Football The (bacon) General Forum Football Thread.

[JingleBells]

He's built a sustainable football club that is also very successfull. In a way Arsenal is a model of how all the clubs should run - not living above their means!

By "well run" do you mean £318m in debt?

 

[soze]

By "well run" do you mean £318m in debt?

We were close to £600 mil in debt this year but the building projects have paid a fair chunk off. And the debt is for the stadium so it will eventually pay for itself.

 

[Vae]

By "well run" do you mean £318m in debt?

You mean debt that was incurred for financing the new stadium and the property development of highbury? So actually debt that was for investments that will pay off the debt and then more over time and make the club even more self-financing. I'd call that a good decision and well-run rather than relying on wealthy investors to continually put in money and then splurge it in the transfer market.

 

[JingleBells]

You mean debt that was incurred for financing the new stadium and the property development of highbury? So actually debt that was for investments that will pay off the debt and then more over time and make the club even more self-financing. I'd call that a good decision and well-run rather than relying on wealthy investors to continually put in money and then splurge it in the transfer market.

Probably, however the downturn in the property market hit them. My brother's got a copy of Deloitte's football finances report, I'll see what that says, anyway it's all well and good having money but they could at least win something

That said, the new stadium is certainly good for income. Spurs and Liverpool are struggling with income due to lack of seat space (Spurs currently fill WHL 99% on average), this also puts off any big spending millionaires as they don't want to have to spend £££ to build a stadium.

 

[Turamber]

He's built a sustainable football club that is also very successfull. In a way Arsenal is a model of how all the clubs should run - not living above their means!

Arsenal play the best football in the league by a country mile but ... have they really been successful when managing on a shoestring? The successful Arsenal sides included a number of big money buys.

Since the big money buys stopped so have the trophies.

 

[Aoami]

Arsenal play the best football in the league by a country mile but ... have they really been successful when managing on a shoestring? The successful Arsenal sides included a number of big money buys.

Since the big money buys stopped so have the trophies.

Like who? Arsenal's biggest spend is still Sylvian Wiltord at about £13m iirc. Even Villa are spending more than that on players, and what have they acheived lately?

 

[JingleBells]

Like who? Arsenal's biggest spend is still Sylvian Wiltord at about £13m iirc. Even Villa are spending more than that on players, and what have they acheived lately?

Arshavin went for £15m, Nasri is up there too

 

[Aoami]

But the point remains, they don't spend as big as other clubs who have acheived equally as little success over the last few years. One club who play in White and call a place not too far from the Emirates home spring to mind

 

[Turamber]

Like who? Arsenal's biggest spend is still Sylvian Wiltord at about £13m iirc. Even Villa are spending more than that on players, and what have they acheived lately?

£12m is our highest transfer fee paid, which is dwarfed by Arsenal's most expensive signing. Besides we were not discussing Villa

In the current squad they have Sagna (£7.5m), Vermalaen (£10m), Arshavin (£15m), Eduardo (£7.5m), Walcott (£9.1m) (figures from Wikipedia).

In more successful times they signed Henry (£10.5m, ten years ago); Pires (£6m in 2000); Jeffers (£8m); Richard Wright (£6m); Reyes (£10.5m), Wiltord (£13m).

It is a media myth that Wenger doesn't spend big money on players. I'm not saying he's a bad manager or anything so churlish, but facts are facts.

 

[soze]

With Ade being sold Wenger is back in the positive i believe but very close though.

This thing with Wenger at the moment is not about money i dont think he said 10 years ago he though he could build a team from youth that could win the league. (And imo you take away Chel$ki and that money and we would have won the league by now). He currently has 18 months left on his contract and i think he will see that out with this style and if he cant win the league change tactic or step down

It is a media myth that Wenger doesn't spend big money on players. I'm not saying he's a bad manager or anything so churlish, but facts are facts.

I have always though it was more Wenger will not buy names not that he does not spend money. Like going for Ade instead of a big name striker stuff like that is what Wenger does best Arshavin being an exception.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

£12m is our highest transfer fee paid, which is dwarfed by Arsenal's most expensive signing. Besides we were not discussing Villa

In the current squad they have Sagna (£7.5m), Vermalaen (£10m), Arshavin (£15m), Eduardo (£7.5m), Walcott (£9.1m) (figures from Wikipedia).

In more successful times they signed Henry (£10.5m, ten years ago); Pires (£6m in 2000); Jeffers (£8m); Richard Wright (£6m); Reyes (£10.5m), Wiltord (£13m).

It is a media myth that Wenger doesn't spend big money on players. I'm not saying he's a bad manager or anything so churlish, but facts are facts.

The fact you've pulled out £6m as a high fee shows you're talking nonsense. Spending "big" is generally considered as forking out 15-20m+ on one player, so it's correct to still class Arsenal as a team that do not spend big.

BTW Arshavin's fee started at less than £15m and has the potential to rise there, so we still actually haven't even spent £15m on one player yet.

The big difference between Wenger's spending is that apart from one or two bad buys (Wright and Jeffers) he gets supreme quality for his price. Villa spent up to £12m on Downing, while we pay roughly the same for an Arshavin. This is the key reason why Wenger's transfer policy is successful. He gets players that should cost twice as much - Zenit wanted ~£30m for Arshavin from Spurs just the window before we signed him. Henry for £10m, one of the best players ever to have graced England with a phenominal goalscoring record. That's pretty good value right there.

And that isn't even mentioning players like Toure (~150k IIRC then sold for £14m), Glichy (who we technically got for free but chucked a few k Cannes' way regardless), Anelka (bought for 500k, sold for £20m+).

In conclusion: Wenger spends decent amounts of money, but not big money. He also spends virtually fuck all on what turn out to be some of the best players in the game so being critical of his transfer policy is hilarious. No other manager in England, or come to think of it - the world, has been so successful over such a long period of time in the transfer market and has never been held to ransom over a player. A manager like Wenger is an asset to Arsenal, and would be to any other club in the world for this reason alone.

 

[Turamber]

The fact you've pulled out £6m as a high fee shows you're talking nonsense.

Whether a price is expensive or not has more to do with the market at the time. At the time £6m was a boatload of money.

 

[JingleBells]

Wenger is also a master of getting rid of players at just the right time, Toure is utter gash at City and Vieira hasn't set the world alight at Inter from what I can tell

 

[Ch3tan]

Whether a price is expensive or not has more to do with the market at the time. At the time £6m was a boatload of money.

This, 6mill, and 10 mill were a lot at the time, and they did bring you success. Especially with henry and pires.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Sorry but that's nonsense again, you must have selective memories or something. At that time the market was highly inflated, for example in the year 2000 when Pires joined Arsenal, the good players were going for values such as:

Crespo - £35.5m
Figo - £37m
R. Ferdinand - £18m
Barthez - £8m (a lot for a keeper then (unless your name was Buffon)
Heskey - £11m
Sutton - £10m
Rebrov - £11m

Look how high those fees are for pretty average players, I can't be arsed to find any more (there's plenty) as it's Christmas. £6m was cheap, we paid £7.2 for Lauren ffs. The market then was as bad as it is now. It's only the upper echelons of transfer fees that are rising, the rest have stayed relatively steady for about 10 years now.

 

[tierk]

Sorry but anyone that thinks/ thought that Wenger has bought ot buys bad should have their heads examined. The man is a God at buying players and a even bigger God when he sells them on after he has turned them into stars -Overmars, Henri, Petit, Anelka anyone.

This is from a a hard core Liverpool fan. Please stfu all idiots!!

 

[Turamber]

Nobody is saying Wenger is a bad manager. But I think its pretty clear he does spend money on players, and spend big. He is not the shoestring manager some people seem to claim.

He also inherited an excellent Arsenal side, how much would he have had to spend if he'd taken over a weaker team?

 

[Raven]

That was 15 years ago....

He has maintained a decent squad year in year out, keeping his overall spending right down, if he has bought he has also sold. A lot of the time actually making a profit from the transfer window by selling more than he has spent.

Edit, only goes up to 2007 but...

http://arsenal-mania.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31663#


From the top of my head he has spent around minus 15 mil this season

 

[gunner440]

That was 15 years ago....

He has maintained a decent squad year in year out, keeping his overall spending right down, if he has bought he has also sold. A lot of the time actually making a profit from the transfer window by selling more than he has spent.

Edit, only goes up to 2007 but...

Arsenal Mania - Forum - View topic - Transfer history under Wenger


From the top of my head he has spent around minus 15 mil this season

That list seems incomplete. Couldn't find Vieira on it for starters and he was Arsene's first buy.

This one is better: Arsenal Transfer History

 

[Wazzerphuk]

I read somewhere that Wenger has been running in the transfer market at a profit and is the only manager in the EPL to do so. CBA to add everything up and check, although I'm fairly sure it's right.

Something Rafa and Fergie can only dream of.

 

[Scouse]

Something Rafa and Fergie can only dream of.

Rafa's necessarily been increasing the value of his squad. But as has been ably demonstrated here many times - Rafa's buying many players cheap and selling expensive - just like Wenger.

Fergie is maintaining an expensive squad. Sort of "treading water".

And the killer is - Wenger would be spending bigger but Arsenal can't afford it...

 

[Raven]

That's because they have just bought a new stadium...how is Liverpool's new stadium coming along?

 

[Scouse]

That's because they have just bought a new stadium...how is Liverpool's new stadium coming along?

It's not. Is that somehow Benitez' fault as well now?

 

[Raven]

No, it's not.

Not sure I said it was?

 

[Scouse]

Oh. I figured you'd be trying to contribute to the context of the thread, rather than just have a random pop at Liverpool having not enough cash...

 

[Raven]

And the killer is - Wenger would be spending bigger but Arsenal can't afford it...

Do you really need a flow chart to demonstrate how the conversation went?

 

[caLLous]

Funny little exchange but I think Raven won this round.

 

[Marc]

I read somewhere that Wenger has been running in the transfer market at a profit and is the only manager in the EPL to do so. CBA to add everything up and check, although I'm fairly sure it's right.

Something Rafa and Fergie can only dream of.

Wheras Wenger can only dream of champions league trophies.

Hell he can dream of any trophies these days. Oh gratz Wenger, you make a profit on your transfers but you aint won a trophy for years.

 

[soze]

This argument is so tiered now its not funny we are clearly the best of the teams that are self sufficient in the PL. And i have said before i would rather keep trying to win on our own than become some rich pricks play thing just to win a few trophies. Yes Chel$ki are currently a better team but if anything happened to the owner they would be done, one day all this living above your means could bite some clubs on the arse.

 

[Embattle]

This argument is so tiered now its not funny we are clearly the best of the teams that are self sufficient in the PL. And i have said before i would rather keep trying to win on our own than become some rich pricks play thing just to win a few trophies. Yes Chel$ki are currently a better team but if anything happened to the owner they would be done, one day all this living above your means could bite some clubs on the arse.

Did wonder how long it would take for someone to mention Chelsea, guess it had to happen but either way this argument is stupid, pointless, boring and well used by those who like to quote fantasy figures.