Godotelli
Stroking Silva's Hair
Why's that?
Always moaning about inflated wages etc. and yet is the 3rd highest paid manager in the world of football.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Why's that?
Always moaning about inflated wages etc. and yet is the 3rd highest paid manager in the world of football.
I meant Jose, didn't know Pep got better pay. Both are extremes of dull football if you ask me. Results wise they've done great, but I dare any of them to do what Wenger did on a shoestring budget, especially circa 2007-2011, the worst period financially wise.
José won't manage a club that's not financially doped, that I guarantee you. I think he ought to be hoppping from Chelsea to PSG to Man City, back to Chelsea and so on.
In historical context, Arsenal are "financially doped". It would have been some achievement (in the negative sense) for Arsenal to drop out of the top 4 given all the finances that have been funneled their way, via rule changes etc., over the many years prior.
Rodgers mounted a title challenge right to the final day of the season whilst spending less on a lesser team. I can't remember the last time Wenger managed that.
Spurs Won the league cup however many years ago, I bet they would have prefered a top 4 finish then and a shot at the champions league?
I think since the Prem has started for Net spend we are like 16th in the league or something ridiculous. To do that and win 8 trophies, building the stadium we did during the economical crisis at the time, with hardly any money to spend.
Spurs have spent much more money than Arsenal, couldn't stay in the top 4, Liverpool over the years have spent more money than Arsenal, couldn't stay in the top 4, Chelsea have spent waaaay more money than Arsenal and managed to drop out of the top 4 in recent times and United this season.
So you can belittle the achievment of him getting it for 17 seasons in a row, but I think we all know it is harder than it seems.
Spurs Won the league cup however many years ago, I bet they would have prefered a top 4 finish then and a shot at the champions league? same with Liverpool in 2011/2012.
So I know everyone takes the piss out of Wenger for what he said, but he was exactly right, 4th place is much more important than the league cup at least, so therefore is better than a trophy. The fact everyone hangs on that is just stupid imo. Everyone knows what he meant by what he said, but they still use it as a stick to bash him with.
You mention Liverpool this season, the liverpool that had no other competitions to trouble them for a large chunk of the season?
Wenger spent more time at 1st in the league, Won the Fa Cup and made the Champions league again. Trying to make Liverpool's achievments more than than what Arsenal have done this season on a 'Lessor' budget, are you taking into account what they spent the seasons before to make the current team they have?
Anyway, you can bash Arsenal and Wenger, but there are two ways to look at it, the very narrow minded way where the only thing that matters are trophies, or you can take into consideration everything that has happened in the period we didn't win anything and understand why we couldn't match the Chelseas, Man Uniteds and Man Citys.
I don't think it is a coincidence that now we are more 'financially free', that we have now Won a trophy. I hope it is the first of many, but we have to wait and see.
That's the problem with Arsenal. You should do both all the time. Before City came along (and only in Mancini 2nd season they were really a top 4 contender) the 4th place was almost an automatic thing for the so-called "big 4". Arsène in most of the seasons, even without 4th place opposition, completely neglected the cups to focus only on the 4th place. That's beneath Arsenal's level.
This season, with the first real title chance in a decade he proved he wasn't a good enough manager. I get all the injuries that they have, so the title probably be out of reach with any other manager at the helm, but the way you guys played against the likes of Liverpool, Man C, Chelsea was such flat out embarrassing and showed that Wenger cannot tactically adapt to play the "Underdog" role. Always playing the possession, high defensive line, without high pressure from the forwards will get you nowhere against teams with better talent.
Hope I'm wrong, because I like Arsenal and Wenger because of their attractive football (plus I loved seeing Overmars playing for you back in the day), but I don't see Arsenal winning the title or even really competing with the other teams, unless they slip up, like what happen this season, with Man U and Chelsea being sub-par.
That's the problem with Arsenal. You should do both all the time. Before City came along (and only in Mancini 2nd season they were really a top 4 contender) the 4th place was almost an automatic thing for the so-called "big 4". Arsène in most of the seasons, even without 4th place opposition, completely neglected the cups to focus only on the 4th place. That's beneath Arsenal's level.
This season, with the first real title chance in a decade he proved he wasn't a good enough manager. I get all the injuries that they have, so the title probably be out of reach with any other manager at the helm, but the way you guys played against the likes of Liverpool, Man C, Chelsea was such flat out embarrassing and showed that Wenger cannot tactically adapt to play the "Underdog" role. Always playing the possession, high defensive line, without high pressure from the forwards will get you nowhere against teams with better talent.
Hope I'm wrong, because I like Arsenal and Wenger because of their attractive football (plus I loved seeing Overmars playing for you back in the day), but I don't see Arsenal winning the title or even really competing with the other teams, unless they slip up, like what happen this season, with Man U and Chelsea being sub-par.
People sometimes forget how he helped change the club. He could have won the FA Cup 2005 and stepped down from the job and let someone else take the reigns and face all the hardship. It would have been glorious for Wenger - winning the 2004 title unbeaten and in 2005 the FA Cup, then BAM, moved to a new stadium with facilities (and training facilities at London Colney as well) for which the development he oversaw himself.
The truth is, the man is much more than a manager.
Don't get me wrong, Rodgers is looking more and more like a great manager, but he spent a fair amount of money on that team, not to mention he inherited a beast of a striker in Luis Suarez.
Godo makes it sound like Liverpool is a poor horse, but we're talking about a team who paid £37m on Carroll at some point and were spending these sums during a time when they weren't in the Champions League.
I like Rodgers especially for the way he made that Swansea team play, with a much more restricted budget. I think that was even more impressive. But let's see how he fares in the next 3 or 4 years.
You're trying to compare someone who's just getting started to a manager who's been 18 years at the helm.
Wenger's loyalty to Arsenal is just amazing, you can't put a price on that. He knew better than anyone else exactly what Arsenal would go through during the stadium debt years and stuck it out.
I have no doubt in my mind that a fella like Mourinho would jump ship if the club owner/board tells him that the well is gonna dry up and there will be reduced investment. Hell, O'Neil did it at Villa.
Now things are gonna get interesting again for Wenger, the Puma deal and renewed Emirates contract are kicking in and it looks like he can afford an Özil per season.
Nothing of this is financial doping. There you won't find no dodgy £400m sponsorship contracts from Kroenke's associates or half-brothers.
You make it sound like playing in the Champions League creates such a disparity that cannot be overcome by the other teams.
If so, then why have Newcastle never qualified again for the CL? Why couldn't Liverpool qualify for about 4-5 consecutive seasons, after being a CL regular?
I don't see where this 'chronic lack of competition' comes from. If anything, with the arrival of Abramovich and Sheikh Mansour on the scene, a financially restricted Arsenal was a stronger candidate for dropping out of the CL places than, say, Liverpool, who had been spending more than Arsenal.
Take a look at the Premier League tables through the years, since the Champions League inception.
The league used to be dominated by Man United and Arsenal, alternating themselves in the 1st and 2nd places, but Liverpool and Newcastle also qualified in consecutive years. Even Leeds United were there.
So before suggesting it was any form of lobbying by UEFA or the financial edge of being in that competition that kept Arsenal in this position, just look elsewhere and think of other reasons why Arsenal keeps qualifying for CL.
Is it the manager? I think so. Look at what happened to Liverpool after they sacked Benitez. Look at Man United now! After being in the Champions League for as long as Arsenal, surely Man United wouldn't lose their place? Or would they?
If the disparity of Champions League participation was as bad as some folk suggest, even under Moyes, there would be no way Man United would have lost their place to Liverpool - especially considering how Liverpool missed out on 4-5 consecutive seasons of 'UEFA lobbying', as you put it.
Now, if we ask ourselves why Chelsea and Man City now keep qualifying for CL every year regardless of the manager, I know the answer for that.