Winter Transfer Missed Opportunities and Regrets

[Niall_Quinn]

I don't see how one of England's top clubs paying the going rate for urgently required players is some special level of commitment as opposed to the reality of the game if you are serious about competing - which is not necessarily the same as being serious about winning.

According to Transfermarkt Pep has spent 1.2 bill building his city squad from the pile of crap he inherited. Klopp spent 800 mill which is why Slot has had the luxury of putting his feet up in the transfer windows. Like Pep, we had to get rid of shite like Luiz, Mustafi and extraordinary waste like Pepe and replace them with actual footballers like Gabby, Odegard and Rice. Failure to do that would have seen us heading back down the table, we've seen this with Utd and the spuds, we've seen what happens if you fail to do at least the bare minimum.

We've spent around 590 mill since Arteta arrived, not the 700 mill being touted. It's a lot of money, but not as much as the club we finished a couple of points behind last season. And not as much as the club we finished above. Seems to me Arteta has made more of what he's had than most. Whether you believe the Kroenke's have been instrumental or not, we've definitely improved under Arteta. The discussion now is whether we can go the final mile and win something more than the minor cups. It took city at least half a billion more in spending to achieve what we are chasing.

We'll see though, won't we? There's a reason fans are now talking about 200 mill plus being required in the summer, because that's what's required, in today's market, to bring in the top talent required to compete at the top level. If it happens then okay, maybe it couldn't happen sooner for reasons we don't know about but at least it happens eventually. If we don't spend what is required then it's be just as easy to conclude the Kroenke's are here to keep the cash cow eating well enough to keep the milk flowing. If the latter is true then there aren't any managers out there who could do anything about that. Do you think Pep could have delivered with half his budget chopped?

It's not just the spending, it's the statement of intent. The top players will want to come to teams that can fulfil their personal ambitions, they won't want to go and keep time waiting for something that, by design, will never arrive. And players already at the club will look elsewhere as their career paths shorten.

But none of that has a bearing on the other issue that can't be reasoned away. We are short of players this season, not short of talent but short of actual bodies. Injuries, bad decisions in the summer, all required emergency measures to be taken in January and nothing was done. There's no excuse for that, at least no acceptable excuse. It's pure negligence. Arteta has said he wanted a striker, maybe true, maybe not. If it was his decision not to bring somebody in the absolutely, it's a massive mistake that has already been exposed. But if it really was the Kroenke's fucking around with sell-on fees then I don't see what Arteta or any manager can do. You ask the board for the players you need and the board then does what it does best, shoots of an insultingly low bid designed to scupper the deal. Now I'm hearing we actually offered £32 mill, £17 mill of which was to be paid next year. That could be just more of the hot air floating around the net but it's not like we don't have a long track record of shit like this.

Regardless, whether guilty or not, Arteta has a shitstorm on his hands now. If he made his bed he'll sure be lying in it if we collapse out of all the competitions in a week, like we often do. Trouble is, if we by some miracle won something it would be vindication of the stupidity that occurred during January, and stupidity is stupidity even when you get rewarded for it.

[Mac76]

The discussion now is whether we can go the final mile and win something more than the minor cups.

Which we're not even doing rn

[IBK]

OK first I want to offer a few more thoughts on our forwards debacle.

Over the weekend, I actually found myself feeling a bit embarrassed when discussing football with friends who are fans of other clubs. Or if that word is too strong, almost apologist. We can debate the reasons for where we find ourselves, but 2 things are true from the perspective of the wider footballing world. Firstly, noone thinks we will win the league now. Secondly, the feeling is that we have brought this upon ourselves as a football club. We might wonder why we are still (relative to our title aspirations) regarded as a bit small time. Not serious about success. Well our lack of a top class striker - even before the season started - sums it up. Even as we were improving and becoming a team in the conversation for honours, Arteta is regarded as having built a team whose principal aim is not to lose, rather than built to take the game to the opposition. It's really difficult to think of a title winning team that do not have a striker who can be relied upon to score 20 goals a season - or if not in numbers - be a true game changer. I commented above that we do not compare in terms of striker talent with any of the teams in the top half of the EPL, and maybe even lower than this. I recall that Pep's Citeh were regarded as having no recognised striker at one stage, but his supporting forward cast was deeper and better than ours - particularly without Saka.

I even wonder whether the 'anti' Arsenal sentiment that we have seen more generally has as much to do with an inherent lack of respect for a team still seen as also rans rather than anything else. It's difficult for fans to 'respect' a team that aspires to silverware but seems timid when it comes to trying to make this happen via player acqusitions.

Even our supposed prime targets seem a bit underwhelming in this context. Like I've said elsewhere, I am generally supportive of pursuing a coherent and planned strategy to raise the level rather than a reactive and scattergun approach. If the realistic plan had been to take the risk of not signing a credible forward in the Summer, or even January, to land an Isaak this Summer (with the huge fee that would command) that would be one thing. But was this a risk worth taking for Cesko - himself a bit of a punt - not top top level...or Nico Williams - bang average Gs and As even in his best seasons in Spain? We are a massive club - currently the 7th richest in the world and 3rd in the EPL. Do our transfer ambitions reflect this?

IMHO aside from what I will kindly describe as over caution in building a self-sustainable model (that I suppose offers a measure of mitigation in some ways), what we are seeing at Arsenal is a degree of incompetence/negligence in our transfer business. I think that last Summer the club placed an over reliance on Arteta's ability to (as NQ says) make more of his resources than most, and took unjustified risks in thinking that our existing players would retain form and fitness. A lack of ability to flex and get business done when the (inevitable) circumstances demanded it will cost us a golden opportunity to win the league, and makes our CL title aspirations seem like a bit of a pipe dream. This is not what champions do, and I think we are seeing a problem at our club at executive level illustrated by Edu's departure - the apparent lack of a plan to replace our sporting director does not bode well, and if January was Jason Ayto's audition, he has truly fluffed his lines.

Where I depart from NQ's thoughts (that may be valid - I'm not dismissing them) is in seeing our problems as down to the owners. First, it is illogical to me that the Kroenkes - winners of 6 US sporting championships and reportedly increasing their weath by £2.5 billon over the past 12 months - would deliberately withhold funds from an Arsenal project clearly (before this season at least) going in the right direction and in with a good shout of winning the league. It makes little business sense - given the income and profile that Arsenal winning the league would achieve. Secondly, Arsenal's net spend under Arteta - even if this is circa £500M - is significant and sees us third in the league over this period. This is inconsistent with funds being denied to Areta. IMO we do not spend £105M on Declan Rice if the owners' ambitions are top 4 only.

I think it's more likely that (with some justification prior to this season), the owners have trusted the club to make the acquisitions it feels are needed. I think there is a fairly fundamental issue at club management level more than in finances level, and I do wonder again what the real reason for Edu's departure was...

[Mac76]

I think we are seeing a problem at our club at executive level illustrated by Edu's departure - the apparent lack of a plan to replace our sporting director does not bode well, and if January was Jason Ayto's audition, he has truly fluffed his lines.

I think it's more likely that (with some justification prior to this season), the owners have trusted the club to make the acquisitions it feels are needed. I think there is a fairly fundamental issue at club management level more than in finances level, and I do wonder again what the real reason for Edu's departure was...

@IBK - agreed on all that, not least these two bits above, I'm concerned about the Edu departure too, I posted on here at the time about how he said something about not agreeing with the direction the club was going in: https://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/s...=1#post4596986

It's possible it was to do with Arteta's being obssessed with defensive players and Edu knew they needed more up front - I said at the time he was maybe a bit weak but I'm starting to think he's a real loss

[HCZ_Reborn]

So, I suppose the question is did KSE explicitly stop Arteta from signing an attacker in the summer and the answer to that question is No. I think there may have been discussion about how much an attacker might have unbalanced the wage bill but there was definitely no veto there. However I think where their responsibility lies is that it was probably not a unilateral decision on Arteta’s part to approach the summer the way we did, it was most likely agreed to take the risk on the players that had scored 90 + league goals last season, and it was believed that if injuries were going to happen it would be defensive or in midfield. There’s no proof of this, it’s speculative but it feels to me anyway a reasonable explanation.

As to Edu, we have heard that he objected to the signings of Merino and Calafiori, now was this an objection to those players in particular or to the positions we were strengthening. The answer is of course that we don’t know. Personally I wouldn’t be too quick to cast Edu in the role of a man who left the club in principled opposition to the types of players we were signing. The summer was but one transfer window amongst many where we left ourselves too short in attacking options (and unless we are saying he was always superseded by Arteta and last summer was the final straw, well he is just as responsible as Arteta in my view)

Edu the only real way to look at his departure is someone left presumably for more money, for more responsibility.

I don’t think in the grand scheme of things his departure is that much of a problem nor do I attribute his absence to our lack of signings in January.

I think January simply came down to not feeling like we could get the kind of player we wanted for the long term in that window, and not being able to do a deal to bring someone in on loan.

I think there’s clearly a conclusion that is reasonable to draw that Arteta does not place the same premium on attacking players that he puts on defensive players. But in some ways that’s a reflection of the direction football has taken, 25 years ago it was the standard for clubs to play two up front….now we have a lone man or an interchangeable front three where the traditional striker doesn’t exist.

That a club like Man City went around two years without a recognised striker is instructive. It doesn’t excuse what we haven’t done, but it does sum up the overall priorities in football currently.

[HCZ_Reborn]

However the fact is that Arsenal is not a PLC anymore, anything we speculate about will remain speculation because KSE does not feel it owes us an explanation. The most important thing for them was our continued appearance in the champions league for the club to be an appreciable asset. Because that objective is being met, it may not be a case of saying that’s all the money you get but it’s more likely a case of not going to rock the boat when its own objectives are being met.

Arteta has put a target on his own head by saying we are short in the attacking positions, short of a miraculous upsurge in goals from the attacking players we do have remaining to us….whatever his positional priorities…I don’t think you’ll have the same army of Zombified fans saying “trust the process” if this upcoming summer goes the same way the last one does.

It will be a difficult one, because clubs will know we have money and not only that we’ve got to make sure we are able to fend off overtures for Saliba from Real Madrid. It’s not just a case of rejecting their offers, it’s how the player himself decides to behave.

[IBK]

I find your OP (first post above) a bit curious, and I think that this is because of the way it is framed. Owners are unlikely to 'explicitly' stop managers from signing players. They may or may not agree to make additional funds available, and I think it is unlikely that the Kroenkes simply refused to do so. If we accept this, then you are suggesting that they were actively complicit in the decision to take the risks that we did - in that they were an active part of this decision making process. I find this also unlikely, given what we know of our owners. It's far more likely IMO that the Kroenkes simply accepted the position adopted by the manager and the executive (by which I mean active drivers such as the manager; Tim Lewis and Jason Ayto). This would be pretty normal at most football clubs - certainly one with pretty absentee owners like ours. It would be extraordinary for owners like the Kroenkes to actively insist on player acquisions, and neither do I think that they would refuse to fund purchases deemed crucial by the manager and the executive.


So we come to the executive. Managers and coaches generally favour signings without considering finances (and so they should), and by all accounts Arteta (who is both) has a good deal of sway at the club. As far as the Summer goes, I think that it is more likely than not that Arteta had limited striker targets and when those were not possible he (with his natural bias to MF/defensive players that you highlight - not to mention an obsession with multitool capabilities) ultimately decided that he would stick with what we have rather than spend money elsewhere. I think that his much reported views on player fatigue may go some way to explaining the club's decision to take this risk.


