Their public statements is what we have to go on and they are very clear.

Interestingly, when we really couldn't compete with Chelsea, City and United the club was rather honest about that fact. Back then they said that getting into the CL places was our goal. It's not until the money came rolling in that the goals set by the club became more ambitious. Nobody forced them to be more ambitious. They assessed the new situation and decided the club is now in a position to realistically challenge for the league title.

The logical conclusion to draw from the board not sacking Wenger is that they think they can achieve their goals with Wenger at the helm and/or that Wenger at least isn't failing badly enough to risk trying it a different way. It is completely illogical to assume Wenger staying on means the board thinks the club can't compete.

You assume that the club lies in its press statements. You assume they say something different behind closed doors. You assume they think we've done the best we can. You'll assume whatever suits your argument, but you don't have any evidence for it.

In the scenario you have concocted for yourself the club at some point, and completely of its own volition, decided to outwardly start lying to the fans while internally simply resigning itself to the fact that they would never deliver on the promises they were making. And you think that is good business sense. You think it helps to sell tickets and attract sponsors if you consistenly fail to hit your own targets.

Bottom line, you personally don't believe we can compete. That's fine. The club disagrees with you. Why can't you accept that?

Not interested in what Wenger says, he's an employee.

The board run this club and they are not lying. You're just confusing goals and targets.

A goal is something you hope to achieve in future. It is the goal of every club to compete and challenge in this league and try to win the title, otherwise what's the point of being there. That surely is their focus and that's what the board have said.

A target is a specific result that the club/board sets (usually internal) and intends to acheive.

There are two compelling arguments to suggest that the board has not set finishing first as their specific target.

1. Given the overwhelming evidence of the relationship between winning and wealth, why are they not spending all their capital to really go for it.

2. Wenger has not achieved a first place finish for 13 years yet he remains in post.

Both of these however fit perfectly with the scenario that they realise they cannot outspend the big three, and given what they have spent, there are few managers who could have achieved 3EPL titles and 7 FA Cups with that money.

The board are not stupid and realise what might have happened if we'd changed Wenger for the likes of Koeman. And do you honestly think that Mourinho or Pep would come to a club with the fifth biggest spend, both of those two know which side their breads buttered?

 

[Makingtrax]

Wenger was given/spent 100M in the summer of 2016-2017 and takes the team out of CL football by finishing 5th. Offered/signs extension by Charity FC.

Harsh world for everyone but Arséne it seems.

You suggesting finishing outside the top four by one point and winning the FA Cup is comparable to going into the relegation zone like Koeman? Really!

 

[hydrofluoric acid]

Good win, at least we haven't given up already.

Well we always play better when the league is not longer reachable!

 

[Makingtrax]

I agree with much of what you say BUT I would put it to you that the reason the board can't match the spending of the three clubs you mention is simply that the majority shareholder of our club has not contributed a penny since buying his first share - taken money out in fact - and to admit a lack of ambition would be effectively to concede this, and confirm the fans in their view that he is not an acceptable owner from where we stand.

Can't argue with that.

 

[Toast]

Not interested in what Wenger says, he's an employee.

The board run this club and they are not lying. You're just confusing goals and targets.

A goal is something you hope to achieve in future. It is the goal of every club to compete and challenge in this league and try to win the title, otherwise what's the point of being there. That surely is their focus and that's what the board have said.

A target is a specific result that the club/board sets (usually internal) and intends to acheive.

There are two compelling arguments to suggest that the board has not set finishing first as their specific target.

1. Given the overwhelming evidence of the relationship between winning and wealth, why are they not spending all their capital to really go for it.

2. Wenger has not achieved a first place finish for 13 years yet he remains in post.

Both of these however fit perfectly with the scenario that they realise they cannot outspend the big three, and given what they have spent, there are few managers who could have achieved 3EPL titles and 7 FA Cups with that money.

The board are not stupid and realise what might have happened if we'd changed Wenger for the likes of Koeman. And do you honestly think that Mourinho or Pep would come to a club with the fifth biggest spend, both of those two know which side their breads buttered?

I see your point and it's fine to distinguish between goals and targets as you do, but you're ultimately just retreating into semantics.

