Being better off is a silly comparison unless you think the decisions post Wenger would good. I doubt you'd find even 1% of the supporters think we've made the right moves in that time.
There's an alternate scenario where we appointed a far more suitable manager and reversed the rot
No we’re clearly not better off. But I don’t think we’d hugely better off with Wenger here, we were making terrible decisions and regressing a lot in Wengers final years, plus the football was getting worse. I think it just highlights how badly run the football club is, and until that changes getting rid of managers won’t make a huge difference. This isn’t a defence of Arteta or saying he should stay, but if we sacked him I wouldn’t at all be confident we’d handle it properly and appointment the right manager, or back him in the right way. We’d probably get a new manager bounce then the usual problems will set in we’ve had for 10+ years
The club needs a vision and leadership off the pitch, having a good manager obviously helps but you need more than that.
I think Wenger should take a lot of responsibility for the mess you're in now. He signed some terrible players that you can't seem to shift for whatever reason. Longer term I think if Arteta goes and you bring in the right man, you'll be better off. The main issue is Kroenke though. No passion or interest in Arsenal.
Neutral view after watching yesterday, you seem lightyears away from being anywhere near the title, or even top 4 really.
I know you had a lot of players missing yesterday for various reasons, but Chelsea's bench would start for your team, even Kepa.
Arsenal consistently buy rubbish players.
Tierney is the last one you look at and are wholly convinced he's been a success and even he had a miserable game v Chelsea.
Let's not forget, Wenger attracted those players because he got us into the CL which tbf he should be credited for, except when he didn't at the end of his career.
comment by Culér (U9489)
posted 36 seconds ago
I think Wenger should take a lot of responsibility for the mess you're in now. He signed some terrible players that you can't seem to shift for whatever reason. Longer term I think if Arteta goes and you bring in the right man, you'll be better off. The main issue is Kroenke though. No passion or interest in Arsenal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go again with the blaming Wenger for buying the "cheaper" players that he was FORCED to buy by the owner's constant. "No, I want 4 or 5 players for 100mil" BS transfer policy. Now granted you can always argue that Wenger could have gotten someone better for what he spent but that's real easy to say with hindsight. However you CANNOT blame him for the owner flat REFUSING TO PAY TOP PRICE FOR TOP QUALITY!
Get it right, Wenger staved off the rot and cancer that is ke and KSE. He kept the club WAY more competitive than it should have been for far longer than it should have been despite beiong hamstrung by the owners cheapskate insistence on quantity of players not quality. The notion/narrative that the complete ke of and owner who won't stump up top cash for the players NEEDED, had absolutely nothing to do with Wenger repeatedly buying substandard players is quite frankly both naive and ridiculous.
the problem is ke, it's ALWAYS BEEN ke, Wenger just had too much class and love for this cliub to drag it through the mud saying so. Instead of repeatedly scapegoating and blaming him for what STan ke has done people need to start waking the hell up and understanding if not for Wenger then we'd have been languishing in this current misery years earlier and for many more years than we have. So ENOUGH with the "It was Wenger" RUBBISH!
Arsene had his flaws but HE did not ruin this football club. The man responsible for that is still the owner and currently proving to you YET AGAIN, exactly how he's fecked up the club by rinsing and repeating the same wash of the last 10 years.
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 11 minutes ago
Arsenal consistently buy rubbish players.
Tierney is the last one you look at and are wholly convinced he's been a success and even he had a miserable game v Chelsea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious Scottish defending?
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
comment by Flip Flop Flip Flop (U22503)
posted 8 minutes ago
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're wrong. Arsenal had to move out of Highbury, which was a tiny stadium and could not be expanded. We would be worse off now if we were still playing there.
The problem with the move was the terrible debt agreement we made, and the timing, which could not have been worse, as it happened just as Abramovic came along and changed the financial landscape of the game.
A relegation battle after 2 games?
comment by Flip Flop Flip Flop (U22503)
posted 6 minutes ago
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea was that we would end up with an owner who gave a feck and was willing to spend what it takes to compete and win at the very top. Had we gotten that then none of this would be happening and we'd be sitting pretty right now.
But sadly the owner we ended up with was ke an owner who instead of investing in the team has asset stripped it for his own personal financial gain. The move needed to happen and was the correct thing to do. The mistake was ever allowing ke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 2 minutes ago
The mistake was ever allowingke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Glazers have never spent a penny on United. Whatever's spent is what they deem the club can use from its own turnover.
