And, we're off.....2016/17

[One Planer]

Benteke?

I disagree that they are a top draw for big players. IF they have a good season in the PL and finish top four again and get further than last 16 of CL then I'd agree they are making progress. That would definitely be a lure for good players. For now though I feel (and purely a personal opinion) they are still in flux and so the massive players may see that as a negative.

Taking Liverpool and Arsenal out of the argument, it's important for the PL to still get the top players in. It makes for good viewing for the neutral armchair football fan (and to a degree justifies paying the monthly ransom to Sky - thats a different argument though) and its important surely to help our own younger players develop by playing with the best out there

Giroud? Xhaka?

I believe that under Klopp Liverpool are a big draw. Now they have CL I believe they'll draw in better quality than before and strengthen.

They key will be holding on to their better players and building around them.

 

[sawtooth]

So let's look at some figures then. In the last 5 years Arsenal's nett spend on transfers has been £205,890,000. In that same period Chelsea's nett spend has been £186,809,000. The two Manchester clubs are above them in this respect with £402.5 million nett for City and £352 million nett for United.

No doubt your defence will be the amount of money spent by Chelsea in the years before that. So let's debunk that one as well. The players from the Chelsea squad from 2012/13 that are still there now are Cahill, Luiz (who has left and returned), Terry, Chalobah, Ake, Azpilicueta, Moses and Hazard. Arsenal still have Szczesny (out on loan), Gibbs, Bellerin, Koscielny, Mertesacker, Jenkinson (out on loan), Monreal, Coquelin, Ramsey, Cazorla, Wislhsere (out on loan), Giroud, Walcott and Oxlade-Chamberlain.

Chelsea have 8 players that have been there since 2012/13. Arsenal have 14. So Chelsea have refreshed more of their squad since 2012/13 than Arsenal but have spent almost £20 million less nett doing it than Arsenal. Maybe the difference is bringing in players such as Willian, Matic, Kante, Costa and Courtois rather than Mustafi, Xhaka, Elneny, and Perez.

And you can't use the wages arguement with Kante being on £110k a week at Chelsea and Ozil, Sanchez and Cech being on over £100k a week at Arsenal. Arsenal also still have over £200 million in cash in the bank.

How can you use Net figures? Majority of players Chelsea sold were bought in the first place by Romans cash.

Just look at the figures both clubs have spent in the last 10 years, Chelseas outlay is more than double Arsenals.

 

[Papas1982]

How can you use Net figures? Majority of players Chelsea sold were bought in the first place by Romans cash.

Just look at the figures both clubs have spent in the last 10 years, Chelseas outlay is more than double Arsenals.

If in two seasons Arsenal haven't got back into top 4. And Spurs who have always spent less than you have taken your 4th place (or above) trophy.

Would you lay fault and wenger? Or would you still think he's doing (he did) a great job?

 

[ColchesterFC]

How can you use Net figures? Majority of players Chelsea sold were bought in the first place by Romans cash.

Just look at the figures both clubs have spent in the last 10 years, Chelseas outlay is more than double Arsenals.

Because nett spending is more accurate to use than gross spending. I could theoretically spend £50 million on my limited company in the next financial year. If that only brings in £5 million in benefit to my company then I've wasted £45 million and my balance sheet shows a £45 million loss. If I spend £50 million and that brings in £100 million in benefits then my balance sheet shows £50 million profit.

So let's look at what that spending has meant to the two clubs......

Chelsea's trophies since 2006 - 3 x Premier League, 4 x FA Cup, 2 x League Cup, 1 x Champions League, 1 x Europa Cup

Arsenal trophies since 2006 - 3 x FA Cup, 2 x League Cup

I think it's clear from those stats that Chelsea have done better in that regards.

And let's not forget the one fact, that I've mentioned more than once before but that you continually conveniently ignore, and that is that Arsenal have got over £200 million in cash in the bank that Wenger could spend but has chosen not to. You could have got Kante but chose not to. It was blamed on Chelsea offering more but in the Premier League is £110k a week really that outrageous?

 

[USER1999]

Arsenals spending, or even lack of top top quality players has nothing to do with why they lose to West Brom, or Watford. The top 4 trophy was lost due to some very poor performances this season, and whilst the players may be at fault, it is also massively down to the manager, and his coaching staff.

That aside, what is Wengers plan to win the league? He thinks Arsenal are a couple of players short. Really? The last 10 years pretty much have seen the same issues, the collapse in feb/march and the end of season resurgence. How is he going to fix that? What is going to change? Payton, collbert, primorich, have all been there, doing the same stuff for ages.

The transfer and scouting has been under performing for years, but that remains the same too. I dont think there is a strategy in place, and i dont think the players they have bought have been what they thought they were buying. If Xhaka was meant to be a defensive midfielder, he is not, he is a deep lying play maker. If ghey didnt want this, why buy him? I also think a lot of the transfer issues with spending come down to Wenger dithering over value in the market.

He has two more years, minimum. What is he going to change, As doing the same thing will net the same results. It always does.

 

[sawtooth]

If in two seasons Arsenal haven't got back into top 4. And Spurs who have always spent less than you have taken your 4th place (or above) trophy.

Would you lay fault and wenger? Or would you still think he's doing (he did) a great job?

To be fair to Wenger it wouldn't be right to start getting on his case after 1-2 seasons of either his side dropping it's level or teams like Spurs or Liverpool elevating theirs. In 20 years Wengers teams have been remarkably consistent. Infact I saw a stat the other day that showed his win to game ratio in the first 10 years is almost identical to the last 10 years despite not winning as much trophies.

If that trend continued for 3-4 seasons and especially if other teams started to come up into the top four with smaller budgets then fair enough but I don't think we will see that.

City, United and Chelsea will continue to dominate for the next 5 years punctuated by some success from Arsenal , Liverpool, Spurs and whoever. But Arsenal have been leading the chasing pack for a decade or more ( and pretty much dominated for the 10 years before that) so Wenger deserves an awful lot of credit for that.

It's been an extraordinary level of consistency with constantly changing teams and external factors to deal with.

 

[Fish]

You seem more obsessed with the past than the future!

 

[Dan2501]

To be fair to Wenger it wouldn't be right to start getting on his case after 1-2 seasons of either his side dropping it's level or teams like Spurs or Liverpool elevating theirs. In 20 years Wengers teams have been remarkably consistent. Infact I saw a stat the other day that showed his win to game ratio in the first 10 years is almost identical to the last 10 years despite not winning as much trophies.

If that trend continued for 3-4 seasons and especially if other teams started to come up into the top four with smaller budgets then fair enough but I don't think we will see that.

City, United and Chelsea will continue to dominate for the next 5 years punctuated by some success from Arsenal , Liverpool, Spurs and whoever. But Arsenal have been leading the chasing pack for a decade or more ( and pretty much dominated for the 10 years before that) so Wenger deserves an awful lot of credit for that.

It's been an extraordinary level of consistency with constantly changing teams and external factors to deal with.

Your delusion defies belief.

So apparently Sanchez and Ozil are demanding £350k a week. If Sawtooth is correct, and poor Arsenal can't afford those sort of wages, it's bye bye to both of them. However, I was reading that Ozil has already been offered £280k a week by Arsenal. I thought they couldn't afford that for anyone?

 

[USER1999]

Your delusion defies belief.

So apparently Sanchez and Ozil are demanding £350k a week. If Sawtooth is correct, and poor Arsenal can't afford those sort of wages, it's bye bye to both of them. However, I was reading that Ozil has already been offered £280k a week by Arsenal. I thought they couldn't afford that for anyone?

It was 250 a week, and it was turned down. I am not seeing a queue forming of eager suitors, so he is daft for not signing it. Unless he is offered more by Arsenal, and then they are idiots.

 

[sawtooth]

Your delusion defies belief.

So apparently Sanchez and Ozil are demanding £350k a week. If Sawtooth is correct, and poor Arsenal can't afford those sort of wages, it's bye bye to both of them. However, I was reading that Ozil has already been offered £280k a week by Arsenal. I thought they couldn't afford that for anyone?

Maybe you believe too much what you read in the papers.

Let's see if they stay and if so what the actual packages are. I will be amazed if it's anywhere near £300K a week each. With that said we do already own the players so it's not like we are going out and spending another £100M and then the £250K a week wages on top.

Savings would need to be made elsewhere to balance the books.

Say what you like but if you think Arsenal have the same spending power as City, Chelsea and Utd then I would say that you are the delusional one not me my friend.

 

[Dan2501]

The club is worth £1.6bn
Kroenke is worth $7.5bn
Usmanov is worth $14.5bn
Arsenal have more cash in the bank than Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern combined
The stadium is now paid off

How do they not have the spending power?

 

[USER1999]

The stadium is not paid off. The payments are down to a sustainable rate which should not affect wages or transfers.

 

[USER1999]

Sell off Gibbs, Debuchy, Jenkinson, Wilshere, Szchesny, Ospina, Perez (who i like), Sanogo, Chambers, Walcott. Without impacting the matchday squad, that would free up a lot of wages.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Maybe you believe too much what you read in the papers.

Let's see if they stay and if so what the actual packages are. I will be amazed if it's anywhere near £300K a week each. With that said we do already own the players so it's not like we are going out and spending another £100M and then the £250K a week wages on top.

Savings would need to be made elsewhere to balance the books.

Say what you like but if you think Arsenal have the same spending power as City, Chelsea and Utd then I would say that you are the delusional one not me my friend.

Are you related to Alister Campbell in anyway ? You spin everything to ensure that it's not Arsenal's or Wengers fault - utterly delusional

Arsenal don't need to "balance the books" they have over £200mil sat there with millions coming in each year with the most expensive tickets in England

It's Wengers reluctance to spend money on the risk signings that is the problem

I thought this season might give you the nod to realise what's wrong

You spend £100mill in the summer yet went backwards - the only person at fault for that is the manager , there was no improvement on last season , the same thumping in the CL by a team Arsenal should aspire to be like, the same disappointments throughout the Prem season and the same cracks being covered over by a cup win. Any other top club would have not asked the manager to stay but the lack of ambition runs right through the whole club - it's a reason why I know people that don't want to spend over a thousand on a season ticket when the club have zero desire to move forward

 

[sawtooth]

Are you related to Alister Campbell in anyway ? You spin everything to ensure that it's not Arsenal's or Wengers fault - utterly delusional

Arsenal don't need to "balance the books" they have over £200mil sat there with millions coming in each year with the most expensive tickets in England

It's Wengers reluctance to spend money on the risk signings that is the problem

I thought this season might give you the nod to realise what's wrong

You spend £100mill in the summer yet went backwards - the only person at fault for that is the manager , there was no improvement on last season , the same thumping in the CL by a team Arsenal should aspire to be like, the same disappointments throughout the Prem season and the same cracks being covered over by a cup win. Any other top club would have not asked the manager to stay but the lack of ambition runs right through the whole club - it's a reason why I know people that don't want to spend over a thousand on a season ticket when the club have zero desire to move forward

Is Liverpool spending £3M on Solanke ambition?

We are spending more than we have ever done but it's not been enough to compete with the big 3.

Same for Liverpool, you've spent millions but are still nowhere closer to winning the league now than you were under Rodgers.

What about Liverpools fall from grace? No league in almost 30 years, now that's really something to worry about. You've tried to change managers when things haven't worked out, where has that got you?

Trophyless for years that's where and the best that you can hope for next year is a top 6 finish. I don't want to take any lessons from Liverpools school of ambition thanks.

 

[Slime]

I think Wenger should show some strength by telling Ozil & Sanchez that they have to sign new deals immediately.
Apparently they've been offered double their current wage ................... if that's not enough for them, Wenger should sell them now, rather than watch them run their contracts down.
A club such as Arsenal should not allow themselves to be held to ransom by two players who know that they are Arsenal's only marquee players ...................... but why this wasn't sorted out a year ago Wenger only knows!!
Thoughts?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Is Liverpool spending £3M on Solanke ambition?

We are spending more than we have ever done but it's not been enough to compete with the big 3.

Same for Liverpool, you've spent millions but are still nowhere closer to winning the league now than you were under Rodgers.

What about Liverpools fall from grace? No league in almost 30 years, now that's really something to worry about. You've tried to change managers when things haven't worked out, where has that got you?

Trophyless for years that's where and the best that you can hope for next year is a top 6 finish. I don't want to take any lessons from Liverpools school of ambition thanks.

I know Liverpools failing and not one Liverpool fan has attempted to hide behind any spending or blaming other clubs - our issues are the clubs and managers fault and managers have been given the sack for failing - deflecting any criticism onto us doesn't answer the question

Arsenal spent £100mil in the summer and went backwards , they spent a good deal of money and went from 2nd in the league to 5th - whose fault is that ? Did the manager spend that money well or did he waste it.

We spent less but moved from 8th to 4th so we improved and if we keep improving we may start to challenge

Our manager changes over the years have Improved the team at the time - we brought in Holllier when the treble , briougjt in Rafa won the biggest club Comp in Europe , even Rodgers got us closer to winning the title than Wenger has in a decade.

So what happens when Arsenal don't improve again for another season ? Blame money again

 

[Hobbit]

Is Liverpool spending £3M on Solanke ambition?

We are spending more than we have ever done but it's not been enough to compete with the big 3.

Same for Liverpool, you've spent millions but are still nowhere closer to winning the league now than you were under Rodgers.

What about Liverpools fall from grace? No league in almost 30 years, now that's really something to worry about. You've tried to change managers when things haven't worked out, where has that got you?

Trophyless for years that's where and the best that you can hope for next year is a top 6 finish. I don't want to take any lessons from Liverpools school of ambition thanks.

You should!

Liverpool have brought an exciting manager, and a few decent players and guess what. They're in the CL and Arsenal aren't.

The trend suggests Liverpool will continue to improve whilst Arsenal, with their player contractual issues will continue to decline.

 

[sawtooth]

I know Liverpools failing and not one Liverpool fan has attempted to hide behind any spending or blaming other clubs - our issues are the clubs and managers fault and managers have been given the sack for failing - deflecting any criticism onto us doesn't answer the question

Arsenal spent £100mil in the summer and went backwards , they spent a good deal of money and went from 2nd in the league to 5th - whose fault is that ? Did the manager spend that money well or did he waste it.

We spent less but moved from 8th to 4th so we improved and if we keep improving we may start to challenge

Our manager changes over the years have Improved the team at the time - we brought in Holllier when the treble , briougjt in Rafa won the biggest club Comp in Europe , even Rodgers got us closer to winning the title than Wenger has in a decade.

So what happens when Arsenal don't improve again for another season ? Blame money again

You can't keep looking at transfer windows in isolation , this is why you have a warped view on the world. You will probably find that Liverpool have spent more than Arsenal in the last 5 years as well.

Step back and have a look at the big picture. One big outlay does not make up for years of under investment.

 

[sawtooth]

You should!

Liverpool have brought an exciting manager, and a few decent players and guess what. They're in the CL and Arsenal aren't.

The trend suggests Liverpool will continue to improve whilst Arsenal, with their player contractual issues will continue to decline.

Haha one instance is not really a trend is it?

They invest heavily and change managers to win stuff, but what have they won olin the past 10 years?

It's not really a blueprint for success mate is it?