yep, i can see this one going all the way too
Robin van Persie
- Thread starter ben_foster
- Start date
- Status
25M is daylight robinry but city would probably shell it out.
If Ribery was big in jazz or the mafia, 'Daylight' would be a good nickname
What circumstances exactly? Wenger's kept Arsenal top four but has at the same time gradually decreased their chances of winning anything. They're not short of cash, you know? He's an owner's manager.
Most of his problems are his own doing though.
Neither of us really know how much he's given to spend each year. I'd say with the money he has spent only he and Sir Alex would have them regularly top four. He does spread a negative mentality amongst his players whenever they're up against it and it's that weakness in main that sees him languish behind Fergie. Who else in the Premier League would have them in that position each season spending so little?
It could be argued that most of the PL consists of makeweight teams, so it's not that hard to be top-four or thereabouts.
Don't think there's any point trying to make sense with these guys.
Remains the only manager to have won the Prem underspending Fergie.
He has weaknesses like everyone but without knowing if he deliberately doesn't spend money I think it's fair to say few could equal what he's done. If he has money to spend and chooses not to then that is another weakness but I still don't think there are many who would do a better job. Who would they replace him with if he was holding them back?
Fair point but they still regularly spend less than more than four clubs. Is there really anyone Arsenal could bring in and expect to do better? I didn't ever think I'd see the day when I'd stick up for Wenger. Laughing at him has been a regular joy for me.
Fair enough. It is difficult to think of an equally competent successor.
David Moyes.
He'll do.
Decent manager, the Premier League's Neil Warnock
Good manager but I doubt he'd do better. It's beginning to look like Moyes will never make the next step in his career.
He's light years ahead of Neil Warnock. I'd fancy my own chances of doing a better job than that gobshite.
Its difficult to judge Wenger when we dont actually know the guidelines he's working under. If theres even a hint of truth in him being the one with the philosophy of spending very little despite plenty being available then he's underachieved in recent seasons.
It is difficult, although he didn't have problems spending big sums before the stadium project.
In saying that there's no excuse for 4 years of Almunia.
This one could have legs, you diamond, Fats Anderson aka Leadbelly, Blind Lemon Berba, Jelly Roll Giggs.
Big Persie Bonpensiero
Crabman Carrick.
Philly Joe Jones, Divez Young.
If we were going to pay silly money this year, we might as well have bit the bullet and bought Hazard.
We actually covered this in Made-Up XIs, though it wasn't one of the better ones.
City did have an offer accepted. He rejected both the Manchester clubs. In fact you guys were third in the running behind Chelsea and us. We were favorites due to us offering him more playing time but the prick chose Chelsea due to them offering more wages.
So you mean the owners give him say 40mil to spend and he then spends nothing to please the owner?
Arsenal would have been fecked without Wenger, he could do better in certain respects but he's still a fantastic manager for a club like Arsenal that dont spend much.
"You see this small statue, Arsene? Is pig, about to feck goat. But this
is irrelevant to my point. My point is, no qualify Champions League, you die."
A bit late, but......
I think what he was driving at is that having Wenger in charge suits the owners of the club. He's bought young players and sold some on for huge profits, most of which has ended up not being re-invested. A lot of shareholders were then made very wealthy when the likes of Kroenke and Usmanov bought shares.
Even now, despite the money they generate every year they still buy a level below the two or three real quality players any title winning side needs.
Wenger either:
a) is to stubborn to admit that his vision of being able to win trophies with home grown kids is impossible in the modern PL; or
b) he doesn't have any money to spend but keeps that gem under his hat.
Clearly a very talented manager - but his legacy is likely to be "didn't win anything for years". It's a shame but he doesn't do himself any favours.
We'd have made an operating loss these last few years if you take away player sales, same with property sales the previous few years.
I thought we dropped out because we refused to pay the 6 million pound in agent fees.
I think his legacy will be that unbeaten team with Henry and Bergkamp. For me that was the greatest team in the Premier league years.
If I didn't know better I'd think you had some sort of bias against Man United
Yep, that Arsenal treble-winning team was something else.
A very good friend of mine is an Arsenal fan and we used to debate endlessly about which was better, The Treble team or "The Invincibles". It was always a source of great satisfaction and amusement for me that neutrals involved in the discussion overwhelmingly agreed with me that United 99 would have destroyed that Arsenal team. One of the most weasely and unlikeable teams of the Premiership era, I will give them that.
Every manager who's in charge of a club in World football is there because it suits the owners. If it didnt, they'd be out of the job. I agree Wenger's a great manager from the owner's POV but you cant blame him for that.
regarding buying players, a club can never attract top talents unless you pay high fee and pay huge wages. Arsenal refuse to do either. So its not really a surprise. Now, i dont know how much of a hand does Wenger have in the salary cap thats there at Arsenal but its something to do with the club and not him. For example, i highly doubt Wenger would say No if his board gave him 34mil+ whatever wages hazard is on to get him.
I do think that Wenger is too stubborn to an extent though. Its as if a part of him wants to prove that he can win a title with his youth policy. That has ultimately cost arsenal and continues to do so but that does NOT take away credit from what he has achieved. Very few managers would have kept Arsenal in the top 4 for such a long time when continuously losing players and barely spending anything.
He's a fantastic manager, best in the PL era after Sir Alex. Its stupid to say he isnt a great manager. If he doesnt make the "great" grade, few do.
I have no love for Arsenal what so ever. I quite like Alastair who posts on here (one of my favourite posters) but for the most part I find their fans arrogant, pompous and bursting with self importance (no offense to Peterstorey and John Jensen but I have not really had much discussion with them and I apologise if I am stereotyping them without substance.)
But credit where credits due, that Arsenal team was outstanding. It played mouth watering football. It was solid at the back, magnificent in midfield plus Bergkamp and Henry is for me the best partnership in Premier League history.
United have been consistently good over the last 20 years and the team everyone else aims to beat but I just think that Arsenal team was the best I have seen.
Because of longevity, yes. I would grudgingly propose Mourinho might be above him, but his achievements do not quite match up to what Wenger has done over a sustained period.
What? You mean that season that they lost to United, Boro & half of Europe but claim to be invincible?
I would fancy the united team with Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney to beat the 99 treble team.
It was some team that. Ranks alongside the best I've seen.
- Status