You brush off Wenger's comments because they directly contradict what you're saying, but your personal disinterest in them does not make them any less valid. Nor do I see why the fact that Wenger is an employee should invalidate his comments.The target, if you will, is therefore to get to 85 points and thereby compete for the title this season.

The goal since 2014, as articulated by Kroenke and Gazidis, is to regularly compete at the very top, which is to be achieved by regularly hitting the targets of getting a high enough point tally to be in the title race and by making it to the final stages of the CL. Before 2014 our goal was to stay in the CL places and Wenger achieved that admirably.

The club evidently believes we now possess the necessary resources to achieve our new goals. Otherwise, there would not have been a change in rhetoric.

If the goal is to compete for the league, the concrete target becomes to achieve about 85 points, because that's what you need to win. At the very least the target for success will be to get closer to achieving that total. With that in mind we can still assess how we've been doing over the past few years in terms of achieving or even moving closer towards achieving our goals. I'd say we've failed our targets since 2014 and therefore are failing to get closer to, let alone accomplish, our goals.

At the same time, it is absolutely possible to set a minimum threshold for the manager to keep his job. Let's say that target is 75 points, as that is normally enough to finish in a CL place. Wenger is great at hitting 75 points, as you yourself have pointed out. That doesn't mean he didn't fail to hit the targets for success, it just means he passed the minimum requirements for having another go.

You seem to suggest, but correct me if I got this wrong, that internally the target is set as 75 points for the season to be succesful, while outwardly the target, implied or made explicit, is 85 points. This, I've argued, flies in the face of both evidence and logic.

The goals are there, as are the targets and failure to meet them is fair grounds for criticism. Even if this manager can't hit the targets to take us closer to our goals, that in no way means the club is incapable of such achievements.

 

[James Bond]

You suggesting finishing outside the top four by one point and winning the FA Cup is comparable to going into the relegation zone like Koeman? Really!

Judge him in May.

Lets compare the two summers and results...

Everton 2017-2018
Manager: Koeman
Net spend over summer: +54m (140m total)
League results:
1. Round 12/08/2017 15:00 H Stoke City 1:0 (1:0)
2. Round 21/08/2017 20:00 A Manchester City 1:1 (1:0)
3. Round 27/08/2017 13:30 A Chelsea FC 0:2 (0:2)
4. Round 09/09/2017 15:00 H Tottenham Hotspur 0:3 (0:2)
5. Round 17/09/2017 16:00 A Manchester United 0:4 (0:1)
6. Round 23/09/2017 15:00 H AFC Bournemouth 2:1 (0:0)
7. Round 01/10/2017 14:15 H Burnley FC 0:1 (0:1)
8. Round 15/10/2017 13:30 A Brighton & Hove Albion 1:1 (0:0)
9. Round 22/10/2017 13:30 H Arsenal FC 2:5 (1:1)

Points 7 (Taking out the point vs BHA).
End result. Sack


Arsenal 2016-2017
Manager: Wenger
Net spend over summer: +85m (95m total)
League results:
15. Round 10/12/2016 15:00 H Stoke City 3:1 (1:1)
17. Round 18/12/2016 16:00 A Manchester City 1:2 (1:0)
24. Round 04/02/2017 12:30 A Chelsea FC 1:3 (0:1)
11. Round 06/11/2016 12:00 H Tottenham Hotspur 1:1 (1:0)
12. Round 19/11/2016 12:30 A Manchester United 1:1 (0:0)
13. Round 27/11/2016 14:15 H AFC Bournemouth 3:1 (1:1)
22. Round 22/01/2017 14:15 H Burnley FC 2:1 (0:0)
16. Round 13/12/2016 19:45 A Everton FC 1:2 (1:1)

Points 11
End Result: 2 year extension.


3 points better off over the same fixtures last year, with Wenger spending 30M more net yet one gets the sack and the other got a raise and extension. Charity FC. Again its a harsh world of modern football out there for anyone but Arsène.

 

[Makingtrax]

I see your point and it's fine to distinguish between goals and targets as you do, but you're ultimately just retreating into semantics.

You brush off Wenger's comments because they directly contradict what you're saying, but your personal disinterest in them does not make them any less valid. Nor do I see why the fact that Wenger is an employee should invalidate his comments.The target, if you will, is therefore to get to 85 points and thereby compete for the title this season.

