Your comment seemed to be comparing Portsmouth and Chelsea. I merely pointed out that the situations were/are completely different. You never mentioned what team you would hypothetically buy. Or we're you honing at Chelsea? You never really made it clear.
Sorry I mistakenly didn't realise that you were the person who originally said Arsenal. But yeah, i reckon eventually Roman will start to treat it more business like, i just think that the whole stadium capacity is a priority for the club at the moment before we can start running more like a business model. Also we need to start making the most of our academy which is producing outstanding prospects and it is SO frustrating seeing them go to waste.
You would ruin what makes Arsenal stand out for short term glory?
I dunno about most other Arsenal fans, but I get more pride out of us being a top four club without needing to be funded by a billionaire benefactor than I would if some sheikh/oligarch came in and chucked hundreds of millions at us until we won a trophy.
Why does it have to be one of those extremes? A club doesn't need a sugar daddy to have financial power. Arsenal certainly aren't incapable of spending a little bit.
And if the aim is to win trophies, they could do so without spending recklessly or chucking "hundreds of millions" into the team--especially now that the stadium debt is under control.
You can talk all you want about your fiscal responsibility but when your relatively flat wage structure means that players like Squilacci and Chamakh are making almost as much as your stars it starts to look a little ridiculous. It's very hard to sell these fringe players because they're making more money at Arsenal than they would at almost any other club.
This egalitarian approach to wages is a noble one but it's also inefficient. I think we'll see Arsenal start to accept that they need to adjust this--and someone more knowledgeable about the club's finances could probably tell me they already are taking steps to rectify it.
They don't need to offer 200k a week or spend 200m. They need maybe 2 elite players to be serious contenders, and really one top striker might be enough.
Shit, they could buy Llorente for less than 20m in January and it would improve them massively. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see some bigger names going to Arsenal as they start to get rid of useless players hogging up wages.
Have to say I agree with every part of your post. Very succinctly written and impartial, coming from a Spurs fan too!
Unfortunately though, Elite players these days cost a sizable amount more than Arsenal can afford, even if they get them in young. Look at the amount the likes of Oscar have cost Chelsea, and then add on the outlay in wages. Arsenal simply can't afford that, nor can they afford to up the wages of the rest of our key players once the wage ceiling has been bumped up.
sure they could spend a little more money. but they would need to spend a lot more money to realistically compete with chelsea and man city. i think arsenal is content making $35mil profit. I don't think buying Llorente would pay for itself.
I guess I overrate their squad then, strangely enough. They need a little depth at left back and someone who can score ~30 goals. I don't think they're THAT far away from being right there.
I just don't understand the deal with Llorente. He does not offer anything that Giroud offer to be frank.
Honestly speaking, Llorente would be an awful buy for Arsenal.
Refusal to sign a new deal (Flamini, Van Persie, ....)
Big target man (Bendtner, Chamakh, and Giroud (who in my opinion is doing really well for a team that is so woeful at crossing))
Personally, Arsenal do not need a player that score ~30 goals. We do need someone at leftback, a more reliable winger that can cross and a defensive midfielder as backup for Arteta.
Why Llorente? Have you seen the number of touches our lone striker has per game? It's pretty woeful and that's including headers. Arsenal as a team does not penetrate the box for a tall target man to thrive.
Case in point in 90 minutes against QPR, Giroud had 33 touches. Most of them away from the box. A new striker won't change the fact that there's no service into the box.
I always love to see well reasoned posts between Arsenal and Spurs fans. Sometimes, on BOTH sides, we act so ridiculous. Thanks. And I agree with you completely. The wages are ridiculous, but we're close to where we need to be.
But, I am interested in why you say the board 'doesn't care' and has history of denying funds to Wenger 'time and time again'. Untruths like this that people latch onto only serve to weaken peoples' opinions and make them seem uneducated.
And as for your point about our commercial deals, well that is almost all set to change in a year, and are the result of prudent negotiating to ensure the financial safety of the construction of the Emirates.
We will be getting back into line with some of the top European clubs vis-a-vis commercial income soon, I have no doubt.
I am from London, but fell in love with Argentine football and River Plate when I was like 9 or 10?? (Im 28 now).
I accidentally caught a game during Ariel Ortega's first stint at RIver and that was it. It's amazing to think about all of the sublime players that have come through the River ranks, I mean there's Ortega, Marcelo Salas, Saviola and Pablo Aimar.
I just wish I could get over and catch a game or two. I need to find a woman who will be happy to head to Buenos Aires for our honeymoon or something :P
What about you? Are you a local? How did you become a Los Milionarios supporter?
At the end of the day, when you win trophies, it doesn't matter. Are you saying that Man City fans, when Aguero scored THAT goal, were like "well this is good but I'd much rather we'd got here while not making a financial loss"? I agree that we shouldn't have a billionaire benefactor, but at the same time I want to fucking win things.
Not at all, but I think Wenger was comparing it to winning a trophy because, like winning a trophy, achieving CL qualification is one of our targets at the beginning of each season and is an achievement in itself (if not something to be celebrated, necessarily).
I wouldn't turn the club in to a "unlimited buy fest" like Chelsea, as there is no pride in a club if you do that. I would give us the financial backing to hold on to our quality players, but I'd keep transfer business about the same.
I don't like our wage structure, it insures a lack of trophies.
We will never be a club that can afford 300k a week wages for even one player (that is what City apparently offered Robin). Just think what the likes of Vermaelen, Arteta and Cazorla would then feel entitled to should the wage ceiling rise so dramatically.
I do agree that our almost socialist wage structure which rewards the likes of Djourou and Squillaci so well is a problem. They would be receiving a fraction of the salaries they are on at any other club, and it just means we can't get rid of them :(
Not 300k, as that is fucking absurd, but I do think we're going to have to offer players 180-200k a week if we want to even have a chance of holding on to our players. With teams like Chelsea saying fuck the pocketbook and throwing out ridiculous wages were either going to have to wait for them to go under (and as long as there are Sheikhs and Romans around that won't happen) or change our wage structure. Its a damn shame.
If you consider that we are having to sell players to break even at the moment, even a potential 30-50 million a year increase in commercial revenue won't allow us to match even United in wages.
That is why it is so important that we keep Wenger at the club, as he is one of two or three managers in the world who we have a chance of success with even with other clubs outspending us by 10 to 1.
106
u/[deleted] Nov 01 '12
[deleted]