Agree, and why I dont go along the wenger is a prick/idiot/twat. He clearly isnt, he is a very intelligent, but his stubborn streak seems to blinker him. He clearly doesnt want to fail, or the club to fail, but at the mo, it feels like it is.Originally Posted by Letters
It goes deeper than a stubborn streak. You have to look back on some of statements and ask yourself what's the agenda. Who is he serving? He's been manipulative and coy with some details. If it weren't for Gazidis, I think we'd know next to nothing about our financial state and I think he'd prefer things were kept that way.
Agree with this. Particularly the highlighted text. This is the dissimulation we are seeing. From where we are it seems clear that the manager is serving his own agenda, not that of the long term prospects of the club. We have become too accustomed to the idea that Wenger's approach and the best interests of the club are one and the same. They are not - and here's why: The health of a football club such as AFC remains principally dependent upon footballing success, not just balancing the books. And with every craven opening match performance; every indication of a lack of ambition - the reputation of the club; the self confidence of the players and the desirability of Arsenal as a destination for players takes another knock. In every sport, success is built on self belief and momentum. But we have not just lost momentum, we are going backwards. The fans know it; our own players must feel it, and potential transfer targets can clearly see better prospects elsewhere.
I genuinely believe that our palpable lack of ambition is behind the increasing evidence of Arsenal's inability to land transfer targets. And Wenger's reactive stance, together with his vacillation in this regard is thretening to create a prefect storm.
Back to the dissimulation - it may be that Vardy's loyalty to Leicester was a factor in him not coming to us, but this abortive transfer move illustrates clearly the smoke and mirrors that we are seeing constantly from Arsenal and its manager. The saga was clear and obvious evidence that the club needs a striker - yet we are now told that this is not the case. Arseblog today summarises many incidences of similar contradictory statements from our manager. The fact that we are apparently being taken as fools is a testament to whose agenda we are following - and it is not one that has much to do with the health of the club as a football team.
As Arseblog says:
When you couple that with a manager who is untouchable and indulged on every football whim – particularly when it comes to spending money – you set yourself up to underachieve, and that’s what we saw yesterday. Stan Kroenke doesn’t care, Ivan Gazidis can do nothing to counter Arsene Wenger’s inherent conservatism in the transfer market, and the manager’s inability to address the very obvious needs of his team led directly to yesterday’s defeat.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
This.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
Thought I'd move the conversation here instead of clogging up the transfer talk.
Are we really broken? Came across this link below and have been thinking about how other clubs are run.
http://www.90min.com/posts/439604-tw...otball-history
I wouldn't say broken.
I'd say fucked beyond repair. But then again, so it British football.
Für eure Sicherheit
A rogues gallery indeed, and poor examples of football club management. But we are not talking about our club being poorly run. We are talking about the 5th or 6th biggest club on the planet sliding into relative mediocrity and sacrificing footballing success for corporate profit. And in a sense that is both unique and a betrayal of our proud traditions.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
I've been thinking about this one over the past few days. I think we're unbalanced and focused too much on commercial stability as a club but I don't think it will always be this way. Is the structure of the club that bad? Is it full of unambitious people? I find that hard to believe. When I've heard Ivan speak, he sounds like he knows the concerns of the fans and isn't stupid. Silverware is what will grow the clubs revenue so even if that is the ultimate end goal for the club, they understand that they need titles to achieve that. Or Ivan does at least.
I don't know what happend to him to make that statement this summer but maybe he's falling into line with Wenger's ethos. That sounded more like Wenger than Ivan and rather than resist, just go with the message and let the fans react. My theory is he threw Wenger right under the spotlight when we announced our new financial might and ambitions. The expectation from the fans was ramped up and I don't think Wenger liked that at all. Well, that's my theory.
For me, Wenger needs to be moved on and then we can really asses what's going on with this club. He has no drive or motivation to win so it's really hard to see what we're capable of.
Last edited by Power n Glory; 19-08-2016 at 07:03 AM.
It's a theory - but I think the problem is that Wenger is both illustrative and determinative of the culture that we now see at the club. In many ways his 'success' in maintaining us as a top 4 club while spending conservatively has given rise to this culture, but we must also remember that we have an 'owner' who is not only disinterested in success on the pitch, but has stated categorically that this is not what his 'investment' is about:
Do you see an owner with this attitude backing a more ambitious manager who wants to spend the going rate to succeed?If you want to win championships then you would never get involved.
IF we believe anything that has been said at our club in the past, our conservative, no risk approach was once a means to an end. Now it has become an end in itself. It is difficult to see what is going to happen to change that - because if another manager is likely to want to, or tries to change things, I cannot see the motivation at board level for supporting this.
Putting the laughter back into manslaughter
http://www.cityam.com/236568/stan-kr...g-on-transfers
I interpret that quote differently. I think that quote is misunderstood and taken out of context. I don’t think that quote is about why he invested in this club. It sounds to me like he’s saying an owner should never get involved with transfers or interfere with the managers work if you want to win titles. I’d like to see his who interview for this. But he goes on to say the best owners watch both sides and if you want the best players the business side has to be run correctly which makes sense."For me, being an individual owner, I have to have some sort of reality involved.
"If you want to win championships then you would never get involved. I think the best owners in sports are the guys that sort of watch both sides a bit. If you don't have a good business then you can't really afford to go out and get the best players unless you just want to rely on other sources of income.
"Over there [in the UK] it was sort of like 'well, we've got guys from the Middle East, the oil price is over $100, they can spend anything they want'.
"But the problem I saw with all of that; those people can lose interest. It doesn't mean that they will, but I sort of threw that out there: 'What happens when the Middle Eastern family, this thing's costing a lot of money and they decide to go home?' I said what really happens in those situations is the fans get hurt because the players get picked up and paid if they're good, the front office gets other jobs."
It goes back to past discussion about the type of owner we want. I think some of the worst owners are the ones pushing players on managers and getting too involved which undermines the managers decisions. In our case, Stan is too passive but reading that article, this is worth noting.
I don’t have a major problem with an owner that’s a bit hands off but I have a problem with him not pressing Wenger to perform. Maybe Stan feels he needs more time to get it right. For us fans, it’s been over decade and we want results now. For Stan and the rest of them, it’s only now they’ve been able to really support Wenger financially and go for bigger targets in the market. For years, Wenger has been going on about financial doping and having to work with restrictions. The focus was always on the Board to deliver the money so he can compete. Now it’s the other way round but we’re starting to see the same excuses. Since the new sponsorship deals, we seen 2 FA Cups and 2nd place. Maybe Stan is thinking we’re making progress. Lord knows how long it will take for him to recognise the managers flaws. I really worry Wenger will accept a new contract. We shall see.His belief in the power of analytics motivated Arsenal's purchase of Chicago-based analytics company StatDNA for £2.2m in 2012.
"I was always interested in Moneyball," said Kroenke. "Billy Beane, one of his heroes happened to be our manager at Arsenal, Arsene Wenger. Arsene has an undergraduate degree in economics and has always had that analytical thing going on.
"When we acquired a controlling interest in Arsenal in 2011, after that we started pushing pretty hard because it seemed to me that there were some people who were a bit more advanced in that area and so we were fortunate in that we acquired StatDNA. They gave us a big lift in the soccer business."
Bringing StatDNA to Arsenal and noticing a weakness in the structure suggests that there is an interest there and he’s following on some level.
I think if we had a more ambitious manager, they’d make use of the budget they were given. Wenger isn’t doing that at the moment. I don’t think anything is being withheld from him otherwise questions would have been asked about Theo Walcott’s contract extension and the Xhaka transfer fee. As long as we spend what we make, I don’t think the owner will have too much of a problem. The resources and facilities are in place but the manager is stale and out of ideas. Wenger can’t deal with a huge influx of players, he thinks it’s too difficult to integrate them and that reflects in his transfer policy. After cocking up our title defence and conceding to Utd, he only signed Lehman for the Invincible season because he had faith in his team bouncing back. That’s how he’s always been. We need a fresh approach and I don’t think the structure is so broken that a manager like Klopp or even Simeone would struggle to deliver more than what Wenger is now. They have the motivation for success. The manager should have that motivation every season, every game. For an owner and a club in our position, we may be looking and measuring things over a 5 year plan, 10 years…etc. That makes sense for club in our position. But I have no idea how manager can get into that sort of mind frame. It’s not normal.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote