When Was The Damage Done?

[Riou]

@Makingtrax you wanna get in on this?

 

[novar]

When Chelsea gifted us a win

 

[Makingtrax]

@Makingtrax you wanna get in on this?

Sure mate, I did a comparison of Wenger v Fergie spend between 96 and 2012 on here and Fergie outspent Wenger by 11 times. The value Arsenal got from Wenger was just unbelievable. Two of the best managers ever to grace English football though, but I don't think Fergie would have been even close to Arsène on the same spend.

 

[HairSprayGooners]

"I dont think Fergie would've been close to Arsène on the same spend"

@Makingtrax

You do realise Ferguson spent just £590M between 2000-2012 and won 7 league titles, he didn't finish 4th once. Chelsea, Liverpool and City all outspent him in that time frame.

You're actually delusional, not even joking. In that same period Arsène spent around £370M... what makes you think £200M in 12 years would've given Arsène 7 league titles? Dumb ****.

 

[GLITCH]

I’ve challenged anybody to come up with an actual metric of decline, that stands up to scrutiny, up to us finishing 2nd in 2015/16.

So far nobody has, even though endless people give opinions about it happening before.

I don't know about an actual metric, but I'd point to Chelsea and City money as something out of his control. He went from winning the league, one of which was unbeaten and finishing no lower than 2nd from 98-05. It's no suprise he finished 3rd when Chelsea started splurging, then pushed down to 4th once City came along. The 3 highest spenders Chelsea, City and Utd took up the top 3 places.

I'd also say things became even more difficult for him when he tried to emulate Barca. Whilst it was splendid to watch, he'd neglected the defensive side of the game and the solid spine that had brought him success. All that being said, I can't say it was much of a decline on his part, but comparatively speaking, a decline nonetheless.

 

[Makingtrax]

I don't know about an actual metric, but I'd point to Chelsea and City money as something out of his control. He went from winning the league, one of which was unbeaten and finishing no lower than 2nd from 98-05. It's no suprise he finished 3rd when Chelsea started splurging, then pushed down to 4th once City came along. The 3 highest spenders Chelsea, City and Utd took up the top 3 places.

I'd also say things became even more difficult for him when he tried to emulate Barca. Whilst it was splendid to watch, he'd neglected the defensive side of the game and the solid spine that had brought him success. All that being said, I can't say it was much of a decline on his part, but comparatively speaking, a decline nonetheless.

Whilst I agree with much of that, fans in general have mixed up the role of the club and the role of the manager. By building the stadium the club knew it was going into austerity in 2004 and then the arrival of two super spending oligarch clubs was a double whammy for Arsenal. Then there were new owners, and leaving of Dein. You can see now what happens when a club is faced with problems like that, they can easily plummet.

The fact that Wenger got top 4 throughout right up to 2015/16, where he was going from 4th to 3rd to 2nd was not decline on his part no what sh!t the club threw at him. The man was an unbelievable manager. People that were angry because he hadn't won the league just don't understand much about football.

 

[GLITCH]

The fact that Wenger got top 4 throughout right up to 2015/16, where he was going from 4th to 3rd to 2nd was not decline on his part no what sh!t the club threw at him. The man was an unbelievable manager. People that were angry because he hadn't won the league just don't understand much about football.

Fair point. I tried

 

[Makingtrax]

Fair point. I tried

Also, the point about Wenger’s style/tactics you made. It’s very rare to see a club spending bottom half of the table, which we were between 2004 and 2012, playing attacking football. Normally they defend and hope to counter. The reason is obvious, you can’t buy enough quality players, so if you attack and get stretched you’re likely to lose by big score lines to wealthier clubs. Arsène did sometimes, but overall though it was an incredibly successful strategy. You’ve only got to look how many goals we scored and our positions in the league.

By 2015/16 though he’d got a good enough midfield, CB pairing and keeper to have best defensive stats, the most clean sheets and second least goals against in the league. Our xG against was superb. But of course that’s when the fan campaign to remove him went into overdrive.

 

[Mrs Bergkamp]

"I dont think Fergie would've been close to Arsène on the same spend"

@Makingtrax

You do realise Ferguson spent just £590M between 2000-2012 and won 7 league titles, he didn't finish 4th once. Chelsea, Liverpool and City all outspent him in that time frame.

You're actually delusional, not even joking. In that same period Arsène spent around £370M... what makes you think £200M in 12 years would've given Arsène 7 league titles? Dumb ****.

The difference imo is that SAF had sustained investment during that time and before whilst we were forced to sell our best players and couldn't hold on to the other good ones for various reasons. We were constantly rebuilding from nothing whilst SAF had a lot of fairly seemless transitions. The last point hits home when you watch old matches. Utd lost Keane but replaced him with Carrick within a year. Both players stayed over ten years. We lost Vieira and then Gilberto and had to rely on a young Cesc thereafter. It's taken 15 years to get someone even close to Vieira. No transitions at Arsenal at all. Poor commercial deals and useless owners. No doubt SAF was phenomenal but he had tools to work with.

 

[GLITCH]

When Chelsea gifted us a win

Tets should've been gone long before tbh.

 

[Makingtrax]

"I dont think Fergie would've been close to Arsène on the same spend"

@Makingtrax

You do realise Ferguson spent just £590M between 2000-2012 and won 7 league titles, he didn't finish 4th once. Chelsea, Liverpool and City all outspent him in that time frame.

You're actually delusional, not even joking. In that same period Arsène spent around £370M... what makes you think £200M in 12 years would've given Arsène 7 league titles? Dumb ****.

Absolute nonsense. We were a selling club because of the stadium build in the period you've selected Arsenal couldn't hold on to it's players and spent a sum total of only £33m between 2000 and 2012 because if it. Players like Cole Nasri, Clichy, Adebayor, Toure all went to richer Premier league clubs. Some went to Barca and Ferguson even nicked RVP to get goals for his last title.

How many of Fergusons top payers were going to rival teams? Wenger kept having to constantly find replacements and make them play at top 4 standard. Ferguson's club investment was 7 times Arsenals.

I don't know what there is about you constantly trying to run down our club when it did so well with so little, but big it up now we're heading down the sewer.

 

[HairSprayGooners]

Absolute nonsense. We were a selling club because of the stadium build in the period you've selected Arsenal couldn't hold on to it's players and spent a sum total of only £33m between 2000 and 2012 because if it. Players like Cole Nasri, Clichy, Adebayor, Toure all went to richer Premier league clubs. Some went to Barca and Ferguson even nicked RVP to get goals for his last title.

How many of Fergusons top payers were going to rival teams? Wenger kept having to constantly find replacements and make them play at top 4 standard. Ferguson's club investment was 7 times Arsenals.

I don't know what there is about you constantly trying to run down our club when it did so well with so little, but big it up now we're heading down the sewer.

Hahahahahahah this is hilarious. So now you want to talk about net spend? When your whole argument is squad cost and spend, you now want to talk about net spend because it suits your agenda.

I continously say how well Wenger did during his earlier years, but you stink this place out thinking he hadn't dropped off and hit his ceiling.

You know why SAF went after winning a trophy? Wanted to go out on a high and allow the club to rebuild properly instead of staying longer and ruining his legacy.

What did Wenger do? Stayed too long and ruined his legacy.

Don't look at fans being toxic, look at why they were being toxic. They were being toxic because we kept getting battered in big away games and because we were losing in every single knockout stage of the CL we were getting to. Monaco, Barca, Bayern. Doesnt matter who it was, we would get smashed.

Wenger had declined, his ceiling was 4th and the knockout stages. Fans were rightly unhappy with that because we needed big titles.

Now we are seeing a rebuild in place, club isn't in the sewer, it was always going to take years to sort out the mess Arsène and mainly the group of monkeys above him had left.

 

[Makingtrax]

Hahahahahahah this is hilarious. So now you want to talk about net spend? When your whole argument is squad cost and spend, you now want to talk about net spend because it suits your agenda.

There are no squad cost figures back in 2000+. If there were I’d gladly talk about it. Net spend tells you nothing about the quality of players you have, that’s where you’re confused.

But it does tell you about your transfer business. And you can see clearly that Arsenal was a selling club and needed to be to survive. Ferguson had stability, but Arsène kept losing his best players and kept having to replace them. Imagine only spending £33m over all those years and maintaining top 4 throughout by constantly buying new players on the cheap to replace the good ones the wealthy clubs in the league are poaching. Amazing manager.

 

[Makingtrax]

What did Wenger do? Stayed too long and ruined his legacy.

I agree Wenger should have accepted one of the offers from all those wealthy clubs instead of staying with a club spending 5th at the most, so that fans who don’t understand much about football could slag him off, despite his incredible achievements and loyalty to one club.

 

[Makingtrax]

Wenger had declined, his ceiling was 4th and the knockout stages. Fans were rightly unhappy with that because we needed big titles.

Every managers ceiling is dictated by his spend. Only flukes like Leicester buck that trend and they are very very rare. It’s why Chelsea won nothing before 2004 and 5 titles since with different managers.

When Arsène had money he won 3 titles. When he was hamstrung he kept the club top 4, when he started spending again he went from 4th to 3rd to 2nd . . then the fans took him down. His ceiling was never fourth.

 

[Makingtrax]

Now we are seeing a rebuild in place, club isn't in the sewer, it was always going to take years to sort out the mess Arsène and mainly the group of monkeys above him had left.

The mess started after Arsène left. Under his leadership we never did deals with dodgy agents, never froze out players, never made wholesale sackings, never played boring football and never threw players under a bus in pressers. That’s why we’re just above the relegation zone.

