Dundalk wrote:Are they now a selling club? Wenger came out the other day and said that they have to pay back millions every year for the foreseeable future. The have just sold on of there best strikers and arguably their best centre back.
Not qualify for the Champions League will be a disaster for them and it looks in serious doubt this season with Man City creeping up on them. He seems to have no money to spend and Fabregas and the likes surely wont stay around much longer
Looking at it from a Liverpool point of view, is is worth getting a new big shiny stadium if it means 10-20 years of scrimping and saving and therefore not competing? Arsenal fans cant be that optimistic about the new season. Wenger will tell the fans that the will compete for the league but the truth about it that they are 9/1 to win the league, City are 12/1 and dropping and Arsenal are 4/9 to win nothing again this year
bigmick wrote:And a lot of the fans are on about getting rid of Wenger. Now I know some of our fans are fond of asking "well who else is there" when anybody criticises the manager, but you could argue that spending sh!tloads of money and not winning anything doesn't rule out that many candidates. If Arsenal got rid of Wenger though and said to the new bloke "you've got to make a profit in the transfer market (and a fecking big one at that) but still get in the top four" credible candidates wouldn't exactly be thick on the ground. Course someone would take it (feck me I'd take it if they offered it to me) but whether they'd actually manage to match what Wenger has done/is doing is another thing.
bavlondon wrote:They also led the table for 1/2 the season a few years ago.
john craig wrote:bavlondon wrote:They also led the table for 1/2 the season a few years ago.
I honestly don't see the relevance of that comment.
Since then they've lost Hleb, Flamini, Adebayor and Toure, while the only established names they've brought in are Arshavin and the so far untested Vermaelen.
The way Arsenal have gone about getting the new stadium is probably how we would need to approach it, unless we get massive investment from somewhere. So Dundalk's point is very valid imo - do we want to essentially drop out of contention for 15-20 years to pay for the stadium? Can we guarantee it's worth it in the long term? The bottom line is that Arsenal will not win a major trophy (by that I mean CL or Prem) as long as they have to stick to this transfer policy, there are simply too many big hitters splashing around money in England and on the continent for Arsenal to realistically compete. Arsene Wenger is a top class manager, not a magician.
bavlondon wrote:john craig wrote:bavlondon wrote:They also led the table for 1/2 the season a few years ago.
I honestly don't see the relevance of that comment.
Since then they've lost Hleb, Flamini, Adebayor and Toure, while the only established names they've brought in are Arshavin and the so far untested Vermaelen.
The way Arsenal have gone about getting the new stadium is probably how we would need to approach it, unless we get massive investment from somewhere. So Dundalk's point is very valid imo - do we want to essentially drop out of contention for 15-20 years to pay for the stadium? Can we guarantee it's worth it in the long term? The bottom line is that Arsenal will not win a major trophy (by that I mean CL or Prem) as long as they have to stick to this transfer policy, there are simply too many big hitters splashing around money in England and on the continent for Arsenal to realistically compete. Arsene Wenger is a top class manager, not a magician.
They have been forced to blood youth into their team when they lost all their experienced players and to some extent that is what we should be looking to do as well. But to suggest that we should maybe not go ahead with the stadium for fear of turning into them is folly. That is the reason Hicks and Gilette bought us in the first place. There is obviously a transition period when you get a new stadium where you need to tighten the coffers but that is inevitable unless you are backed by a super rich owner.
Not to mention how much money they have still to recoup on sales of the homes/highury. It didn't help with the credit crunch either.
If you look at all the sucessfull teams they all have big stadiums that bring in a lot of revenue. We need that too.
john craig wrote:bavlondon wrote:john craig wrote:bavlondon wrote:They also led the table for 1/2 the season a few years ago.
I honestly don't see the relevance of that comment.
Since then they've lost Hleb, Flamini, Adebayor and Toure, while the only established names they've brought in are Arshavin and the so far untested Vermaelen.
The way Arsenal have gone about getting the new stadium is probably how we would need to approach it, unless we get massive investment from somewhere. So Dundalk's point is very valid imo - do we want to essentially drop out of contention for 15-20 years to pay for the stadium? Can we guarantee it's worth it in the long term? The bottom line is that Arsenal will not win a major trophy (by that I mean CL or Prem) as long as they have to stick to this transfer policy, there are simply too many big hitters splashing around money in England and on the continent for Arsenal to realistically compete. Arsene Wenger is a top class manager, not a magician.
They have been forced to blood youth into their team when they lost all their experienced players and to some extent that is what we should be looking to do as well. But to suggest that we should maybe not go ahead with the stadium for fear of turning into them is folly. That is the reason Hicks and Gilette bought us in the first place. There is obviously a transition period when you get a new stadium where you need to tighten the coffers but that is inevitable unless you are backed by a super rich owner.
Not to mention how much money they have still to recoup on sales of the homes/highury. It didn't help with the credit crunch either.
If you look at all the sucessfull teams they all have big stadiums that bring in a lot of revenue. We need that too.
So your point that they led the league for half a season 'a few years back' proves what point?
bavlondon wrote:So your point that they led the league for half a season 'a few years back' proves what point?
Return to Premiership - General Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.