Do you still want Wenger as Arsenal manager?

[Power n Glory]

no-one has argued that.



Agreed.



Again, no-one is saying that.

No, but Wenger comes out and says that he firmly believes in growing a team ‘organically’ and people have a problem with what he’s been saying for years and looking for other reasons why he’s failing. I see people trying to disassociate him from what’s going on around the club.

If you’re going to say what people have posted is all speculation, then just look at what’s been built over the years, what Wenger’s philosophy is all about, how he fell from grace at Monaco, what he’s telling the fans right now, he’s not speaking in code and we have the answer.

He believes he’s doing the right thing.

[She Wore A Yellow Ribbon]

And how do you know that?

picking apart parts of my post again to try and get an upperhand. done it 2 pages ago and doing it again.

how do i know that? im using my brain. im looking at the obvious, using my judgement, and listening to people in and around the club who have spoken in the past. its common knowledge wenger has a lot more control than other managers do at any other club. but you can sit there and deny it, or paint a picture where wenger has little control.

as another poster said, its a copout.

[Letters]

"I don't, I'm speculating" would have done.

[Flavs]

"I don't, I'm speculating" would have done.

BAM!!

[She Wore A Yellow Ribbon]

how do you know hes not in full control?

wake up and smell the coffee pal.

edit: done what you done earlier and waited until there was a single point throughout the argument you could capitalise on to end the argument again i should start doing that.

[Niall_Quinn]

how do you know hes not in full control?

wake up and smell the coffee pal.

Because businesses aren't structured that way and Arsenal is a business. It's really no more complicated than that. Influence, yes. Control? Impossible.

[She Wore A Yellow Ribbon]

its only impossible to fit into your argument. otherwise its a perfectly sane argument and judgement to make, especially the way this club has been run over the past few years.

[Boss]

1. Wenger's never been one to spend big money on players - he prefers to buy his own and develop them. Even when he's bought high profile players in the past, it has been players on frees or at low prices (Klinsmann and Hoddle at Monaco, Campbell, Rosicky and Overmars with us). Everyone remembers the 'if we gave him 100M he'd give it back' quote and IIRC Wenger's gone on record saying that he prefers to make good players rather than buy them.

2. Most of our 'large' signings have been in the 10-15M range, which the board has all sanctioned. The board has backed Wenger in the past for relatively 'big money' moves - Nasri, Arshavin, Reyes, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Gervinho, even the bids for Baptista+Robinho and all of those apart from Arshavin and maybe Gervinho are/were project players rather than finished product.

It doesn't make sense that the board would sanction loads of bids for project players but not sanction lesser/equal bids for established players. Wenger has a lot more control over the financial side of transfers than managers at other clubs do and this has only increased since Dein left. He's also mentioned in the past that he prefers younger players due to their sell on value and it's no coincidence that every one of our 'big money' buys was under 25 years old (apart from Arshavin of course, a notable exception for the reason he was bought). Wenger also prefers to buy from outside the Premiership (fact) and believes that transfer values within the Premiership are inflated (he's stated this before iirc). Our only transfers from within the PL in the last 10 years have been Silvestre (750k), Campbell twice (free), Diarra (2-4M) and Gallas (part of the Cole transfer).

Basically - why would the board sanction 15M for Nasri but not 16M for Alonso? Or 4M for Denilson but not 2M for Schwarzer? That is down to Wenger I'd believe.

Some background reading that should back up some of the above:

Former Arsenal managing director Keith Edelman believes Arsene Wenger is missing the influence of former chief executive David Dein.

Edelman says Dein was the missing link in Wenger's management team.

"During the years we were successful there was an alliance of people at the top who made the club successful - that was David Dein, Arsene and myself," he told the Mail on Sunday. "I ran the business side and David and Arsene ran the football side. David did a phenomenal job for the club and I think they miss David's role in encouraging Arsene.

"Arsene is naturally cautious and David was always very ambitious for the club. Look at Sol Campbell and how important he was and how expensive he was as an acquisition at a key moment when he won us a lot of trophies. [Campbell signed on a free transfer, but his wages and signing-on fees amounted to about £6million a year, at the time an unprecedented commitment.] I don't see that now.

"David was also a great networker. Together with Arsene, David would look at players and get into a position where he felt comfortable [spending money on them]. I used to sit in the boardroom and hear Arsene say, 'If you want to win the Premier League, you have to have a world-class goalkeeper'.

"Well, if that's what he believes, has he actually delivered that? David's importance is probably underestimated as he would make sure we now had a world-class goalkeeper.

"The demise of David is probably the reason why [Arsenal have not won more trophies], that and the fact that they haven't made some key signings at some key moments.

"There needs to be someone to understand the management that you have and to encourage them in their weak points and support them on that. Arsene is a naturally cautious man and, like any manager, he always thinks that his current management team is better than they actually are."

http://www.tribalfootball.com/articl...luence-1589991

and

'Barry is a good player, but the problem with players who are 27 or 28 is that you pay big money and then you get nothing back.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...#ixzz1VlXfy2eT

[Kano]

why would a new owner go against wenger when the club is making profit? noone seems to be answering that one. we are making profit, wenger is in charge, why would stan change this strategy and go against wenger which is what some of you are implying.

i also never said they are blocking his ideas around the pitch. where did you get that from? im saying they arent blocking anything and its wenger who has chosen not to spend on experience. whilst some of you are saying it 'must' be down to board, as your beloved wenger cant suddenly have gone mad.

see this the blind alley you keep running down. i'm certainly not looking for excuses for wenger (beloved? come on man, grow up. you'll be talking about cliques and all that gay shit soon) and i'm not excusing his spending decisions or the issues around the team.

what i am and will continue to refute is the idea that a man who owns several business' would invest a sizeable amount into another one and then let a lower level director fully control it's direction. it would never ever happen, unless he really didn't care about his money.

[Boss]

Wenger is hardly a 'low level director', given he's directly linked to most of the profit the club makes.

Let's not keep using that silly phrase please, thanks.