The goal since 2014, as articulated by Kroenke and Gazidis, is to regularly compete at the very top, which is to be achieved by regularly hitting the targets of getting a high enough point tally to be in the title race and by making it to the final stages of the CL. Before 2014 our goal was to stay in the CL places and Wenger achieved that admirably.

The club evidently believes we now possess the necessary resources to achieve our new goals. Otherwise, there would not have been a change in rhetoric.

If the goal is to compete for the league, the concrete target becomes to achieve about 85 points, because that's what you need to win. At the very least the target for success will be to get closer to achieving that total. With that in mind we can still assess how we've been doing over the past few years in terms of achieving or even moving closer towards achieving our goals. I'd say we've failed our targets since 2014 and therefore are failing to get closer to, let alone accomplish, our goals.

At the same time, it is absolutely possible to set a minimum threshold for the manager to keep his job. Let's say that target is 75 points, as that is normally enough to finish in a CL place. Wenger is great at hitting 75 points, as you yourself have pointed out. That doesn't mean he didn't fail to hit the targets for success, it just means he passed the minimum requirements for having another go.

You seem to suggest, but correct me if I got this wrong, that internally the target is set as 75 points for the season to be succesful, while outwardly the target, implied or made explicit, is 85 points. This, I've argued, flies in the face of both evidence and logic.

The goals are there, as are the targets and failure to meet them are fair grounds for criticism. Even if this manager can't hit the targets to take us closer to our goals, that in no way means the club is incapable of such achievements.

I brush off Wenger's comments because ultimately this discussion is about boards judging managers, in the light of the Koeman sacking.

You want to judge Wenger for not achieving 85 points or so since 2014, that's fine, but I see no evidence or words mentioning specifically that from his employees . . . just general aims, to rouse the troups.

None of us have any idea what targets have actually been set as you've pointed out. But I've given some reasons why I don't think the board are judging Wenger by a first place finish, or even a first place challenge, like a lot of the fans are.

At no stage have we been anywhere near the highest spending club, in fact 4th last year was the closest. Apart from the Leicester fluke no other club has been able to buck the money trend of beating the big three since the oligarchs arrived in 2004.

I prefer to judge Wenger by what he has achieved against the odds over a long period of time. He's just a good manager who can make mistakes, not superman.

If you expect him to challenge and beat all three teams that have consistently outspent him by some distance, that's your affair. But I think it's harsh. He's often beaten one or even two but all three is a tall order.

 

[Makingtrax]

Judge him in May.

Lets compare the two summers and results...

Everton 2017-2018
Manager: Koeman
Net spend over summer: +54m (140m total)
League results:
1. Round 12/08/2017 15:00 H Stoke City 1:0 (1:0)
2. Round 21/08/2017 20:00 A Manchester City 1:1 (1:0)
3. Round 27/08/2017 13:30 A Chelsea FC 0:2 (0:2)
4. Round 09/09/2017 15:00 H Tottenham Hotspur 0:3 (0:2)
5. Round 17/09/2017 16:00 A Manchester United 0:4 (0:1)
6. Round 23/09/2017 15:00 H AFC Bournemouth 2:1 (0:0)
7. Round 01/10/2017 14:15 H Burnley FC 0:1 (0:1)
8. Round 15/10/2017 13:30 A Brighton & Hove Albion 1:1 (0:0)
9. Round 22/10/2017 13:30 H Arsenal FC 2:5 (1:1)

Points 7 (Taking out the point vs BHA).
End result. Sack


Arsenal 2016-2017
Manager: Wenger
Net spend over summer: +85m (95m total)
League results:
15. Round 10/12/2016 15:00 H Stoke City 3:1 (1:1)
17. Round 18/12/2016 16:00 A Manchester City 1:2 (1:0)
24. Round 04/02/2017 12:30 A Chelsea FC 1:3 (0:1)
11. Round 06/11/2016 12:00 H Tottenham Hotspur 1:1 (1:0)
12. Round 19/11/2016 12:30 A Manchester United 1:1 (0:0)
13. Round 27/11/2016 14:15 H AFC Bournemouth 3:1 (1:1)
22. Round 22/01/2017 14:15 H Burnley FC 2:1 (0:0)
16. Round 13/12/2016 19:45 A Everton FC 1:2 (1:1)

Points 11
End Result: 2 year extension.


3 points better off over the same fixtures last year, with Wenger spending 30M more net yet one gets the sack and the other got a raise and extension. Charity FC. Again its a harsh world of modern football out there for anyone but Arséne.

That's ridiculous.

Wenger's matches weren't in succession, Wenger got 4 points more over just 8 matches, Wenger never went into the relegation zone, Wenger never got a raise (unless you can provide a link, but I've asked for one several times), Wenger's other results to go with these took him one point off the top 4, Wenger won an FA Cup.

Ffs 007 this is desperation posting

 

[Toast]

I brush off Wenger's comments because ultimately this discussion is about boards judging managers, in the light of the Koeman sacking.

You want to judge Wenger for not achieving 85 points or so since 2014, that's fine, but I see no evidence or words mentioning specifically that from his employees . . . just general aims, to rouse the troups.

None of us have any idea what targets have actually been set as you've pointed out. But I've given some reasons why I don't think the board are judging Wenger by a first place finish, or even a first place challenge, like a lot of the fans are.

At no stage have we been anywhere near the highest spending club, in fact 4th last year was the closest. Apart from the Leicester fluke no other club has been able to buck the money trend of beating the big three since the oligarchs arrived in 2004.

I prefer to judge Wenger by what he has achieved against the odds over a long period of time. He's just a good manager who can make mistakes, not superman.

If you expect him to challenge and beat all three teams that have consistently outspent him by some distance, that's your affair. But I think it's harsh. He's often beaten one or even two but all three is a tall order.

This discussion was set off because we disagree how a manager should be judged. You hold we should judge achievements conmensuarate to spending power, I hold we should judge against self-imposed goals and targets.

I think we're pretty much in agreement. You still seem more focused on Wenger's pre-2014 work, and I certainly won't disparage what he's achieved in that period. He did a phenomenal job.

Were I think we, respectfully, disagree is to what extent we are able to compete for the league now. I've set out my reasons for believing the club, Wenger included, at present considers us to have the means to realistically aim for 85 points and also why 75 points has generally satisfied the board as a minimum requirement. Personally, I believe the club is capable of hitting 85 points right now, though I don't think it'll happen under Wenger.

Ultimately the insiders are in the best position to judge, and they've publicly stated that we aim to compete for the league right now. 75 points is no longer good enough. I'm taking them at their word and will judge them by their standards.
If you want to judge him using different criteria that is, to use your own words, your affair.

P.S. If you won't take Wenger's word for it, how about Ivan's? He even partially takes on board your point about spending.

30 June 2017 - It was a bit disappointing, we were in the mid-70s for points and our ambition is to win the Premier League and to do that you have to be at least mid-80s, probably upper 80s. So there is a gap. We have to close that gap and that’s not just about spending, although that’s obviously a big part of it.

EDIT: This one is even better.

(On his hope for the 2017/18 season) There is an awful lot going on, we’re only four weeks from the end of last season. You’ll see the product of some of that work soon, some on the player front, some will be behind the scenes. All of that work is geared towards getting from 75 points to 85 and more, to win the Premier League.

 

[James Bond]

That's ridiculous.

Wenger's matches weren't in succession, Wenger got 4 points more over just 8 matches, Wenger never went into the relegation zone, Wenger never got a raise (unless you can provide a link, but I've asked for one several times), Wenger's other results to go with these took him one point off the top 4, Wenger won an FA Cup.

Ffs 007 this is desperation posting

Wenger always gets until May to turn things around though. Which was my point. You were saying Koeman deserved to be sacked for his results and money spent. I pointed, then provided, results showing they were hardly better than Wenger's the year prior yet his failing are judged completely different in your eyes.

What is ridiculous is that I apparently need to point out that Koeman easily had the hardest first 9 games of the season and he was sacked as a result. 5 of his first 9 games were vs England's top 6. I was never saying Koeman should not have but I fail to see how he performed any different than Arsène. Wenger was just lucky they didnt all come at the start of the season.