Originally Posted by AKBapologist
Mate,
name one post in this thread that says we have unlimited funds to throw away.
and then name one post in this thread that says we cannot win stuff because of we don't have chelsea or city's money --- you will find out that it's only your posts that make such claims.
moreso, your definition of a sugar-daddy doesn't even make sense.
‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’
The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!
£80m for Conaldo tbh. Absolutely great business.
@budesonide - I'm in concurrent arguments, one with you, and one with someone else.
NO manager at arsenal can behave in the transfer markets, in the way you describe, according to gladis. Sacking Wenger will not produce different results in the transfer window. And in the clubs that do buy who ever they want to, they are backed by unlimited funds and thus purchases can be made with NO RISK.
What's there not to understand?
Would you be surprised if messi went for 250million?
‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’
The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!
Err...yes?
Pretty surprised I'd say.
In reality, how many managers can act in the "money is not barrier" business model? Those of Man City; Chelsea; Real Madrid: yes. Perhaps Barcelona and Man U but I am not 100% convinced with either. I suspect that Guardiola and Ferguson can spend the money they do because they are successful and that the funds would dry up the instant the success ends. Also, both clubs have benefited from making serious coin from player sales.
But outside of those, every manager has to weigh the cost/benefit of each purchase.
While all answers are responses, not all responses are answers.
Absolutely surprised, regardless of his quality.
While all answers are responses, not all responses are answers.
Yes they can. Spending 20million on a quality centreback instead of 10million on an unknown french nobody could have made a bloody difference.
If we had spent 25million on torres seasons ago, we may not now be trying to get wenger to spend some fucking money on quality players.
And yes, we can spend 20 million -- dare I say even 30million --- on a worldclass player if we wanted to based on our spending the past few seasons. Wenger doesn't see the value of that. ANOTHER MANGER WITH BALLS WOULD!
And that is all that is needed.
Wenger would rather spend the 20/30 million on five unknown kids and 3 squillaci's and pay them handsomely whilst at it too.
That is the difference. Wenger seems to know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’
The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!
I agree with everything you said.
yeah I guess, paying over-the-top for quality is a waste.
‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’
The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote