A foreigner manager can have range of problems when adapting to the new league, so an assistant with the knowledge of the league can be very beneficial. They can provide detailed scouting of the opposition style of play.
Beyond that, i suppose it's a good idea to have some sort of familiar presence in the club, rather than a complete overhaul of the coaching staff. Perhaps one of the problems in Moyes' reign was his insistence of completely changing over the coaching staff.
You're incorrect on your assessment of Wenger. Wenger's revolution was limited to fitness, diet and on-field principles. One of the big positives from Wengers early reign was his insistence on keeping the core principles of the club intact. It was also telling that he kept Pat Rice on as assistant manager, who was caretaker boss when Stewart Houston resigned.
Hopefully when we've finally got rid of Wenger, i'd imagine the new manager would want to name an assistant familiar to the core fan base. Someone in the mould of a Bergkamp or Henry type.
Wenger has done great things at Arsenal but he was also fortunate enough to inherit a very strong defence.
Its important to understand that the club is not just a manager. There are layers of management and a board of directors as well. Familiarity with the system ie knowing directors on the board and how they work is vital in how quick a new manager can implement his ideas.
The cliche is not only abt getting more time from the fans.
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 6 minutes ago
Wenger has done great things at Arsenal but he was also fortunate enough to inherit a very strong defence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats rubbish. The best defence in Wenger's tenure was not one he inherited. The invincibles defence was completely assembled by Wenger.
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
You watch Arsenal more than I but like United are finding out now replacing most of a defence at the same time is a problem.
Wenger bought well to get Lauren in and bring through Cole etc but much easier to do when the strength is there already. It's a shame SAF wasn't able to phase out Rio, Vidic in the same way.
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All he said was that it was a very strong defence, he didn't say it was the best. No need for the rubbish comment, was there?
comment by terminator1 (U1863)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All he said was that it was a very strong defence, he didn't say it was the best. No need for the rubbish comment, was there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubbish comment?! What on earth are you talking about??
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 10 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of that defence was old and coming to an end. They did not help in any transition. They all left at the same time. Look at the results of that same defence before Wenger got here. You have to go back to 91', 6 years or so for that defence to have won a title. So to suggest that strong defence was somehow responsible of Wenger's early success is also not accurate.
To be honest the key to our success were Vieira/Bergkamp. Everything was built around them.
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by terminator1 (U1863)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All he said was that it was a very strong defence, he didn't say it was the best. No need for the rubbish comment, was there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubbish comment?! What on earth are you talking about??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was referring to Jenius's comment, which you appeared to be defending.
I realise the media is very happy to discredit Wenger's accomplishments as somehow not his. The truth is our successes in the past are all down to Arsene Wenger.
That does not mean however that he is the man to take Arsenal forward. Sometimes the game moves on faster than the manager and their ideas become less relevant to the times. That is happening to Wenger and so far he has not been able to adjust.
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 34 seconds ago
I realise the media is very happy to discredit Wenger's accomplishments as somehow not his. The truth is our successes in the past are all down to Arsene Wenger.
That does not mean however that he is the man to take Arsenal forward. Sometimes the game moves on faster than the manager and their ideas become less relevant to the times. That is happening to Wenger and so far he has not been able to adjust.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think anyone here is trying to discredit anything Wenger has done, certainly not myself. There's nothing wrong with saying he had something in his favour when he took over. It doesn't belittle anything, as he then went on and created an even better defence.
You seem very defensive, when there isn't any need to be. No one's having a go at Wenger. That said, I do believe he's been at Arsenal for too long now, and his infamous attitude towards stringent bookkeeping certainly stopped Arsenal going forward at a crucial time.
In the absence of a sugardaddy, Wenger's "infamous attitude towards stringent bookkeeping" kept us from "doing a Leeds".
A less dramatic situation would be "doing a Valencia", based on how much they've côcked up their new stadium move so far.
Internal appointments worked quite well for Liverpool. Shanks then Paisley then Fagan and then Dalglish.
We then had an external appointment with the name of Graeme Souness who knew about the workings of club from when he was a legendary player. His tenure was judged as unsuccessful and was sacked.
We went internal again and made Roy Evans (coach) into the manager. We played attractive and attacking football, but the Spice Boys didn't live up to their true footballing potential.
I think a manager recruited externally who has been previously associated with the club will lift the entire club when appointed and can have a prolonged honeymoon period when compared with other managers. But it's vital for them to meet expectations during the prolonged honeymoon period and to sustain performances beyond this.
comment by Gillespie Road (U18361)
posted 2 minutes ago
In the absence of a sugardaddy, Wenger's "infamous attitude towards stringent bookkeeping" kept us from "doing a Leeds".
A less dramatic situation would be "doing a Valencia", based on how much they've côcked up their new stadium move so far.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're being a bit dramatic with your Leeds reference. There is a balance, and the vast majority of Arsenal fans seem to think he didn't strike that balance. Has Wenger or board members not said on numerous occasions that Wenger has a vast 'war chest' available, should Wenger decide to use it?
I maintain that Wenger definitely missed a great opportunity to really move Arsenal forward. You can't deny that you spent far too many years in relative stagnation.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Certainly didn't mean to rubbish Wenger at all.
Point I was making was that he had a strong defensive core/ethic in place as part of a philosophy if you will.
He added excellently to this and combined the best of both worlds.
He was unlucky in a way as he was at the time facing one of the best United teams ever otherwise he would have won more.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
Certainly didn't mean to rubbish Wenger at all.
Point I was making was that he had a strong defensive core/ethic in place as part of a philosophy if you will.
He added excellently to this and combined the best of both worlds.
He was unlucky in a way as he was at the time facing one of the best United teams ever otherwise he would have won more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Valid point, but you have to look at the dreaded historical context. From the Arsenal perspective, the Wenger years are as good as we've ever had it.
I'd like to agree with the part where the OP talks about fresh ideas in a club.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Any debate on Wenger on our board will usually involve the same suspects, often with consistently held opinions. Makes for a livelier discussion on potential replacements, after he leaves.
The snarky blanket statements however, don't help.
Arsenal fans on here are mostly the polar opposite of fickle
Gilespie R
I was also readying a well though out response until I saw that comment.
Sign in if you want to comment
New managers 'knowing the club inside out'
Page 1 of 2
posted on 13/1/15
A foreigner manager can have range of problems when adapting to the new league, so an assistant with the knowledge of the league can be very beneficial. They can provide detailed scouting of the opposition style of play.
Beyond that, i suppose it's a good idea to have some sort of familiar presence in the club, rather than a complete overhaul of the coaching staff. Perhaps one of the problems in Moyes' reign was his insistence of completely changing over the coaching staff.
You're incorrect on your assessment of Wenger. Wenger's revolution was limited to fitness, diet and on-field principles. One of the big positives from Wengers early reign was his insistence on keeping the core principles of the club intact. It was also telling that he kept Pat Rice on as assistant manager, who was caretaker boss when Stewart Houston resigned.
Hopefully when we've finally got rid of Wenger, i'd imagine the new manager would want to name an assistant familiar to the core fan base. Someone in the mould of a Bergkamp or Henry type.
posted on 13/1/15
Wenger has done great things at Arsenal but he was also fortunate enough to inherit a very strong defence.
posted on 13/1/15
Its important to understand that the club is not just a manager. There are layers of management and a board of directors as well. Familiarity with the system ie knowing directors on the board and how they work is vital in how quick a new manager can implement his ideas.
The cliche is not only abt getting more time from the fans.
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 6 minutes ago
Wenger has done great things at Arsenal but he was also fortunate enough to inherit a very strong defence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats rubbish. The best defence in Wenger's tenure was not one he inherited. The invincibles defence was completely assembled by Wenger.
posted on 13/1/15
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
posted on 13/1/15
You watch Arsenal more than I but like United are finding out now replacing most of a defence at the same time is a problem.
Wenger bought well to get Lauren in and bring through Cole etc but much easier to do when the strength is there already. It's a shame SAF wasn't able to phase out Rio, Vidic in the same way.
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All he said was that it was a very strong defence, he didn't say it was the best. No need for the rubbish comment, was there?
posted on 13/1/15
comment by terminator1 (U1863)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All he said was that it was a very strong defence, he didn't say it was the best. No need for the rubbish comment, was there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubbish comment?! What on earth are you talking about??
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 10 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of that defence was old and coming to an end. They did not help in any transition. They all left at the same time. Look at the results of that same defence before Wenger got here. You have to go back to 91', 6 years or so for that defence to have won a title. So to suggest that strong defence was somehow responsible of Wenger's early success is also not accurate.
To be honest the key to our success were Vieira/Bergkamp. Everything was built around them.
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by terminator1 (U1863)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by Serial WUManiser™© - WOL Free (U1410)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 3 minutes ago
So he didn't inherit a strong defence then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He did inherit a strong defence. The point J99 was making was that it wasn't the best defence in Wengers reign was the Invincibles, which he assembled himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All he said was that it was a very strong defence, he didn't say it was the best. No need for the rubbish comment, was there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubbish comment?! What on earth are you talking about??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was referring to Jenius's comment, which you appeared to be defending.
posted on 13/1/15
I realise the media is very happy to discredit Wenger's accomplishments as somehow not his. The truth is our successes in the past are all down to Arsene Wenger.
That does not mean however that he is the man to take Arsenal forward. Sometimes the game moves on faster than the manager and their ideas become less relevant to the times. That is happening to Wenger and so far he has not been able to adjust.
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 34 seconds ago
I realise the media is very happy to discredit Wenger's accomplishments as somehow not his. The truth is our successes in the past are all down to Arsene Wenger.
That does not mean however that he is the man to take Arsenal forward. Sometimes the game moves on faster than the manager and their ideas become less relevant to the times. That is happening to Wenger and so far he has not been able to adjust.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think anyone here is trying to discredit anything Wenger has done, certainly not myself. There's nothing wrong with saying he had something in his favour when he took over. It doesn't belittle anything, as he then went on and created an even better defence.
You seem very defensive, when there isn't any need to be. No one's having a go at Wenger. That said, I do believe he's been at Arsenal for too long now, and his infamous attitude towards stringent bookkeeping certainly stopped Arsenal going forward at a crucial time.
posted on 13/1/15
In the absence of a sugardaddy, Wenger's "infamous attitude towards stringent bookkeeping" kept us from "doing a Leeds".
A less dramatic situation would be "doing a Valencia", based on how much they've côcked up their new stadium move so far.
posted on 13/1/15
Internal appointments worked quite well for Liverpool. Shanks then Paisley then Fagan and then Dalglish.
We then had an external appointment with the name of Graeme Souness who knew about the workings of club from when he was a legendary player. His tenure was judged as unsuccessful and was sacked.
We went internal again and made Roy Evans (coach) into the manager. We played attractive and attacking football, but the Spice Boys didn't live up to their true footballing potential.
I think a manager recruited externally who has been previously associated with the club will lift the entire club when appointed and can have a prolonged honeymoon period when compared with other managers. But it's vital for them to meet expectations during the prolonged honeymoon period and to sustain performances beyond this.
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Gillespie Road (U18361)
posted 2 minutes ago
In the absence of a sugardaddy, Wenger's "infamous attitude towards stringent bookkeeping" kept us from "doing a Leeds".
A less dramatic situation would be "doing a Valencia", based on how much they've côcked up their new stadium move so far.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're being a bit dramatic with your Leeds reference. There is a balance, and the vast majority of Arsenal fans seem to think he didn't strike that balance. Has Wenger or board members not said on numerous occasions that Wenger has a vast 'war chest' available, should Wenger decide to use it?
I maintain that Wenger definitely missed a great opportunity to really move Arsenal forward. You can't deny that you spent far too many years in relative stagnation.
posted on 13/1/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/1/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/1/15
Certainly didn't mean to rubbish Wenger at all.
Point I was making was that he had a strong defensive core/ethic in place as part of a philosophy if you will.
He added excellently to this and combined the best of both worlds.
He was unlucky in a way as he was at the time facing one of the best United teams ever otherwise he would have won more.
posted on 13/1/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/1/15
comment by Diafol Trwyn Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 5 minutes ago
Certainly didn't mean to rubbish Wenger at all.
Point I was making was that he had a strong defensive core/ethic in place as part of a philosophy if you will.
He added excellently to this and combined the best of both worlds.
He was unlucky in a way as he was at the time facing one of the best United teams ever otherwise he would have won more.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Valid point, but you have to look at the dreaded historical context. From the Arsenal perspective, the Wenger years are as good as we've ever had it.
I'd like to agree with the part where the OP talks about fresh ideas in a club.
posted on 13/1/15
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/1/15
Any debate on Wenger on our board will usually involve the same suspects, often with consistently held opinions. Makes for a livelier discussion on potential replacements, after he leaves.
The snarky blanket statements however, don't help.
posted on 13/1/15
Arsenal fans on here are mostly the polar opposite of fickle
posted on 13/1/15
Gilespie R
I was also readying a well though out response until I saw that comment.
Page 1 of 2