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Flip Flop Flip Flop (U22503)
posted 6 minutes ago
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea was that we would end up with an owner who gave a feck and was willing to spend what it takes to compete and win at the very top. Had we gotten that then none of this would be happening and we'd be sitting pretty right now.
But sadly the owner we ended up with waske an owner who instead of investing in the team has asset stripped it for his own personal financial gain. The move needed to happen and was the correct thing to do. The mistake was ever allowingke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Usmanov is a disgusting crooked piece of sh*t and should also have been allowed nowhere near our club.
The irony of course is that people pine for the days of David Dein and think the sun shone from his backside, when he actually introduced both Kroenke and Usmanov to Arsenal.
No and you’re not going to be better off if you bring in two worst candidates than Wenger. Club should have been aiming higher for a Conte type.
comment by PowerkingHenry27 (U18930)
posted 7 minutes ago
No and you’re not going to be better off if you bring in two worst candidates than Wenger. Club should have been aiming higher for a Conte type.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That will never happen with our owners though - Conte wouldn't put up with their bullcarp
comment by The Post Nearly Man Says Our Number 7 is the King of Uruguay (U1270)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 2 minutes ago
The mistake was ever allowingke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Glazers have never spent a penny on United. Whatever's spent is what they deem the club can use from its own turnover.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hair splitting, the point is that if the manager wants a player that cost 100 mil, he'
s allowed to go buy him. He doesn't get told, "No you have to buy 3 or 4 lesser players instead." That's what I'm on about, exactly HOW money is allowed to be spent. As opposed to whether it's the owners money or club's turnover. Doesn't matter if it's his own or club coffers, him strangling how and where it's spent for 10 years has caused this teams overall quality level to fall so far. His model was unsustainable for competing and now the true damage has begun to show.
"The likes of Fabregas, Nasr, Robin, Hleb, Song, Adebayor etc " all left because the club under Wenger had zero ambition. Go back and read RVP's statement at the time.Dien leaving was when Wenger took full control and running a club, having a wage structure,rewarding loyal players and making a profit were all far,far more important than winning anything. We became weak and lazy,and we have remained that way ever since. Arsene inherited a backbone,and once they retired we were toast.Rose-coloured specs are fine,but it's now how it was.
Wenger didn't have money to spend like Arteta does. Now when you look at Wenger's time you can see he got maximum out of every team he managed. To finish in top 4 with players like Chamakh, Sanogo and others is success similar to invincibles. There are 2 season I feel we should've done more, 07/08 and 15/16, other seasons we finished maximum we could with team avaliable at the time.
Firstly, Wenger had to go; it was time and the man has openly admitted that he stayed longer than he should have.
We all knew it would be tough after he left, granted I thought we would be a 5th - 7th place contender, but the slump is not a surprise; it is just the decline is much steeper than I thought it would be to get out off.
I was surprised we wanted Arteta as the guy had zero experience, but he has had some bright moments. It has been enough time to make a judgment call and I do not think he will last. And there is problem, he should not last but the club is badly managed.
So to answer your question, yes we are worse off as I think Wenger would have the clout to steady the ship and veto certain decisions (Pepe). But having said that we got Xhaka under Wenger so who knows it may have been just a worse.
Yeah Wenger did sign some proper dross and average players toward the end that we found hard to ship off and have held us back over the years. Silvestre, squilaci, Santos, park, Gervinho, Xhaka, welbeck, Elneny, sanogo, mustafi, Perez, Jenkinson, kolasinac mhiki. You could probably add a fair few to that list as well. So if we carried on that trend, we probably wouldn’t hugely better off
To say no one blames the board is quite simply ludicrous. Pretty much everyone thinks the board were extremely poor since Wenger went. Lots of people blame the board for poor appointment and singings, particularly under Emery who was only head coach so not involved in transfers, appointing Arteta as a first time manager and giving him too long before taking action against him.
