Best Player of the Emirates Era

Discussion in 'Arsenal Talk' started by American_Gooner, Apr 26, 2019.

?

Who do you consider to be the best player post Highbury?

  1. Cesc Fabregas

    56.7%
  2. Robin Van Persie

    20.5%
  3. Mesut Özil

    6.3%
  4. Alexis Sanchez

    7.1%
  5. Santi Cazorla

    5.5%
  6. Other

    3.9%
  1. Sammy1887

    Sammy1887 Still Hating Reed in 2019

    Well I'm not surprised that he is behind Sanchez, Santi and Cesc. I think Ramsey has done more to be on that list tbf.
     
  2. Mrs Bergkamp

    Mrs Bergkamp Well-Known Member

    Cesc for me. Despite the way he left, he wore our shirt with pride, played well and played through injury. Captained us in the best playing style the PL has seen despite the lack of trophies. A great role model for any youth player who is serious about how good they need to be.
     
  3. American_Gooner

    American_Gooner Not actually American. Unless Di Marzio says so. Moderator

    And the one from GDeep is just a piss take, since he changed his vote after someone mentioned that Özil had 0.
     
    GeorgiaGunner and Sammy1887 like this.
  4. Sammy1887

    Sammy1887 Still Hating Reed in 2019

    GDeep himself is a piss take.
     
    Jury, DasBootist, Camron and 5 others like this.
  5. TheEconomist

    TheEconomist Well-Known Member

    Koscielny should be on the list

    I'd say Fabregas with cazorla not too far behind
     
  6. YeahBee

    YeahBee Terrible hot takes

    To do what Cesc did is unprecidented

    He was a Child who went in and became the heart of the team in the hardest league in the hardest position

    Messi didnt do that
    Cr9 didnt do that
    Etc etc
     
  7. Mark Tobias

    Mark Tobias Mr. Agreeable

    Seconded. Hate the snake but he was immense for us. Played his best football for us too!
     
  8. progman07

    progman07 Well-Known Member

    Unbelievable difference in his passing range to anyone in the current squad. The only reason we didn't win big things around 2008-12 was injuries and the lack of bench options. I mean when van Persie got injured we had players like Bendtner and Chakamkh cover for him... (and he was injuried quite a lot, wasn't he).
     
  9. progman07

    progman07 Well-Known Member

    Subjective but they were right to leave, van Persie left because Gazidis kept lying about our ambition, and Fabregas left to play for the best team in the world at that time. Both got tired of carrying the average players we insisted on playing 'not to kill their careers'.

    I think we were really just 1-2 marquee signings from turning the club into a consistent force, but we failed to do so (e.g. the Xabi Alonso incident) and all of our good players left in turn.
     
  10. TheEconomist

    TheEconomist Well-Known Member

    Agree. Good summary of the Emirates era
     
    say yes likes this.
  11. Oh_Snap

    Oh_Snap Well-Known Member

    Take this survey again in 10 years. Players get better when they dont play for us anymore or are injured. WTF votes for Sanchez ffs
     
    RacingPhoton likes this.
  12. YeahBee

    YeahBee Terrible hot takes

    Bendtner should have been sooo much more but he tripped on his ego

    Trice the player giraud ever was
     
  13. Ricardinho

    Ricardinho La Liga Correspondent

    He was as clumsy as sanogo at times but had some good moments in the shirt.
     
  14. SingmeasongSong

    SingmeasongSong Glass Half Empty

    The worst thing about it is that the money we saved back then to pay off debts is just a drop in the bucket nowadays as the money in football has multiplied.

    Our piss poor budget of last summer or probably the next one as well would basically be enough to get you Fabregas, Van Persie and Arshavin for what we sold or bought them respectively at their primes all together :lol:
     
    Mrs Bergkamp and RacingPhoton like this.
  15. Dennis_Bergkamp_10

    Dennis_Bergkamp_10 Well-Known Member

    You sir are the gift that keeps on giving.
     
    Dj_sds - and Ricardinho like this.
  16. RacingPhoton

    RacingPhoton Well-Known Member

    Yeah. On hindsight, the stadium move turned out to be the worst move in history. Whatever extra money we make out of the move is now easily over-shadowed by tv and kits deals these days. We lost the opportunity to stay at the top and hold the forte because of it. Now there seems to be no way back.
     
    Trilly likes this.
  17. Trilly

    Trilly The John Cross of Ilford

    Stadium move killed us, I previously used to think of it as just bad luck but the more I think about it, the more I think it might have been avoided.

    Could there have been analysis done? Could anyone have seen the revenue boom coming? Was historical data used to determine whether there was a positive trend wrt the money in football? Did anyone bother working out the opportunity cost of building a stadium at the expense of being competitive? Etc.
    It's easy on the surface to say unlucky but if I was about to make such a big commitment with my football club this seems like the kind of stuff I'd be thinking about. Bearing in mind we had a lot to lose, being one of the best teams in the world at that point.

    We basically gambled on the world standing still and waiting for us while we funded and built our stadium. Sounds ridiculous when you put it like that.
     
  18. Mark Tobias

    Mark Tobias Mr. Agreeable

    What a post. But I will answer this one question..
    No, i do not believe it could have been predicted.
     
    Trilly likes this.
  19. GDeep™

    GDeep™ Protector of RonaldoMadness

    You think one of the biggest organisations on the planet didn’t do all this and more before moving?

    The one thing I think they didn’t see coming was the Arab/American/Russian money. Think the club felt even with the stadium change they would be ahead of everyone and just behind Utd.
     
    Trilly and Ricardinho like this.
  20. American_Gooner

    American_Gooner Not actually American. Unless Di Marzio says so. Moderator

    A few things come to mind:
    1. The club probably expected FFP to be enforced more stringently, if this was the case then self-sustaining model would've been more feasible. As it happens, UEFA have been quite lenient and seemingly allowed PSG/City et al free reign to spend whatever they want.

    2. The club was backed into a corner with the stadium move and so they had to sign these sponsorships that were less than ideal, although I do sympathise with them here. Seeing the likes of Liverpool and United sign more lucrative deals every few years while we were stuck in long-term arrangements meant that we were always going to be playing catch up when it came to renewal time.

    3. Even though Chelsea came into money in 2003, the club probably didn't expect lightning to strike twice with regards to Man City. You can argue that they should've expected more foreign investment in the PL but the sheer scale of City's spending was always going to be an abberation, especially if going back to point 1 there was no real enforcement of FFP beyond squad size restrictions.
     

Share This Page

Watch Arsenal Live Streams With StreamFootball.tv