• ! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !

    Discussions about police investigations

    In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.

    Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.

Let's all laugh at Man Utd: Amrabad


Country: Iceland
Not just managers. You are already seeing fans on here defending United season saying its progress and they are going in the right direction. Disgusting.
 

Rocky

Swears he's not a Tottenham fan
It's interesting to see a number of people complain about the amount of money spent at Utd without a high league position or good football being played.

I haven't kept up with the 'squad cost' debate, but it seemed as though it was @Makingtrax versus almost the entire forum? If that were the case, it would be hard to resolve the contradiction of that with the above complaints about Man Utd.
 

Country: Iceland
I always maintained that there is link between the richest clubs 3 and thereby heaviest spenders and them sharing the title between them for last 13 seasons apart for when Leicester won it.

But there are other factors of course what decide which team win it. I think we should have won it last season if we played our cards right.

With that said. It wont surprise me a bit if Chelsea will have slow season next year and United and City will battle out for the league title.
 

Batman

Head of the Wayne foundation for benching Nketiah

Country: USA

Player:Saliba
It's interesting to see a number of people complain about the amount of money spent at Utd without a high league position or good football being played.

I haven't kept up with the 'squad cost' debate, but it seemed as though it was @Makingtrax versus almost the entire forum? If that were the case, it would be hard to resolve the contradiction of that with the above complaints about Man Utd.
Except that nobody is complaining about it. We're all more amused at how dreadful they are relative to what they've spent than anything. That has absolutely nothing to do with us and everything to do with how badly they've misallocated their tremendous resources. The funny thing about his whole "squad cost" argument is that its entire purpose is to defend Wenger but actually either way you look at it Wenger looks bad. We don't spend as much as we could(and he has admitted that he treats the club's money like his own meaning he's the one behind it) but we're not so far behind our rivals(bar United who again are incredibly wasteful and underachieving terribly) in "squad cost" that it justifies our continuing regression in the league.
 

Rocky

Swears he's not a Tottenham fan
Except that nobody is complaining about it. We're all more amused at how dreadful they are relative to what they've spent. That has absolutely nothing to do with us and everything to do with how badly they've misallocated their tremendous resources.

Which is an acknowledgement that resources make a difference. It has plenty to do with any debate on Arsenal's resources and expectations. Can't have it both ways.
 

Batman

Head of the Wayne foundation for benching Nketiah

Country: USA

Player:Saliba
Which is an acknowledgement that resources make a difference. It has plenty to do with any debate on Arsenal's resources and expectations. Can't have it both ways.
Resources CAN make a difference. They aren't the be all end all. No club on earth has more access to capital than Manchester City. How do they fare in Europe?
 

Rocky

Swears he's not a Tottenham fan
Resources CAN make a difference. They aren't the be all end all. No club on earth has more access to capital than Manchester City. How do they fare in Europe?

I agree, except I think it is fairer to say that resources DO make a difference. They always do, regardless of the less than 100% correlation between resources and league position. Perhaps I should actually read all of the debates on resources to understand what the debate actually is. I just can't really be arsed...

It's obvious that resources are a huge factor. Obvious that Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea have more than anyone else in the league. Obvious that all managers make mistakes regardless of resources. Obvious that resources aren't the only factor as Leicester proved. Obvious that anyone arguing that Wenger has never made a mistake is wrong. Obvious that anyone who denies that resources have played a huge part in the stranglehold of Man Utd, Chelsea and Man City is wrong.
 

Batman

Head of the Wayne foundation for benching Nketiah

Country: USA

Player:Saliba
I agree, except I think it is fairer to say that resources DO make a difference. They always do, regardless of the less than 100% correlation between resources and league position. Perhaps I should actually read all of the debates on resources to understand what the debate actually is. I just can't really be arsed...

It's obvious that resources are a huge factor. Obvious that Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea have more than anyone else in the league. Obvious that all managers make mistakes regardless of resources. Obvious that resources aren't the only factor as Leicester proved. Obvious that anyone arguing that Wenger has never made a mistake is wrong. Obvious that anyone who denies that resources have played a huge part in the stranglehold of Man Utd, Chelsea and Man City is wrong.
There seems to be some confusion here of willingness to spend versus resources. If Kroenke and Usmanov wanted to work together they could easily outspend United and Chelsea. They've got way more money than the Glazers and Roman do with their combined wealth. Clearly we do have the resources. What is also clear is that between Kroenke and Wenger there is less inclination to both properly and fully utilize those resources than there should be.The fact that the manager can flush 16M down the toilet on Perez means we can't exactly cry poverty even compared to those 3 clubs you've mentioned but resources mean very little if you don't dispense them well as United are proving on a macro level and we are proving on a smaller scale.

