Arsenal's Decline: Are there any easy answers?

[Letters]

The stats would argue that our great teams weren't actually that great. They won three league titles in ten years and failed miserably in the Champs League. We only had one team to beat in the league then as well.

They won 3 titles in 7 years, twice did the double and once went through an entire league season without losing a game.
They were fantastic sides but they did have some mental fragility too as I've mentioned.

[Niall_Quinn]

Forgot the other vital thing required. An effective backroom staff that brings proper tactical awareness in the key areas. In that respect, if Wenger won't bring in the help he clearly needs, this is the biggest reason for replacing the manager. I still can't get my head around Pat Rice (great Arsenal servant notwithstanding) being asked to stay when he was ready to leave. That was a great opportunity missed to clean house without bringing the whole house down.

[Olivier's xmas twist]

The stats would argue that our great teams weren't actually that great. They won three league titles in ten years and failed miserably in the Champs League. We only had one team to beat in the league then as well.

Yep, Every team under Wengere has been bad mentally even invincibles bottled it the season after going unbeatern. We should have won back to back titles that year but no we gave it to the chavs.

We have a mentally week manager and it goes back years.

[Grebbo]

Our decline can also be contributed to the frankly piss poor commercial deals this board signed us up to.

Spurs having a shirt sponsor that pays double what ours does is shameful. They have been in the Champs Lge once and we've been in it 15yrs on the bounce!

Manure make more money from DHL sponsoring their training kit than we get for our playing kit sponsors!

All you ever hear is we were desperate for the cash to fund the stadium but that's nonsense. We got a whacking great big loan to fund the stadium and had a bag of cash after years of success on and off the pitch.

[Dennis Bendtner]

NQ's rock analogy is very good. Gradually they have rolled down and struck Wenger on the head. He's had these restraints for longer than most managers stay in a job. I suppose we're seeing the effects in his decision-making and managerial capabilities. Maybe it shouldn't be entirely surprising. So yeah, it's a case of board and manager accountability...but we'd only get so far by making changes in one area.

[Letters]

Looking back, it all started to go downhill when David Dein left. Dein and him were a good partnership, on his own he’s struggled.
Maybe a good, strong number 2 (stop giggling at the back) would be a better solution than sacking him because I don’t believe he’s suddenly a blithering idiot. There are better managers out there but there are a lot of worse managers too.

[LDG]

Looking back, it all started to go downhill when David Dein left. Dein and him were a good partnership, on his own he’s struggled.
Maybe a good, strong number 2 (stop giggling at the back) would be a better solution than sacking him because I don’t believe he’s suddenly a blithering idiot. There are better managers out there but there are a lot of worse managers too.

You copied and pasted that from somewhere

[IBK]

I'm not sure, we've had numerous £10 million or thereabouts signings. On the main point though, I don't think I see this divide between Wenger and the board that others do. What you say about success on the pitch would be nice but not necessary can be reflected in Wenger saying winning the Carling Cup can't really be considered a trophy yet the top four, effectively is though. Both are effectively saying achieving a target isn't that important, it's just the 'competitions' that differ. Having said that though, I doubt Wenger would believe finishing in the top four is compulsory, if it hadn't been express to him, that was the case.

Wenger has maintained the self-sustaining rhetoric just in the same way as Gazidis has bundled his lines. Like you say Kroenke talks about Wenger in glowing terms but from what we know about Wenger and his stance on owners (of the Citeh and Chelsea kind), I'd hazard a guess that it's reciprocal.

I agree with your point. I don't see 2 opposing camps, either. Wenger, his original far-sightedness and his ability for years to maintain CL football is one of the main reasons for the stadium project and why the ownership, board and self-sustainability model is what it is. It is also, I suspect one of the reasons why our gradual decline has been tolerated. While we remained a top four club, it was accepted by manager and board that this was an acceptable place to be in the light of our cashed up rivals.

Our real gripe with the board is our lack of investment, and we assume that lack of funds is why Wenger hasn't addressed our obvious and basic failings. But I don't think its that simple. Yes, the board are risk averse/welded to this self-sustainability gig, and given what I believe is an overspend on player wages, I don't think that there is as much cash to throw around as many gooners seem to - but I find it incredibly difficult to believe that Wenger is being denied the funds he wants. Why would the board risk alienating their 'cash cow' if that is what they regards Wenger as.

No -this situation to me has all the hallmarks of being, at least partly, Wenger sanctioned. If the board was as parsimonious as some believe, why would they let Wenger pay over the odds in transfer fees and wages for the 'youth project' players he likes to collect. The board may be criticised for having no ambition greater than 4th place, but neither it would appear, does the manager (or at least no realistic ambition - otherwise why would he persist in taking risks with injuries; ignore form when it comes to the teamsheet etc).

As for what it will take to turn things around - the one thing that would make the necessary difference to the current regime would be ther return of DD - who in the bitterest of ironies was sacked for approaching the guy who now owns the club. I have had my issues with his personal ambitions in the past - but as time goes on it begins to look like he was a vitally important part of the club's success - enabling us to land the players we want, and preventing AW from losing perspective/grounding which is a defect becoming more obvious as each season passes.

This ain't going to happen, though. So the only possible event that will change things is if AW goes, and I think that he may walk if we finish down the table and the disaffection at the Emirates continues.

After that - who knows? We may well continue our decline under another manager who does not have Wenger's talent for spotting players and selling them at a profit, and are nevertheless shackled to our self-sustaining policy. Or the board may finally realise that our decline will be utterly terminal without some serious investment on the playing side, and might play a less passive role without having to defer to wenger on everything player/coaching related.

[Ashburton2006]

I don't care that City are above us. They've blundered their way to the top through sheer weight of spending.
We can't compete with them, I wouldn't want us to try.
But Spurs? They don't have anywhere near the income or resources we do, they haven't had a shiny stadium or the CL football to entice players.
There's no way they should be able to compete with us much less now be way above us.

Simple Answer Letters, they have a Manager that will buy British and take a chance! We could have bought Scott Parker, but we bough benayoun? WTF!!

As much as I hate old wobbley face, he is a good Manager!

[Marc Overmars]

Looking back, it all started to go downhill when David Dein left. Dein and him were a good partnership, on his own he’s struggled.
Maybe a good, strong number 2 (stop giggling at the back) would be a better solution than sacking him because I don’t believe he’s suddenly a blithering idiot. There are better managers out there but there are a lot of worse managers too.

He obviously had a very good relationship with Wenger, both professional and personal as they remain good friends today. Wenger even asked Dein if he should resign in 2007, but Dein told him not to because it wasn't in our best interests.

I know he's not mr popular, but the guy was at least in touch with the way football was heading and wanted us to stay ahead of the pace. As IBK says above, ironically he was turfed for bringing in the guy who the board did a U-turn for and have now welcomed into the fold. Dein was incredibly influential, a massive Gooner, and a real football man for Wenger to confide in, which cannot be said of anyone from the current board. He did make a mistake in pursuing a possible move to Wembley, but then no one is perfect.