I can see Arteta's plan and line of thinking and I'm confident it will reap huge rewards in the end if we are patient. But obviously as fans we want results right now. I will only pass judgment on our direction under Arteta in May but right now I won't join the "Arteta out" chorus. If he doesn't turn things round by then then we can consider bringing on a new man on the rudder.
comment by 5-2 (U10698)
posted 6 hours, 36 minutes ago
Wenger didn't have money to spend like Arteta does. Now when you look at Wenger's time you can see he got maximum out of every team he managed. To finish in top 4 with players like Chamakh, Sanogo and others is success similar to invincibles. There are 2 season I feel we should've done more, 07/08 and 15/16, other seasons we finished maximum we could with team avaliable at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what I am talking about and plus the fact that the board kept selling Wenger's bright players to raise money for club. Remember there was a time when Petr Cech was the only player Wenger bought because there was no money and we still managed to make top 4!
comment by Tyke (U9181)
posted 7 hours, 53 minutes ago
"The likes of Fabregas, Nasr, Robin, Hleb, Song, Adebayor etc " all left because the club under Wenger had zero ambition. Go back and read RVP's statement at the time.Dien leaving was when Wenger took full control and running a club, having a wage structure,rewarding loyal players and making a profit were all far,far more important than winning anything. We became weak and lazy,and we have remained that way ever since. Arsene inherited a backbone,and once they retired we were toast.Rose-coloured specs are fine,but it's now how it was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was it Wenger's fault that the club had no ambition then? Go back and read more about what went on during Wenger's era. The man was practically making money for the club as the board kept on selling his star players. I read RVP statements and watched his interviews afterwards... he had no issues with Wenger as per lack of ambition. He said he had a meeting with the board (Ivan Gazidis to be precise) and that's who told RVP that the club had no ambition so sign big names and RVP subsequently left the club for ManU to win EPL
Sign in if you want to comment
Reality check: Are we better off?
Page 1 of 2
posted on 23/8/21
Being better off is a silly comparison unless you think the decisions post Wenger would good. I doubt you'd find even 1% of the supporters think we've made the right moves in that time.
There's an alternate scenario where we appointed a far more suitable manager and reversed the rot
posted on 23/8/21
No we’re clearly not better off. But I don’t think we’d hugely better off with Wenger here, we were making terrible decisions and regressing a lot in Wengers final years, plus the football was getting worse. I think it just highlights how badly run the football club is, and until that changes getting rid of managers won’t make a huge difference. This isn’t a defence of Arteta or saying he should stay, but if we sacked him I wouldn’t at all be confident we’d handle it properly and appointment the right manager, or back him in the right way. We’d probably get a new manager bounce then the usual problems will set in we’ve had for 10+ years
The club needs a vision and leadership off the pitch, having a good manager obviously helps but you need more than that.
posted on 23/8/21
I think Wenger should take a lot of responsibility for the mess you're in now. He signed some terrible players that you can't seem to shift for whatever reason. Longer term I think if Arteta goes and you bring in the right man, you'll be better off. The main issue is Kroenke though. No passion or interest in Arsenal.
posted on 23/8/21
Neutral view after watching yesterday, you seem lightyears away from being anywhere near the title, or even top 4 really.
I know you had a lot of players missing yesterday for various reasons, but Chelsea's bench would start for your team, even Kepa.
posted on 23/8/21
Arsenal consistently buy rubbish players.
Tierney is the last one you look at and are wholly convinced he's been a success and even he had a miserable game v Chelsea.
posted on 23/8/21
Let's not forget, Wenger attracted those players because he got us into the CL which tbf he should be credited for, except when he didn't at the end of his career.
posted on 23/8/21
comment by Culér (U9489)
posted 36 seconds ago
I think Wenger should take a lot of responsibility for the mess you're in now. He signed some terrible players that you can't seem to shift for whatever reason. Longer term I think if Arteta goes and you bring in the right man, you'll be better off. The main issue is Kroenke though. No passion or interest in Arsenal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here we go again with the blaming Wenger for buying the "cheaper" players that he was FORCED to buy by the owner's constant. "No, I want 4 or 5 players for 100mil" BS transfer policy. Now granted you can always argue that Wenger could have gotten someone better for what he spent but that's real easy to say with hindsight. However you CANNOT blame him for the owner flat REFUSING TO PAY TOP PRICE FOR TOP QUALITY!
Get it right, Wenger staved off the rot and cancer that is ke and KSE. He kept the club WAY more competitive than it should have been for far longer than it should have been despite beiong hamstrung by the owners cheapskate insistence on quantity of players not quality. The notion/narrative that the complete ke of and owner who won't stump up top cash for the players NEEDED, had absolutely nothing to do with Wenger repeatedly buying substandard players is quite frankly both naive and ridiculous.
the problem is ke, it's ALWAYS BEEN ke, Wenger just had too much class and love for this cliub to drag it through the mud saying so. Instead of repeatedly scapegoating and blaming him for what STan ke has done people need to start waking the hell up and understanding if not for Wenger then we'd have been languishing in this current misery years earlier and for many more years than we have. So ENOUGH with the "It was Wenger" RUBBISH!
Arsene had his flaws but HE did not ruin this football club. The man responsible for that is still the owner and currently proving to you YET AGAIN, exactly how he's fecked up the club by rinsing and repeating the same wash of the last 10 years.
posted on 23/8/21
comment by HB Fash (U21935)
posted 11 minutes ago
Arsenal consistently buy rubbish players.
Tierney is the last one you look at and are wholly convinced he's been a success and even he had a miserable game v Chelsea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hilarious Scottish defending?
posted on 23/8/21
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
posted on 23/8/21
comment by Flip Flop Flip Flop (U22503)
posted 8 minutes ago
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're wrong. Arsenal had to move out of Highbury, which was a tiny stadium and could not be expanded. We would be worse off now if we were still playing there.
The problem with the move was the terrible debt agreement we made, and the timing, which could not have been worse, as it happened just as Abramovic came along and changed the financial landscape of the game.
posted on 23/8/21
A relegation battle after 2 games?
posted on 23/8/21
comment by Flip Flop Flip Flop (U22503)
posted 6 minutes ago
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea was that we would end up with an owner who gave a feck and was willing to spend what it takes to compete and win at the very top. Had we gotten that then none of this would be happening and we'd be sitting pretty right now.
But sadly the owner we ended up with was ke an owner who instead of investing in the team has asset stripped it for his own personal financial gain. The move needed to happen and was the correct thing to do. The mistake was ever allowing ke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
posted on 23/8/21
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 2 minutes ago
The mistake was ever allowingke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Glazers have never spent a penny on United. Whatever's spent is what they deem the club can use from its own turnover.
posted on 23/8/21
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Flip Flop Flip Flop (U22503)
posted 6 minutes ago
The problem stems from leaving Highbury in the 1st place when Arsenal were already competing with the best.
If you know you are going to sell your assets to pay off the stadium why move there in the 1st place.
If all you could afford was a 1 bed flat , you wouldn't go and buy a 6 bed house and struggle when you were perfectly comfortable in your 1 bed flat.
Arsenal tried to fix something that wasnt broken
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The idea was that we would end up with an owner who gave a feck and was willing to spend what it takes to compete and win at the very top. Had we gotten that then none of this would be happening and we'd be sitting pretty right now.
But sadly the owner we ended up with waske an owner who instead of investing in the team has asset stripped it for his own personal financial gain. The move needed to happen and was the correct thing to do. The mistake was ever allowingke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Usmanov is a disgusting crooked piece of sh*t and should also have been allowed nowhere near our club.
The irony of course is that people pine for the days of David Dein and think the sun shone from his backside, when he actually introduced both Kroenke and Usmanov to Arsenal.
posted on 23/8/21
No and you’re not going to be better off if you bring in two worst candidates than Wenger. Club should have been aiming higher for a Conte type.
posted on 23/8/21
comment by PowerkingHenry27 (U18930)
posted 7 minutes ago
No and you’re not going to be better off if you bring in two worst candidates than Wenger. Club should have been aiming higher for a Conte type.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That will never happen with our owners though - Conte wouldn't put up with their bullcarp
posted on 23/8/21
comment by The Post Nearly Man Says Our Number 7 is the King of Uruguay (U1270)
posted 1 hour, 1 minute ago
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 2 minutes ago
The mistake was ever allowingke anywhere near this club. We ALWAYS should have gone with Usmanov, dodgy Russian or not, he loves the game, would have given a toss about his club remaining at the top and spent whatever it took to do so. Same as Roman the Sheikh and the Glazers do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Glazers have never spent a penny on United. Whatever's spent is what they deem the club can use from its own turnover.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hair splitting, the point is that if the manager wants a player that cost 100 mil, he'
s allowed to go buy him. He doesn't get told, "No you have to buy 3 or 4 lesser players instead." That's what I'm on about, exactly HOW money is allowed to be spent. As opposed to whether it's the owners money or club's turnover. Doesn't matter if it's his own or club coffers, him strangling how and where it's spent for 10 years has caused this teams overall quality level to fall so far. His model was unsustainable for competing and now the true damage has begun to show.