He treated everybody with respect, the club thrived and won more in that period of it’s history than any other. The greatest manager Arsenal has ever had. And while this owner keeps us spending at most 5th in the league, will be the greatest manager for a long time to come.

 

[Atlas]

The difference imo is that SAF had sustained investment during that time and before whilst we were forced to sell our best players and couldn't hold on to the other good ones for various reasons. We were constantly rebuilding from nothing whilst SAF had a lot of fairly seemless transitions. The last point hits home when you watch old matches. Utd lost Keane but replaced him with Carrick within a year. Both players stayed over ten years. We lost Vieira and then Gilberto and had to rely on a young Cesc thereafter. It's taken 15 years to get someone even close to Vieira. No transitions at Arsenal at all. Poor commercial deals and useless owners. No doubt SAF was phenomenal but he had tools to work with.

Whos fault is that tho? Wenger chose to rely on youth because he wrongly believed that they were good enough. If you choose to develop Diaby and Denilson instead of signing Xabi Alonso you can’t then turn around and say you had no choice. We could have afforded better but Wenger chose not to spend. This choice cost us. Nobody to blame but Wenger.

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/amp/news/wenger-why-i-snubbed-barry-alonso

 

[goonergaz]

I don't know about an actual metric, but I'd point to Chelsea and City money as something out of his control. He went from winning the league, one of which was unbeaten and finishing no lower than 2nd from 98-05. It's no suprise he finished 3rd when Chelsea started splurging, then pushed down to 4th once City came along. The 3 highest spenders Chelsea, City and Utd took up the top 3 places.

I'd also say things became even more difficult for him when he tried to emulate Barca. Whilst it was splendid to watch, he'd neglected the defensive side of the game and the solid spine that had brought him success. All that being said, I can't say it was much of a decline on his part, but comparatively speaking, a decline nonetheless.

It wasn't just them spending money, it was also them buying the best players and upsetting others from/at rival clubs.

If they had just shopped elsewhere and only bought what they needed that would have been crappy enough, they just went that extra mile to really fxxk everyone else over, buying up all the talent and inflating the market making if harder to compete.

 

[bingobob]

Whilst I agree with much of that, fans in general have mixed up the role of the club and the role of the manager. By building the stadium the club knew it was going into austerity in 2004 and then the arrival of two super spending oligarch clubs was a double whammy for Arsenal. Then there were new owners, and leaving of Dein. You can see now what happens when a club is faced with problems like that, they can easily plummet.

The fact that Wenger got top 4 throughout right up to 2015/16, where he was going from 4th to 3rd to 2nd was not decline on his part no what sh!t the club threw at him. The man was an unbelievable manager. People that were angry because he hadn't won the league just don't understand much about football.

Why is it City don't always win the league or that PSG and City don't always win the CL. Squad cost, money spent that are the biggest spenders. Maybe, just maybe there is more to it than that? Why did United under Ferguson win against teams that out spent them?

Economic stagnation to regression is well established in economics. This 2nd place finish you keep referring to is an anomoly not the norm. Here is a good article on regression to the mean https://fs.blog/2015/07/regression-to-the-mean/

This is what happened under Wengers tenure. A 2nd place finish happened only twice after we last won the league. The very definition of outlaying results.

Was Wenger remarkably consistent for a long period, yes. Absolutely, no doubt. But he never went beyond consistent after his early peak years. A 7 or 8 out of 10 but never a 10 out of 10. And that's where the issues stem from. We never progressed we never regressed like a Leeds. But we stagnated and eventually clubs overtook us. It's like a Stoke who were happy just being a PL team. Eventually that mentality of just being part catches up. You're a safe top 12 team and suddenly hungrier ambitious teams arrive and you're in a dog fight for relegation.

Its why teams like United were successful over the years. They adopted and changed brought in new players, new coaches, reinvented themselves with each new challenger. They never allowed comfort and stagnation to set in. RVN top scorer, moved on replaced, Beckham see you later. Keane old and a problem moved on. Their defence replaced several times.

An interesting note in that article is about those who stay in jobs too long.

 

[HairSprayGooners]

Every managers ceiling is dictated by his spend. Only flukes like Leicester buck that trend and they are very very rare. It’s why Chelsea won nothing before 2004 and 5 titles since with different managers.

When Arsène had money he won 3 titles. When he was hamstrung he kept the club top 4, when he started spending again he went from 4th to 3rd to 2nd . . then the fans took him down. His ceiling was never fourth.

But then when Arsène had money again from 2013/2014 we didn't improve from getting into CL places, we didn't come close to challenging for a title...

So he had declined. If it was his early years and we just went through a stadium build and he started spending he would've won titles. But he didn't, because of a decline. Which is only natural and happens with every single manager as they age.