Jimbo 133 Posted May 12, 2008 Author Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Robson's here would be worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj 17 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Although Wenger has huge respect in the transfer market, he has bought some unmitigated shite: Luis Boa Morte, Richard Wright, Stefan Malz, Christopher Wreh, Jeremie Aliadiere, Davor Suker, Gilles Grimandi, Remi Garde, Kaba Diawara, Junichi Inamoto, Igor Stepanovs, Nelson Vivas, Oleg Luzhny, David Grondin, Pascal Cygan. Suker was not shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Robson's here would be worse. I agree, but Wenger or Fergy after a couple of bouts of cancer and approaching senility might not be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Robson's here would be worse. I agree, but Wenger or Fergy after a couple of bouts of cancer and approaching senility might not be. Ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26209 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Absolutely, though the fact that few of them cost much means that it gets swept under the carpet. As has been said, a lot of his big money transfers have flopped and I reckon he's 'afraid' to spend big money and get burnt again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Robson's here would be worse. I agree, but Wenger or Fergy after a couple of bouts of cancer and approaching senility might not be. Ok. Memory fading like Newcastle's 2nd "easy" FA cup run? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besty 4 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Veron? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Robson's here would be worse. I agree, but Wenger or Fergy after a couple of bouts of cancer and approaching senility might not be. Ok. Memory fading like Newcastle's 2nd "easy" FA cup run? Like Sven's luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 (edited) Senderos? Exactly, although I'm not arguing that Wenger is a shite judge of players, he clearly isn't, but his list of shite signings are as bad as anyones, no doubt a list of shite Ferguson signings would be equally bad reading. Robson's here would be worse. I agree, but Wenger or Fergy after a couple of bouts of cancer and approaching senility might not be. Ok. Memory fading like Newcastle's 2nd "easy" FA cup run? Like Sven's luck. Aye, we're completely agreed that Sven's luck has faded, much like the memory of Newcastle's FA cup runs and how easy or difficult they were. Edited May 12, 2008 by Fop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Chelsea and Arsenal are away on their own and it definitely is a top 3 rather than a top 4. If you're going to include Liverpool in the bracket, then surely Everton are in with a shout and claim it is a top 5? But liverpool were closer to Arsenal than Everton were to them. And in turn, Everton were further from Liverpool than Villa were from them. I think that confirms it to be a top 4. Followed by two distinct groups... Everton, Aston Villa, Blackburn, Portsmouth, Man City. West Ham, Spurs, Newcastle United, Middlesbrough, Wigan, Sunderland, Bolton, Fulham, Reading, Birmingham. It'll not be too difficult to jump from the last group into the middle, but near impossible for any team of either group to make it into the top. True.... I'd still stick the top 3 out on their own though - they were the only 3 who could realistically win the league. Liverpool are in a bit of a limbo state IMO. Not quite at the top but far enough away from the chasing pack. Unless Arsenal spend they are not getting back to where they were 5 years ago. Not necessarily. What if Man Utd are beset by injury problems? What if Chelsea sell players and don't replace them well? What if Wenger unearths more youthful talent for pittance? Historically they've not spent massive amounts and the only really successful expensive aquisition I can think of was Henry. I wouldn't under-estimate them at any cost. Off the top of my head Wiltord ? £12m ? Eduardo £8m ? Franny Jeffers £10m ? Lauren 7.2m Wiltord 13m edu 6m Bronkhorst 8.5 Reyes 12.5m Richard Wright 6m Helb 10m Walcott 9.2m Sagna 7.5m De Silva 8.5m Not as many bargains as people imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 They're relatively inexpensive compared to what Chelsea and Man Utd spend though. Arsenal are 6th biggest spenders in the last 10 years or so iirc. Incredible really. Plus, I'm not sure if it is, but if that is just money spent it's even more amazing. Probably net spend though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 They're relatively inexpensive compared to what Chelsea and Man Utd spend though. Arsenal are 6th biggest spenders in the last 10 years or so iirc. Incredible really. Plus, I'm not sure if it is, but if that is just money spent it's even more amazing. Probably net spend though. This is true, but they aren't exactly bargains either. Just cause Toure and Flamini were cheap people wander around thinking the whole team is built around some 'philosophy'...The differance for me is that Chelsea and Man Utd are competing with the top 2/3 sides in Serie A and Spain for the best players in the world, hence the fees. Wenger I grant you is a bit more circumspect and for instance Adebayor has saved his neck this season, but sooner or later my contention is that they are going to have to spend big on 2/3 players as imo they are falling behind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted May 12, 2008 Author Share Posted May 12, 2008 They're relatively inexpensive compared to what Chelsea and Man Utd spend though. Arsenal are 6th biggest spenders in the last 10 years or so iirc. Incredible really. Plus, I'm