posted on 23/8/21
"The likes of Fabregas, Nasr, Robin, Hleb, Song, Adebayor etc " all left because the club under Wenger had zero ambition. Go back and read RVP's statement at the time.Dien leaving was when Wenger took full control and running a club, having a wage structure,rewarding loyal players and making a profit were all far,far more important than winning anything. We became weak and lazy,and we have remained that way ever since. Arsene inherited a backbone,and once they retired we were toast.Rose-coloured specs are fine,but it's now how it was.
posted on 23/8/21
Wenger didn't have money to spend like Arteta does. Now when you look at Wenger's time you can see he got maximum out of every team he managed. To finish in top 4 with players like Chamakh, Sanogo and others is success similar to invincibles. There are 2 season I feel we should've done more, 07/08 and 15/16, other seasons we finished maximum we could with team avaliable at the time.
posted on 23/8/21
Firstly, Wenger had to go; it was time and the man has openly admitted that he stayed longer than he should have.
We all knew it would be tough after he left, granted I thought we would be a 5th - 7th place contender, but the slump is not a surprise; it is just the decline is much steeper than I thought it would be to get out off.
I was surprised we wanted Arteta as the guy had zero experience, but he has had some bright moments. It has been enough time to make a judgment call and I do not think he will last. And there is problem, he should not last but the club is badly managed.
So to answer your question, yes we are worse off as I think Wenger would have the clout to steady the ship and veto certain decisions (Pepe). But having said that we got Xhaka under Wenger so who knows it may have been just a worse.
posted on 23/8/21
Yeah Wenger did sign some proper dross and average players toward the end that we found hard to ship off and have held us back over the years. Silvestre, squilaci, Santos, park, Gervinho, Xhaka, welbeck, Elneny, sanogo, mustafi, Perez, Jenkinson, kolasinac mhiki. You could probably add a fair few to that list as well. So if we carried on that trend, we probably wouldn’t hugely better off
posted on 23/8/21
To say no one blames the board is quite simply ludicrous. Pretty much everyone thinks the board were extremely poor since Wenger went. Lots of people blame the board for poor appointment and singings, particularly under Emery who was only head coach so not involved in transfers, appointing Arteta as a first time manager and giving him too long before taking action against him.
posted on 23/8/21
I can see Arteta's plan and line of thinking and I'm confident it will reap huge rewards in the end if we are patient. But obviously as fans we want results right now. I will only pass judgment on our direction under Arteta in May but right now I won't join the "Arteta out" chorus. If he doesn't turn things round by then then we can consider bringing on a new man on the rudder.
posted on 24/8/21
comment by 5-2 (U10698)
posted 6 hours, 36 minutes ago
Wenger didn't have money to spend like Arteta does. Now when you look at Wenger's time you can see he got maximum out of every team he managed. To finish in top 4 with players like Chamakh, Sanogo and others is success similar to invincibles. There are 2 season I feel we should've done more, 07/08 and 15/16, other seasons we finished maximum we could with team avaliable at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what I am talking about and plus the fact that the board kept selling Wenger's bright players to raise money for club. Remember there was a time when Petr Cech was the only player Wenger bought because there was no money and we still managed to make top 4!
posted on 24/8/21
comment by Tyke (U9181)
posted 7 hours, 53 minutes ago
"The likes of Fabregas, Nasr, Robin, Hleb, Song, Adebayor etc " all left because the club under Wenger had zero ambition. Go back and read RVP's statement at the time.Dien leaving was when Wenger took full control and running a club, having a wage structure,rewarding loyal players and making a profit were all far,far more important than winning anything. We became weak and lazy,and we have remained that way ever since. Arsene inherited a backbone,and once they retired we were toast.Rose-coloured specs are fine,but it's now how it was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was it Wenger's fault that the club had no ambition then? Go back and read more about what went on during Wenger's era. The man was practically making money for the club as the board kept on selling his star players. I read RVP statements and watched his interviews afterwards... he had no issues with Wenger as per lack of ambition. He said he had a meeting with the board (Ivan Gazidis to be precise) and that's who told RVP that the club had no ambition so sign big names and RVP subsequently left the club for ManU to win EPL
Page 1 of 2