Football 16-17

[pink_triangle]

47 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

Budget is of course an important part of where a team finishes but it is not the only factor. I don't think anyone can say Wenger has spent his budget well in the last few seasons. 

Not an important factor, it's the important factor. I think it's the only factor that research has ever shown any statistical significance.

Edited April 11, 2017 by pink_triangle

[pink_triangle]

28 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

Competing at the very top. Champions league finals, league titles, unbeaten seasons

I think your expectations are too high. I don't think any alternative manager will achieve that with the current spending.

[pink_triangle]

35 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

I still don't think you understand why Arsenal fans are frustrated. 'Arsenal's dip' has been for about 10 years. 

I would say about 12 years which randomly coincide with 2 clubs who have overtaken Arsenal by running clubs through the benefactor model. If they hadn't have done this I have no doubt Wenger would be competing for titles. I'm not sure Wenger can be blamed for these external factors.

[pink_triangle]

12 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

. Again, you are talking like this season is an isolated 'blip' for Arsenal. It's been the same thing for years 

It is an isolated blip, Arsenal in recent years have finished on pat or better with their wage budget. 

[CRW5252]

13 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Not an important factor, it's the important factor. No think it's the only factor that research has ever shown any statistical significance.

What other factors has this 'research' investigated? You are simplifying football too much, stats aren't everything.

 

9 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I think your expectations are too high. I don't think any alternative manager will achieve that with the current spending.

 It's the expectations that have been set by the board and Wenger as they have repeatedly expressed the title as the target. When we moved to the Emirates we were told we would compete with Bayern in 10 years.  

 

4 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I would say about 12 years which randomly coincide with 2 clubs who have overtaken Arsenal by running clubs through the benefactor model. If they hadn't have done this I have no doubt Wenger would be competing for titles. I'm not sure Wenger can be blamed for these external factors.

Perhaps that is true but we were told that moving to the Emirates would mean we could compete with these teams. 

Edited April 11, 2017 by CRW5252

[Wooderson]

Let's see how Arsenal fare hovering around the 4th/5th/6th position for a few seasons, blud. Will make things v interesting and business for Arsenal Fan TV will be booming, Rob fam. 

[pink_triangle]

8 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

What other factors has this 'research' investigated? You are simplifying football too much, stats aren't everything.

 

 

They have certainly looked at things like changing managers and age of squads. I don't think we have decent markers for passion and effort yet. Unfortunately modern day football is pretty much all about financial statistics. Look through Europes leagues and the winners will all be top 2/3 richest.

 

11 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

 

 It's the expectations that have been set by the board and Wenger as they have repeatedly expressed the title as the target. When we moved to the Emirates we were told we would compete with Bayern in 10 years.

They need to therefore match spending with these ambitions. Arsenal at present recruit players from a pool which has already been emptied by the likes of City, Chelsea and Man Utd.

 

13 minutes ago, CRW5252 said:

 

Perhaps that is true but we were told that moving to the Emirates would mean we could compete with these teams. 

They could compete if they spend the money. Whether the choice not to is that of Wenger or the board then who knows. My suspicion is the successor will still have the 4th biggest budget to play with.

However Chelsea and City could easily fall back into mediocrity if the owners pull the plug. 

[Wooderson]

Well said, Pink. Arsenal not shopping in the same markets as the proper big teams. Disclaimer, LFC shopping at Lidl.

[zahidf]

awesome from dortmund fans

 

 

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

I still don't think you understand why Arsenal fans are frustrated. 'Arsenal's dip' has been for about 10 years. We are not protesting purely about the results at the moment. It is frustration that has built up after years of broken promises (from Wenger and the board). We have gone from one of the best clubs in the world to not even being in the top 20. 

you see constant top 4 as a dip, when you'd have to be blind to not have noticed other teams come past Arsenal - rather than Arsenal dipping - due to owners who've been able to pump clubs with cash (and Spurs, who've got lucky via having a couple of excellent players).

And Utd have gone from being one of the best in the world to not even being in the top 20, too - and have *actually* fallen, too. 

If you have the answer with binning Wenger, you'll also have the answer of who will do better than him, and if it's so certain that there's better than him, you'll have a list of replacements too.

So let's see the list, and then if/when Wenger goes we can see whether you've really known your stuff.

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

Competing at the very top. Champions league finals, league titles, unbeaten seasons

Your expectations aren't off the scale nuts, oh no.