not sure if it is, but if that is just money spent it's even more amazing. Probably net spend though. This is true, but they aren't exactly bargains either. Just cause Toure and Flamini were cheap people wander around thinking the whole team is built around some 'philosophy'...The differance for me is that Chelsea and Man Utd are competing with the top 2/3 sides in Serie A and Spain for the best players in the world, hence the fees. Wenger I grant you is a bit more circumspect and for instance Adebayor has saved his neck this season, but sooner or later my contention is that they are going to have to spend big on 2/3 players as imo they are falling behind. By today's money those transfer fees don't seem to be massive, but at the time, the fee's for Wiltord, Bronkhorst and Wright were massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 (edited) They're relatively inexpensive compared to what Chelsea and Man Utd spend though. Arsenal are 6th biggest spenders in the last 10 years or so iirc. Incredible really. Plus, I'm not sure if it is, but if that is just money spent it's even more amazing. Probably net spend though. This is true, but they aren't exactly bargains either. Just cause Toure and Flamini were cheap people wander around thinking the whole team is built around some 'philosophy'...The differance for me is that Chelsea and Man Utd are competing with the top 2/3 sides in Serie A and Spain for the best players in the world, hence the fees. Wenger I grant you is a bit more circumspect and for instance Adebayor has saved his neck this season, but sooner or later my contention is that they are going to have to spend big on 2/3 players as imo they are falling behind. By today's money those transfer fees don't seem to be massive, but at the time, the fee's for Wiltord, Bronkhorst and Wright were massive. Aye. In todays market Bronckhorst, Reyes and Lauren would be 15-20m. The 10.5m for Henry would be a Torres type fee now. He does pick up 2/3 bargains a year but they also spend relatively high when they need a position filling. FWIW I've never rated Helb either. Edited May 12, 2008 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 They're relatively inexpensive compared to what Chelsea and Man Utd spend though. Arsenal are 6th biggest spenders in the last 10 years or so iirc. Incredible really. Plus, I'm not sure if it is, but if that is just money spent it's even more amazing. Probably net spend though. This is true, but they aren't exactly bargains either. Just cause Toure and Flamini were cheap people wander around thinking the whole team is built around some 'philosophy'...The differance for me is that Chelsea and Man Utd are competing with the top 2/3 sides in Serie A and Spain for the best players in the world, hence the fees. Wenger I grant you is a bit more circumspect and for instance Adebayor has saved his neck this season, but sooner or later my contention is that they are going to have to spend big on 2/3 players as imo they are falling behind. They're already falling behind I agree. It's the size of the squad as much as anything. Wenger seems to keep getting 'lucky' so it can't just be luck obviously but you're right about Adebayor, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus 0 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 IMO there is very little differance from Everton to us. Theres a world of difference. Everton have the one thing we havnt had for years now. Stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 26209 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Chelsea and Arsenal are away on their own and it definitely is a top 3 rather than a top 4. If you're going to include Liverpool in the bracket, then surely Everton are in with a shout and claim it is a top 5? But liverpool were closer to Arsenal than Everton were to them. And in turn, Everton were further from Liverpool than Villa were from them. I think that confirms it to be a top 4. Followed by two distinct groups... Everton, Aston Villa, Blackburn, Portsmouth, Man City. West Ham, Spurs, Newcastle United, Middlesbrough, Wigan, Sunderland, Bolton, Fulham, Reading, Birmingham. It'll not be too difficult to jump from the last group into the middle, but near impossible for any team of either group to make it into the top. True.... I'd still stick the top 3 out on their own though - they were the only 3 who could realistically win the league. Liverpool are in a bit of a limbo state IMO. Not quite at the top but far enough away from the chasing pack. Unless Arsenal spend they are not getting back to where they were 5 years ago. Not necessarily. What if Man Utd are beset by injury problems? What if Chelsea sell players and don't replace them well? What if Wenger unearths more youthful talent for pittance? Historically they've not spent massive amounts and the only really successful expensive aquisition I can think of was Henry. I wouldn't under-estimate them at any cost. Off the top of my head Wiltord ? £12m ? Eduardo £8m ? Franny Jeffers £10m ? Lauren 7.2m Wiltord 13m edu 6m Bronkhorst 8.5 Reyes 12.5m Richard Wright 6m Helb 10m Walcott 9.2m Sagna 7.5m De Silva 8.5m Not as many bargains as people imagine. Aye but tbf from that list I'd say only Richard Wright was a total flop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neville Neville Neville 0 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 I'd like to open up to debate that 65-43 does not equal 18 basic arithmetictastic :revelling in pedantry: IMO there is very little differance from Everton to us. Table says different though, doesn't it?? Torres won't like this one bit - shows that Man Utd, Chelsea and Arsenal are away on their own and it definitely is a top 3 rather than a top 4. If you're going to include Liverpool in the bracket, then surely Everton are in with a shout and claim it is a top 5? Highlights how close we actually were to the other end of the table - Spurs as well for that matter. Reading are far too close to us. If KK had been here all season you could conservatively add 12 points to our tally. 