It's difficult though to look at a club like Atletico or Dortmund and the success they've had relative to their resources with bigger fish than we have to worry about to compete with and continue to moan about squad cost. Our squad cost is much closer to Chelsea's or City's than Dortmund's is to Bayern or Atleti's is to Barca and Madrid and yet both of those sides have managed to compete in Europe and domestically and even pip those giants to the title while we have floundered. What that suggests is that our utilization of resources is a greater problem than the quantity of them.
 

Rocky

Swears he's not a Tottenham fan
There seems to be some confusion here of willingness to spend versus resources. If Kroenke and Usmanov wanted to work together they could easily outspend United and Chelsea. They've got way more money than the Glazers and Roman do with their combined wealth. Clearly we do have the resources. What is also clear is that between Kroenke and Wenger there is less inclination to both properly and fully utilize those resources than there should be.The fact that the manager can flush 16M down the toilet on Perez means we can't exactly cry poverty even compared to those 3 clubs you've mentioned but resources mean very little if you don't dispense them well as United are proving on a macro level and we are proving on a smaller scale.

It's difficult though to look at a club like Atletico or Dortmund and the success they've had relative to their resources with bigger fish than we have to worry about to compete with and continue to moan about squad cost. Our squad cost is much closer to Chelsea's or City's than Dortmund's is to Bayern or Atleti's is to Barca and Madrid and yet both of those sides have managed to compete in Europe and domestically and even pip those giants to the title while we have floundered. What that suggests is that our utilization of resources is a greater problem than the quantity of them.

Of course, I agree that willingness and ability to invest resources are part of the issue. However, I'm referring to criticism of Wenger's performance as manager, when people reject the relevance of resources allocated on the squad. It isn't unambiguously clear what the truth is about the level of resources being made available to Wenger by the club.

If you want a different owner of a club, that's up to you. However it doesn't automatically lead on that it is reasonable to criticise someone who has bought a business legitimately and seen that business turn over a healthy profit. If Kroenke wants to do that it's up to him, he's the major shareholder and that is how it works. No amount of billions that Usmanov owns can do anything to force that to change.

Dortmund and Athletico have done very well with less resources, although it's quite biased to portray them as doing better than Arsenal. Neither team has won all that many trophies really. Neither team has won the league more than Wenger has over the period he has been manager (Dortmund 3, Atheltico 1). Athetico won the Europa League while Arsenal were competing in the Champions League. Neither team can compete with Arsenal's success in domestic cups during the Wenger era. I don't think either of them has to compete with 3 teams investing more than them like Arsenal do with Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.

Absolutely the utilization of resources can be questioned - it just doesn't automatically necessitate slagging off the manager or moaning about ownership and the board.
 

Makingtrax

Worships in the house of Wenger 🙏
Trusted ⭐

Country: England

Player:Saliba
Of course, I agree that willingness and ability to invest resources are part of the issue. However, I'm referring to criticism of Wenger's performance as manager, when people reject the relevance of resources allocated on the squad. It isn't unambiguously clear what the truth is about the level of resources being made available to Wenger by the club.

If you want a different owner of a club, that's up to you. However it doesn't automatically lead on that it is reasonable to criticise someone who has bought a business legitimately and seen that business turn over a healthy profit. If Kroenke wants to do that it's up to him, he's the major shareholder and that is how it works. No amount of billions that Usmanov owns can do anything to force that to change.

Dortmund and Athletico have done very well with less resources, although it's quite biased to portray them as doing better than Arsenal. Neither team has won all that many trophies really. Neither team has won the league more than Wenger has over the period he has been manager (Dortmund 3, Atheltico 1). Athetico won the Europa League while Arsenal were competing in the Champions League. Neither team can compete with Arsenal's success in domestic cups during the Wenger era. I don't think either of them has to compete with 3 teams investing more than them like Arsenal do with Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.

Absolutely the utilization of resources can be questioned - it just doesn't automatically necessitate slagging off the manager or moaning about ownership and the board.
Nobody knows the truth about the level of resources Wenger has been given, but of course it suits his critics to say that he's just stubborn and refuses to spend. We do know there's money in the bank to improve this team though, but not enough to outspend or out bid the big three.

Only a fool or people with agendas refuse to acknowledge the degree to which money affects the final position in the league. We'll probably never know what Wenger or even the likes of Tony Pullis could have achieved if they'd been given £650m like Mourinho.
 

Wilshere10

Well-Known Member
Of course, I agree that willingness and ability to invest resources are part of the issue. However, I'm referring to criticism of Wenger's performance as manager, when people reject the relevance of resources allocated on the squad. It isn't unambiguously clear what the truth is about the level of resources being made available to Wenger by the club.

If you want a different owner of a club, that's up to you. However it doesn't automatically lead on that it is reasonable to criticise someone who has bought a business legitimately and seen that business turn over a healthy profit. If Kroenke wants to do that it's up to him, he's the major shareholder and that is how it works. No amount of billions that Usmanov owns can do anything to force that to change.

Dortmund and Athletico have done very well with less resources, although it's quite biased to portray them as doing better than Arsenal. Neither team has won all that many trophies really. Neither team has won the league more than Wenger has over the period he has been manager (Dortmund 3, Atheltico 1). Athetico won the Europa League while Arsenal were competing in the Champions League. Neither team can compete with Arsenal's success in domestic cups during the Wenger era. I don't think either of them has to compete with 3 teams investing more than them like Arsenal do with Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.

Absolutely the utilization of resources can be questioned - it just doesn't automatically necessitate slagging off the manager or moaning about ownership and the board.
The early Wenger era is not in question though, its about his recent performance.

Since the turn of the decade Dortmund have won 2 league titles, a German cup and reached a European final. Atletico have won a league title, the copa del rey and reached 2 European finals in that same time period. And remember they're competing against the 3 elite clubs in the world right now.

They have far outperformed us on the pitch and definitely made more out of their resources than we have. The fact that we don't make the most out of ours is the problem some of us have.
 

Batman

Head of the Wayne foundation for benching Nketiah

Country: USA

Player:Saliba
Of course, I agree that willingness and ability to invest resources are part of the issue. However, I'm referring to criticism of Wenger's performance as manager, when people reject the relevance of resources allocated on the squad. It isn't unambiguously clear what the truth is about the level of resources being made available to Wenger by the club.

If you want a different owner of a club, that's up to you. However it doesn't automatically lead on that it is reasonable to criticise someone who has bought a business legitimately and seen that business turn over a healthy profit. If Kroenke wants to do that it's up to him, he's the major shareholder and that is how it works. No amount of billions that Usmanov owns can do anything to force that to change.

Dortmund and Athletico have done very well with less resources, although it's quite biased to portray them as doing better than Arsenal. Neither team has won all that many trophies really. Neither team has won the league more than Wenger has over the period he has been manager (Dortmund 3, Atheltico 1). Athetico won the Europa League while Arsenal were competing in the Champions League. Neither team can compete with Arsenal's success in domestic cups during the Wenger era. I don't think either of them has to compete with 3 teams investing more than them like Arsenal do with Man Utd, Man City and Chelsea.

Absolutely the utilization of resources can be questioned - it just doesn't automatically necessitate slagging off the manager or moaning about ownership and the board.
We're not talking about the entire period Wenger has been manager now are we? We're talking about the period since the move to the Emirates which has coincided with takeovers at Chelsea, City and United that have increased their spending power(though United's of course is less artificial).

So from 2005 to now in fact both Atleti and Dortmund have been considerably more successful than ourselves. We have 2 FA cups, haven't challenged for the title and literally nothing else in that time period unless you think repeatedly losing in the knockout stage is an achievement. Atleti have won a CDR, the league over the best teams in the world, finished within 3 points of those teams in another season and gone to 2 CL finals as well as making deep runs into the CL in years they weren't in the final. That's in the last 5 years. You want to compare our 2 paltry FA Cups to that?

Dortmund while not as successful as Atletico have at won a league/cup double and made it to a CL final in the aforementioned 5 year period. You want to tell me you wouldn't take that record over what we've achieved since then. Both clubs have done it with more of a disparity in their resources than we have to our rivals. Now your last point if I'm being polite is strange. Last I checked this is a football forum talking about a football club. I don't give a flying f*ck how healthy a profit Kroenke is turning for himself. I don't support Kroenke's wallet FC. This forum is not Kroenke's Wallet-Mania. It is absolutely fair to both question the intentions and actions of the chairman and board as it relates to our allocation of resources and on field success. It is also absolutely fair to be critical of the manager when the same mistakes are present each and every year and there is tangible evidence that whatever resources he does have are at least partially being wasted.

The point here is that we've seen that having the most money to spend means absolutely nothing if those in charge of spending it don't spend it wisely or if those in charge of managing the players purchased don't do it well. There's a reason that you don't see City, United and PSG in the CL final but you do see Juventus, Madrid,Barca and Bayern. It's because resources are secondary to a stable and sustainable footballing model that maximizes available resources rather than blindly hurling them at the wall. It's why a club like Juve can replace a whole squad in 3-4 seasons without a high net spend and remain competitive while we waste money on players like Perez and go backwards.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts+

Top Bottom