 

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, CRW5252 said:

 Koeman did very well at Southampton and has been great at Everton so far so it's a fair bet to say he'll do well in the future. Again, you are talking like this season is an isolated 'blip' for Arsenal. It's been the same thing for years 

Wenger did well at Arsenal so far so it's a fair bet to say he'll do well in the future...?

 

[pink_triangle]

Also I think the argument that Arsenal aren't in the world top 20 is debatable on the back of regular top 4 premiership and last 16 champions league finishes.

[ThomThomDrum]

That #bedsfoawayfans really is impressively classy of the Dortmund fans. Cockle warming stuff.

Edit..........

Although I did laugh at this..............(Am I a bad person? )

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by ThomThomDrum

[zahidf]

Its going to be ok at Arsenal: Wenge will have a 200 million 'war chest' to spend, and they will get zaha, dembele, rodiruigez and keep ozil and sanchez.

[big__phil]

Think we'll have to agree to disagree about Arsenal chaps! Clearly different views about what to expect in terms of ambition and success.

Which game are we watching tonight then? Some good CL fixtures! Munich v Real probably the standout, but interesting to see if Shakespeare can get a tune out of the team in Madrid.

[mjsell]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

(and Spurs, who've got lucky via having a couple of excellent players).

Bit harsh. no credit for what has been an excellent few years from them. Poch has been consistently one of the best managers in the league since his arrival, and has got them set up perfectly and playing with great intensity, agression, power and creativity.

A team that are defying the 'money spent = league position' theory, must just be getting lucky.

[JSmurphy]

10 minutes ago, big__phil said:

Which game are we watching tonight then? Some good CL fixtures! Munich v Real probably the standout, but interesting to see if Shakespeare can get a tune out of the team in Madrid.

It's got to be Dortmund / Monaco followed by Atletico / Leicester. I can't stand Madrid so will be hoping Bayern smash them.

[eFestivals]

Just now, mjsell said:

Bit harsh. no credit for what has been an excellent few years from them. Poch has been consistently one of the best managers in the league since his arrival, and has got them set up perfectly and playing with great intensity, agression, power and creativity.

A team that are defying the 'money spent = league position' theory, must just be getting lucky.

It wasn't meant as harsh. They've been building themselves in the right direction for years, from long before Pooch arrived.

All the same, they've got lucky with a couple of players - Kane and Alli, both of whom they signed because they saw potential, of course, but that's what every manager is doing with every signing. These two happened to have matured to that high potential, when few of the signings that any manager makes does come in at that high level.

If those two hadn't ended up at that level it's unlikely that Spurs would be flying as high as they are.

[mjsell]

14 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

It wasn't meant as harsh. They've been building themselves in the right direction for years, from long before Pooch arrived.

All the same, they've got lucky with a couple of players - Kane and Alli, both of whom they signed because they saw potential, of course, but that's what every manager is doing with every signing. These two happened to have matured to that high potential, when few of the signings that any manager makes does come in at that high level.

If those two hadn't ended up at that level it's unlikely that Spurs would be flying as high as they are.

You do realise that Kane has been at Spurs since 2004 - since he was 11. Maybe he has been just been coached well by the club? nah, probably just got lucky. 

And when you look at the signings Spurs have made in the last few years (since poch took over) there havent been many that havent worked out (Fazio, N'Jie, Sissoko, Janssen being a few that come to mind). With Alderweireld, Dier, Wanyama, Davies, Trippier, Alli, Son, Wimmer, Vorm all working out pretty well (some excellently) when does getting lucky with a couple of signings become credit for  great player identification and recruitment?

Edited April 12, 2017 by mjsell

[eFestivals]

17 minutes ago, mjsell said:

You do realise that Kane has been at Spurs since 2004 - since he was 11. Maybe he has been just been coached well by the club? nah, probably just got lucky. 

Yep. And I also realise that plenty of players signed at the same time and age haven't made it to the same level. So how come Kane has and they haven't if it's purely about coaching?

They're of course trying to coach well (all players, not just Kane) and they're of course trying to spot great potential, but that doesn't mean they'll be successful with either. None of it is guaranteed.

At the end of the day, it comes down to the luck of Kane being that high quality player at the end of the process, when he might have been one of the lower-level players like the others.

Every manager wants every signing to come out like Kane did, but it doesn't happen. In the end it comes down to the luck of who it is they've taken a chance on and whether they come out of it particularly good - or not.

Like I say, I'm not trying to be harsh on Spurs, but there is a high amount of luck involved in Kane being that good which they couldn't have known for sure when signed, even tho they might have hoped he would be.

 

Quote

And when you look at the signings Spurs have made in the last few years (since poch took over) there havent been many that havent worked out (Fazio, N'Jie, Sissoko, Janssen being a few that come to mind). With Alderweireld, Dier, Wanyama, Davies, Trippier, Alli, Son, Wimmer, Vorm all working out pretty well (some excellently) when does getting lucky with a couple of signings become credit for a great player identification and recruitment?

Yep, Pooch might turn out to be exceptional with signings compared to other managers (tho i've not been paying attention enough to know one way or another).  Other managers tho - even the likes of fergie - have a significant fail rate too.

Maybe Alli was a no-brainer - they happen now and then - or maybe Pooch correctly spotted his potential, or maybe he took a chance on what he thought might be great potential. Whatever, he can be credited for a great signing there ... but it still might not have worked out like it has. Bad luck might have had Alli not settle in and so not be the player he is. Likewise, good luck has had him settle in well and be a huge success. There's a world of possibilities, and there's an amount of luck in how it turns out. None of it is guaranteed.

With Kane tho, that's luck for Pooch that he was at the club and ready and able to step up. Pooch might have arrived at a different time and had no one like that.

All clubs and managers try and do what Spurs & Pooch have done, tho luck plays a big part in how it turns out.

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by eFestivals

[sdvruxk]

Everything that has ever happened in football has had a slice of luck involved then.

[mjsell]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Yep. And I also realise that plenty of players signed at the same time and age haven't made it to the same level. So how come Kane has and they haven't if it's purely about coaching?

They're of course trying to coach well (all players, not just Kane) and they're of course trying to spot great potential, but that doesn't mean they'll be successful with either. 

At the end of the day, it comes down to the luck of Kane being that high quality player at the end of the process, when he might have been one of the lower-level players like the others.

Every manager wants every signing to come out like Kane did, but it doesn't happen. In the end it comes down to the luck of who it is they've taken a chance on and whether they come out of it particularly good - or not.

Like I say, I'm not trying to be harsh on Spurs, but there is a high amount of luck involved in Kane being that good which they couldn't have known for sure when signed, even tho they might have hoped he would be.

 

Yep, Pooch might turn out to be exceptional with signings compared to other managers (tho i've not been paying attention enough to know one way or another).  Other managers tho - even the likes of fergie - have a significant fail rate too.

Maybe Alli was a no-brainer - they happen now and then - or maybe Pooch correctly spotted his potential, or maybe he took a chance on what he thought might be great potential. Whatever, he can be credited for a great signing there ... but it still might not have worked out like it has. Bad luck might have had Alli not settle in and so not be the player he is. Likewise, good luck has had him settle in well and be a huge success. There's a world of possibilities, and there's an amount of luck in how it turns out.

With Kane tho, that's luck for Pooch that he was at the club and ready and able to step up. Pooch might have arrived at a different time and had no one like that.

All clubs and managers try and do what Spurs & Pooch have done, tho luck plays a big part in how it turns out.

 

The way you talk, you see everything in football as a game of chance. A roll of the dice on which team does well and which doesnt. Chelsea have won the league - must be just getting lucky that Kante turned out not to be a one season wonder. Lucky that the change in formation worked out pretty well, and lucky that the appointment of Conte has got the players playing again.

Spurs have done good business, play good football, and are getting good results (the last few weeks without Kane in the team), It is a bit tough for me to argue on Spurs' behalf being an Arsenal fan, but to dismiss their rise as luck is ridiculous imo.

[zahidf]

I think pooch is great. Youngest team in the top 6, lowest wage bill and being well above expectations 2 years in a row.

And some great, positive football as well.

I hope they win the FA cup this year (I think the league will be too much for them)

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, sdvruxk said:

Everything that has ever happened in football has had a slice of luck involved then.

It does. That's what makes it fun. 

If it had nothing of luck every game would be predictable and therefore every game would be pointless.

It's much like how the controversies of a game are what makes the game, and how the use of video will take that away and spoil the game. If there's no controversies to talk about, there's less to talk about, and football becomes less interesting.