I am not sure that I would go as far as to call Edu's departure the result of 'principled opposition', but neither do I think it's far fetched to attribute his parting of ways with the club to disagreement over where the emphasis should be. Further, it has been suggested in some quarters (and this is by no means implausible) that Edu had become disenchanted with a tilting of executive decision making and strategy re the team towards Arteta, when previously their input had been more evenly matched. If this is the case - and l do think there may be truth in this - then I think this situation is a concern. We need only look at late Wenger to see what can happen when unchecked decision making is left to a manager.


I feel also that you underplay Edu's 'schmoozing' ability and contacts. One example of this is that Arsenal scouted and reportedly discussed a potential transfer move for (now Citeh's) Vitor Reis ahead of this January. Reis is regarded in many quarters as the next potential Saliba, and given what we have known for some time about RM's interest in Saliba, this is precisely the kind of longer term 'hedge' that might have suited Arsenal in this difficult potential situation. It is by no means implausibe to think that Edu might have made the difference here. Edu is known for his charm and persuasiveness when it comes to transfer targets, and the evidence suggests that the club is lacking this since his departure.


I am not saying that Edu got everything right, but over recent years him and Arteta seemed to make a good team - much like Dein and Wenger. I cannot definitively counter your underplaying of Edu's role, but I am saying that one of the foundations of a successful club is balance, construtive questioning and a mix of talents at board level, and I think you abandon this at your peril. This January is hardly an endorsement of the effectiveness and organisiation of the executive at Arsenal post Edu, and I have concerns about the circumstances that led to his departure just as, we thought, the 5 stage plan was going to come to fruition.


I agree with you about the difficulties we now have when approaching transfers given our lamentable lack of squad strength up front. Perhaps more worryingly when it comes to trying to keep our best players I have real doubts as to whether the club has the direction and bravery required to navigate this. For example if Saliba is not ready to commit to a new contract then a club run with the efficiency of say Bournemouth; Brighton or Brentford would already have a plan for accepting the inevitable and ensuring that it maximises the transfer fee and spends this to mitigate the damage. It would take bravery; planning and the efficiency to ensure that a suitable replacement was brought in. Our forward debacle does not suggest that these attributes are particularly present at our club. Neither does the fact that after 3 months there is no indication that a 'top' sporting director's arrival is imminent.

[Niall_Quinn]

@IBK - agreed on all that, not least these two bits above, I'm concerned about the Edu departure too, I posted on here at the time about how he said something about not agreeing with the direction the club was going in: https://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/s...=1#post4596986

It's possible it was to do with Arteta's being obssessed with defensive players and Edu knew they needed more up front - I said at the time he was maybe a bit weak but I'm starting to think he's a real loss

Much more likely, given what we can measure in hindsight, he was concerned about the screeching 180 degree that saw us go from a club making investments on the pitch to a club pinching pennies to the point of negligence.

[IBK]

Much more likely, given what we can measure in hindsight, he was concerned about the screeching 180 degree that saw us go from a club making investments on the pitch to a club pinching pennies to the point of negligence.

Like I say, I disagree with you if you are arguing that it's the owners penny pinching. In their US teams, they have shown a will to spend money to win things. I think the Kroenkes are wedded to Arteta, and if he had given them an ultimatum and insisted on funds being made available for a striker in Jan they would have backed him. IMO the owners refusing to spend is the least likely explanation for the situation we find ourselves in.

Arteta has been backed in building a defence and MF with depth. It doesn't make sense that the under investment further up the pitch is owner led. Instead it points squarely at this not having been a real priority for the manager - or at least being something that he was happy to delay addressing - for whatever reason. That's why I have little sympathy with Arteta bleating over the past couple of weeks that he needs a striker. IMO he - and the active executive made this bed.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Where I disagree is that KSE make no input into transfer matters. Just as we need their blessing when we do want to make a big signing, my understanding is that transfer strategy in general is discussed with them through Josh Kroenke. And if they simply green lighted the decision made by Arteta and others at the club to go forward with what we had up front, then as owners they do take some responsibility for this.
Frankly even if Arteta decided this unilaterally without consulting anyone they would take responsibility, it is their club after all and he is just an employee.