'What ifs' are pointless tbh. KK wasn't here all season and therefore that's what we've ended up with. Over the period of the past 9 months, Everton were 18 points better than us - that's not even open for debate. If they're in the same position after the summer, remains to be seen. I'm hopeful the gap will reduce but then we've been saying that for the last 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake 0 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 IMO there is very little differance from Everton to us. Theres a world of difference. Everton have the one thing we havnt had for years now. Stability. Agreed, we should have stuck with Souness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus 0 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 IMO there is very little differance from Everton to us. Theres a world of difference. Everton have the one thing we havnt had for years now. Stability. Agreed, we should have stuck with Souness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Everton have enjoyed three top six finishes in the last four years under Moyes following a 17th place finish in 03/04 when they still stuck with him. In the last four years they've bought only one player for over £10M, and just three between £5 and £10M I'd say the differences between us and them are striking. If they're going to kick on from 5th place they need to invest VERY heavily. If we're going to kick on from 12th place, we need consistency and sensible spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6300 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 Chelsea and Arsenal are away on their own and it definitely is a top 3 rather than a top 4. If you're going to include Liverpool in the bracket, then surely Everton are in with a shout and claim it is a top 5? But liverpool were closer to Arsenal than Everton were to them. And in turn, Everton were further from Liverpool than Villa were from them. I think that confirms it to be a top 4. Followed by two distinct groups... Everton, Aston Villa, Blackburn, Portsmouth, Man City. West Ham, Spurs, Newcastle United, Middlesbrough, Wigan, Sunderland, Bolton, Fulham, Reading, Birmingham. It'll not be too difficult to jump from the last group into the middle, but near impossible for any team of either group to make it into the top. True.... I'd still stick the top 3 out on their own though - they were the only 3 who could realistically win the league. Liverpool are in a bit of a limbo state IMO. Not quite at the top but far enough away from the chasing pack. Unless Arsenal spend they are not getting back to where they were 5 years ago. Not necessarily. What if Man Utd are beset by injury problems? What if Chelsea sell players and don't replace them well? What if Wenger unearths more youthful talent for pittance? Historically they've not spent massive amounts and the only really successful expensive aquisition I can think of was Henry. I wouldn't under-estimate them at any cost. Off the top of my head Wiltord ? £12m ? Eduardo £8m ? Franny Jeffers £10m ? Lauren 7.2m Wiltord 13m edu 6m Bronkhorst 8.5 Reyes 12.5m Richard Wright 6m Helb 10m Walcott 9.2m Sagna 7.5m De Silva 8.5m Not as many bargains as people imagine. You're destroying your own argument here. You claimed that unless Arsenal spent money they won't get back to where they were 5 years ago. To back it up, you're demonstrating that when Wenger HAS spent money, by and large those signings have been unsuccessful. So by definition you're declaring that the success he's had at Arsenal has been from the players that have either come through the youth system or have been bought on a shoe-string. In that scenario, you can't discount that he could achieve it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 You're destroying your own argument here. You claimed that unless Arsenal spent money they won't get back to where they were 5 years ago. To back it up, you're demonstrating that when Wenger HAS spent money, by and large those signings have been unsuccessful. So by definition you're declaring that the success he's had at Arsenal has been from the players that have either come through the youth system or have been bought on a shoe-string. In that scenario, you can't discount that he could achieve it again. Parky's all over the shop today. Needs a few Ritalin to calm him down. All the cloak and dagger meetings, hearsay and innuendo with no solid information has his conspiracy theory node about to blow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted May 12, 2008 Share Posted May 12, 2008 You're destroying your own argument here. You claimed that unless Arsenal spent money they won't get back to where they were 5 years ago. To back it up, you're demonstrating that when Wenger HAS spent money, by and large those signings have been unsuccessful. So by definition you're declaring that the success he's had at Arsenal has been from the players that have either come through the youth system or have been bought on a shoe-string. In that scenario, you can't discount that he could achieve it again. Parky's all over the shop today. Needs a few Ritalin to calm him down. All the cloak and dagger meetings, hearsay and innuendo with no solid information has his conspiracy theory node about to blow. Pet name for his cock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now