Summer Transfer Misery and Recriminations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie

I do wonder if you seem to think I'm arguing from a position that Wenger shouldn't be relieved of his position, I am just not going to lie and pretend I think things will be markedly better with a new manager.

---

That's a worry because you shouldn't assume that. When we start lumping posters into certain camps a lot gets missed. I'm not playing devils advocate. I hate that. Heck - check my posts to NQ in this thread about the club structure. I'm saying the exact same thing to him and there is no doubt about where he stands on Wenger.

I don't think we run a bad operation. Some elements are good and some are bad. I think we have a great environment for a new coach with great ideas to flourish. It's the sort of environment that produced Wenger. He had freedom. But that's also the bad side. It's produced Wenger. :lol: It was great for when he was in his prime and he's taken us far. But he can't take us any further and my main criticism of the Board is how it's been handled along with ridiculous ticket prices.

Not many people in football think we run a bad operation. I don't think we do either.

https://www.facebook.com/FootballFig...c_ref=NEWSFEED

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

That's a worry because you shouldn't assume that. When we start lumping posters into certain camps a lot gets missed. I'm not playing devils advocate. I hate that. Heck - check my posts to NQ in this thread about the club structure. I'm saying the exact same thing to him and there is no doubt about where he stands on Wenger.

I don't think we run a bad operation. Some elements are good and some are bad. I think we have a great environment for a new coach with great ideas to flourish. It's the sort of environment that produced Wenger. He had freedom. But that's also the bad side. It's produced Wenger. :lol: It was great for when he was in his prime and he's taken us far. But he can't take us any further and my main criticism of the Board is how it's been handled along with ridiculous ticket prices.

Not many people in football think we run a bad operation. I don't think we do either.

---

I think in terms of operation it depends what you mean, financially i think our operation is amazing....from a footballing perspective i think it's shocking.

And it goes beyond Wenger, the youth academy for instance has been neglected for years and this is why many of our youngsters are usually bought for a premium from other clubs rather than being developed by scratch by us.

Peter Wood from Le Grove seems to hold Gazidis in high esteem and believes that his hands are tied as long as Wenger is at the club, i hope he's right because i think there appears to be a total lack of disconnect between the board and footballing aspects of the club and if Gazidis can bridge that gap than i hope he's given every opportunity so to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie

I think in terms of operation it depends what you mean, financially i think our operation is amazing....from a footballing perspective i think it's shocking.

And it goes beyond Wenger, the youth academy for instance has been neglected for years and this is why many of our youngsters are usually bought for a premium from other clubs rather than being developed by scratch by us.

Peter Wood from Le Grove seems to hold Gazidis in high esteem and believes that his hands are tied as long as Wenger is at the club, i hope he's right because i think there appears to be a total lack of disconnect between the board and footballing aspects of the club and if Gazidis can bridge that gap than i hope he's given every opportunity so to do.

---

I’ll give Ivan credit where it’s due because I think he’s been more open with the fans than anyone else has at the club. Wenger is Wenger. PHW showed nothing but disdain for the fans, Stan stays silent…..I know more about the inner workings of the club because of Gazidis. It was Ivan that appointed new youth academy coaches weren’t producing anything. He shook that system up. The new fitness coach was Ivan also. I like how we’re bring back old players to coach the team. That should have been done a long time ago. I think Wenger has resisted change in that area and it seems as though he got his way with Henry not being part of the coaching set up for petty and trivial reasons imo. That’s the sort of thing that bothers me. Jonker wanted Henry in the set up but Wenger rules against it and there was no compromise. As said before, we need more guys that know football at Arsenal. The infrastructure is changing now that we have the sponsorship deals in place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kano

I think it still remains subjective because of how you measure success. Most of us fans refer to winning trophies as the only true sign of success at a club like Arsenal, whereas it seems to be that Wenger doesn't see that as the entire, 100% end game of what he is trying to achieve season-on-season. If he refuses to pay market rates to buy players, from his point of view, he would say he is working in the best interests of the club and doing the best job financially. Whether we believe he should or shouldn't be isn't the point. But what he views as best set of methods to reach a successful level. You would assume given we are going round in circles that he is happy with his approach and sees no reason to change them. It's all subjective thinking ultimately, which is why you have fans still arguing for and against him staying at the club. Whether we agree with that or not is down to us. I agree about the transfer failings, squad management etc but clearly he believes fully in his approach and what some of us may call a mistake, he'll disagree entirely.

---

I understand that, and it is obvious that Wenger believes messianistically in his approach. But his belief that he is doing the best for the Club does not equate either to the question of whether he is doing his best for the club. Footballing success for Arsenal FC is not a subjective issue. It is an objective one. Success is winning trophies. This is not necessarily the case for all clubs who have little realistic hope of doing so - and I will accept that for these clubs the bar is lower, but the test even for these clubs remains an objective one - have they done as well as they can do with the resources at their disposal? When it comes to Arsenal, it is fair to expect a club with our resources to be competing for titles with the best clubs - both at home and in Europe. Doing the best job financially should not be in a manager's remit, and I do not accept that a manager 'doing his best' financially is a manager doing his best for our club.

We all accepted this idea during the stadium project period - because we thought that the caution in the transfer market was the means to ensure that we would compete with the best at a future stage. But recent times have shown this to be a fallacy. As a club we have become bound to a philosophy that is risk averse; uncompetitive and lacking in ambition. The manager is an integral part of this flawed approach - and it being taken with his eyes firmly open.

We are a cash machine for Stan, until that changes, we have no vision and we are not a football club. Arsenal as we know it is gone.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...m-Germany.html

Serge up for a new contract. Has anyone been watching him Rio? Heard he's been on fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ralpheroo72

We are a cash machine for Stan, until that changes, we have no vision and we are not a football club. Arsenal as we know it is gone.

---

How different is Stan to previous owners or owners at other clubs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

How different is Stan to previous owners or owners at other clubs?

---

We haven't had "Owners" previously, Arsenal has always been a public limited company......and whilst it technically still is now, anyone who owns over 50% of shares is de-facto the owner.

Although Hill Wood was aloof, his father was chairman and his father before him and even though he was an old Tory fart i think he did care about it being a football club rather than part of a profit making portfolio.

He had a personal relationship with the players including Tony Adams

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie

We haven't had "Owners" previously, Arsenal has always been a public limited company......and whilst it technically still is now, anyone who owns over 50% of shares is de-facto the owner.

Although Hill Wood was aloof, his father was chairman and his father before him and even though he was an old Tory fart i think he did care about it being a football club rather than part of a profit making portfolio.

He had a personal relationship with the players including Tony Adams

---

The previous 'owners' sold their shares though. You could argue they treated this club like a cash machine also.

Trying to stay objective, we could have had it a lot worse. Was just reading up on Liverpool's former owners, Hicks and Gillett. Liverpool were close to going into administration. :lol: