Wenger - 1000 games

Clipsey · 25 Mar 2014 at 16:10

Strange stat that 1000 games of Wenger had a higher win rate than 1000 games with Fergie.

drunkenmaster · 25 Mar 2014 at 16:13

TNA said:
Rather see Wenger stay for a few more years myself. We are only now able to start spending money in the transfer market.

We need a RB, LB, DM + ST in the summer. They all need to be very good or world class then we could maybe challenge for title next year.

What made us able to spend this year that we weren't able to do before. before you mention stadium debt, you should realise that the repayments haven't changed and the debt is NOT paid off, it's not close to paid off, nothing has changed regarding the debt from last season to this one except for slightly more of it has been paid off as with every previous year.

FrankJH · 25 Mar 2014 at 16:43

Clipsey said:
Strange stat that 1000 games of Wenger had a higher win rate than 1000 games with Fergie.

Very strange indeed..... Unless I guess out of all the non - wins Utd were more likely to draw and Arsenal lose?

Sorry just worked it out...Wenger built up a season winning team a few years quicker than Fergie plus the 49 consecutive Non-losses ( for the Invincibles) helps the stats no end..
SAF probably didnt start winning leagues until the 400 game mark ( or there abouts) and finished on 1500 or so- will Arsenal give AW another 500 games to see what his win rate is like at that point? Lol

TNA · 26 Mar 2014 at 12:27

drunkenmaster said:
What made us able to spend this year that we weren't able to do before. before you mention stadium debt, you should realise that the repayments haven't changed and the debt is NOT paid off, it's not close to paid off, nothing has changed regarding the debt from last season to this one except for slightly more of it has been paid off as with every previous year.

Sure but did we not get some sponsorship money recently? As I understood it we generally year by year should be in a better position to spend more money on players. But I am not hardcore fan, so could have read it wrong

dacads · 26 Mar 2014 at 12:42

Just thought I'd put this here

drunkenmaster · 26 Mar 2014 at 12:51

TNA said:
Sure but did we not get some sponsorship money recently? As I understood it we generally year by year should be in a better position to spend more money on players. But I am not hardcore fan, so could have read it wrong

Every team(to one degree or another) gets increases in sponsorship/income every 3-4 years. That is football, Arsenal could have easily afforded to spend 42mil on Ozil 10 years ago, 5 years ago, 2 years ago or this year. We couldn't buy a 42mil player every season, and we still can't now.

I just get frustrated because for no apparent reason lots of Arsenal fans seem to think our debt is now gone, we've spent money on players, thus Wenger's problem was only that he wasn't capable of spending since the stadium move.

The problem with that being the debt hasn't gone, the repayments are the same and nothing has changed. The only thing that changed was Wenger felt desperate and so spent big.... on the wrong player.

Arsenal more than most signed the worst possible sponsorship deals a decade ago which HAVE held us back financially. We can still have spent more than we have, and more importantly spent what we have MUCH better. But we could also have had more money. Our shirt deals are semi decent now, not brilliant. Very poor compared to other consistent champs league teams(but then we never win anything). IIRC it's Emirates extending shirt/stadium sponsorship till the 18/19 season for 150mil, that is basically 30mil a season for shirt and stadium, while say Utd just signed a 60mil shirt deal. We signed a kit deal with Puma that I think only starts next year which is 30mil a year up from around 10-15mil before. Decent, but not massive increases. They only look good compared to our terrible deals we've had in the past decade. Compared to everyone comparable to Arsenal(top four consistent teams) the deals aren't great and tv/stadium are still our main income sources.

Again the only real change was Wenger felt the need to spend big this year, nothing else, we could have done it any year. Wenger has increased wages massively since the move to the Emirates, we've gone from 70mil a year wages to estimated to be 160mil this year.. We've had loads of extra money, Wenger's just been peeing it away on Diaby's, Denilson's, Squillaci's, Gervinho's, etc, etc.

TNA · 26 Mar 2014 at 13:25

dacads said:
Just thought I'd put this here

Ah man. Got to say can't disagree with what those two are saying.

drunkenmaster said:
Every team(to one degree or another) gets increases in sponsorship/income every 3-4 years. That is football, Arsenal could have easily afforded to spend 42mil on Ozil 10 years ago, 5 years ago, 2 years ago or this year. We couldn't buy a 42mil player every season, and we still can't now.

I just get frustrated because for no apparent reason lots of Arsenal fans seem to think our debt is now gone, we've spent money on players, thus Wenger's problem was only that he wasn't capable of spending since the stadium move.

The problem with that being the debt hasn't gone, the repayments are the same and nothing has changed. The only thing that changed was Wenger felt desperate and so spent big.... on the wrong player.

Arsenal more than most signed the worst possible sponsorship deals a decade ago which HAVE held us back financially. We can still have spent more than we have, and more importantly spent what we have MUCH better. But we could also have had more money. Our shirt deals are semi decent now, not brilliant. Very poor compared to other consistent champs league teams(but then we never win anything). IIRC it's Emirates extending shirt/stadium sponsorship till the 18/19 season for 150mil, that is basically 30mil a season for shirt and stadium, while say Utd just signed a 60mil shirt deal. We signed a kit deal with Puma that I think only starts next year which is 30mil a year up from around 10-15mil before. Decent, but not massive increases. They only look good compared to our terrible deals we've had in the past decade. Compared to everyone comparable to Arsenal(top four consistent teams) the deals aren't great and tv/stadium are still our main income sources.

Again the only real change was Wenger felt the need to spend big this year, nothing else, we could have done it any year. Wenger has increased wages massively since the move to the Emirates, we've gone from 70mil a year wages to estimated to be 160mil this year.. We've had loads of extra money, Wenger's just been peeing it away on Diaby's, Denilson's, Squillaci's, Gervinho's, etc, etc.

Not too much I can disagree with there. Thought I heard Diaby is not taking any wages when not playing? But yeah, Denilson, Squillaci and Gervinho to a lesser degree were all waste of time and money.

At least we got rid of a load of deadwood players last summer, if we do that again this year and bring in a world class player or two, it will be an improvement.

I guess the difference here is I like to look at the bright side more. I just think if Wenger leaves there will be a high chance we will get a manager who will spend more and deliver less. Only time I would agree for Wenger to go is if we are replacing him with a mourinho or pep calibre manager. Not a moyes

Leeroy Jenkins · 26 Mar 2014 at 14:20

dacads said:
Just thought I'd put this here

Thats how all pundits should be like, most pundits would say it was just a bad day for Arsenal and they will get over it. Should just say it how it really is and he's bang on about Wilshere.

jonneymendoza · 26 Mar 2014 at 18:57

thread will turn into a wenger out thread just like the moyes one.

Who do you think will be here next seasoon? Moyes? Wenger? None?

TNA · 26 Mar 2014 at 20:38

I want him to stay though. I am not fickle like most

jonneymendoza · 26 Mar 2014 at 20:42

i dont think waiting 10 years for wenger to deliver is being fickle

K1LLSW1TCH · 27 Mar 2014 at 02:11

Who would replace him though?

Trusty · 27 Mar 2014 at 03:26

I'd like to see Frank De Boer if anyone, he'd be my choice, been around the block he has..

Klopp probably as well?

K1LLSW1TCH · 27 Mar 2014 at 04:45

Trusty said:
I'd like to see Frank De Boer if anyone, he'd be my choice, been around the block he has..

Klopp probably as well?

I don't see any reason why Klopp would swap Dortmund for Arsenal, de Boer would be an interesting appointment. Ajax play some really attractive football and he's said several times he'd be looking for a new challenge soon.

benhaha85 · 27 Mar 2014 at 08:12

K1LLSW1TCH said:
I don't see any reason why Klopp would swap Dortmund for Arsenal, de Boer would be an interesting appointment. Ajax play some really attractive football and he's said several times he'd be looking for a new challenge soon.

Plus his no2 is a certain Arsenal legend....

Trusty · 27 Mar 2014 at 08:44

^ Yea, it's pretty much set up for them if they wanted to take the job. He just signed a new contract last year i think but it's probably protection more than anything else. It's a hard one, really is. Klopp would probably interested as the Bundesliga is a bore...

benhaha85 · 27 Mar 2014 at 09:02

^ Yep, it's not an easy choice. I don't really know enough about Klopp to say whether he'd be a good choice or not. De Boer would fit in with our ethos, plus a link to Ajax could come in quite handy.

drunkenmaster · 27 Mar 2014 at 09:33

K1LLSW1TCH said:
I don't see any reason why Klopp would swap Dortmund for Arsenal, de Boer would be an interesting appointment. Ajax play some really attractive football and he's said several times he'd be looking for a new challenge soon.

Klopp has seen a huge amount of his work undone, many of his players have to be sold/leaving for wages Dortmund simply can't afford. Bayern get scared of their spending.

Dortmund are spending 70-80mil on wages a year and are losing all their best players as other teams offer them 150k a week and they can only afford 70-80k a week for most of the squad.

At Arsenal he would be at a team with effectively twice the spending power in wages and transfers, he could build something and NOT see it torn apart after it gets successful.

MOving into the future the 20+ point gap between Dortmund and Bayern for the past two seasons is going to be standard. Dortmund can't compete truly long term, a lucky round of buys/youngsters and more importantly, a few lazy years by Bayern were they were poorly managed and allowed Dortmund to beat them to the league. The way Bayern have built up in the past 4 years, Dortmund have precisely zero chance at being competitive for the next five years.

This is absolutely the time for Klopp to move on.

jonneymendoza · 27 Mar 2014 at 10:55

drunkenmaster said:
Klopp has seen a huge amount of his work undone, many of his players have to be sold/leaving for wages Dortmund simply can't afford. Bayern get scared of their spending.

Dortmund are spending 70-80mil on wages a year and are losing all their best players as other teams offer them 150k a week and they can only afford 70-80k a week for most of the squad.

At Arsenal he would be at a team with effectively twice the spending power in wages and transfers, he could build something and NOT see it torn apart after it gets successful.

MOving into the future the 20+ point gap between Dortmund and Bayern for the past two seasons is going to be standard. Dortmund can't compete truly long term, a lucky round of buys/youngsters and more importantly, a few lazy years by Bayern were they were poorly managed and allowed Dortmund to beat them to the league. The way Bayern have built up in the past 4 years, Dortmund have precisely zero chance at being competitive for the next five years.

This is absolutely the time for Klopp to move on.

well said

CliffyG · 27 Mar 2014 at 10:58

I think it's pretty apparent that a significant change is required at the club.