The Board

[the wes 7,212]

Monchi went back to seville

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11834/11668315/monchi-returns-to-sevilla-as-sporting-director-after-arsenal-links

[Vesper 28,769]

9 minutes ago, the wes said:

Monchi went back to seville

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11834/11668315/monchi-returns-to-sevilla-as-sporting-director-after-arsenal-links

bläääääääääää

but at least Arse didn't get him

[the wes 7,212]

1 hour ago, Vesper said:

bläääääääääää

but at least Arse didn't get him

It's best to hire DOF now so he can scouted good players for 2020 summer transfer window if we can't get this transfer ban lifted in the summer

[Vesper 28,769]

13 minutes ago, the wes said:

It's best to hire DOF now so he can scouted good players for 2020 summer transfer window if we can't get this transfer ban lifted in the summer

completely 100% agree

[zekinjo 449]

 

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

Gourlay leaving had a bigger impact. Especially in how we approached the transfer market. 

[manpe 10,861]

2 hours ago, MoroccanBlue said:

Gourlay leaving had a bigger impact. Especially in how we approached the transfer market. 

He still got a lot of stick from us. Shows you can't appreciate something until you get something worse.

[Vesper 28,769]

101 days until the summer 2019 window opens. I hope the numpty board has the GO button set up and their plans set to liquidate and rebuild in a MASSIVE way just in case our CAS non-deferral appeal is successful (I think it has a good shot)

IF we do get the window this summer and the board (ie. Roman and the puppets) go all deer-in-the-headlights and fuck it up badly we are so screwed until 2021.

[Special Juan 27,423]

Our board don't plan properly, the scatter gun approach will still continue if the ban is lifted.

People need to understand the club is a mess, and nothing will change why we still have these fucking cock jockeys in charge.

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

1 hour ago, Mana said:

Actually, the most useless board out of the top 6 is Stan Kroenke and his cronies...but THEN it's us.

They can only spend revenue brought in from the club's operations. I wouldn't rate them alongside us. 

We are on course to miss CL football for the 3rd time in 4 years, in spite City being the only club in Europe outspending us. That is utterly unacceptable. The Drinkwater deal alone is a sackable offence. 

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

4 minutes ago, Mana said:

That's what makes them very bad owners. You can rate them alongside them.

Yes I know. But Arsenal's situation is way worse. 10+ years without a league trophy. Little ambition. That's why we are the second worst run club in the top 6.

They had a new stadium to fund. And they can only spend within the means of the money brought in from operations. They can't compete financially compared to us, City, or United. 

The fact we are the 2nd biggest spenders in Europe and have done so poorly this half a decade, to me, reflects worse than Arsenal if we are to rate incompetence. 

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

4 minutes ago, Mana said:

Keyword, "Had". HAD. It's all paid off for years now. Still no difference.

How is it not a difference? 

Arsenal's whole business model is a self sustaining one. Only spending with what they bring in on operations, IE new stadium ticket prices. How do you honestly expect them to compete against us, City and United?

11 minutes ago, Mana said:

Kroenke used his own money (and Arsenal's profits) to build his ranch and expand Los Angeles Rams in America. So don't pretend the owners (and Arsenal) don't have any money to spend. They do. Just in the wrong areas, and that's down to Kroenke.

But the argument is who has the more incompetent board? Not owner?

11 minutes ago, Mana said:

That's based in the last 10 years. And within that 10 years, didn't we win the league 3 times and the Champions League? What did Arsenal win compare to that time?

I specifically said half a decade. Why? Because that is when Marina took charge. 

Since then, only City have out spent us. Being the 2nd highest spenders in Europe, yet being on course to finish outside the top 4 for the 3rd time in 4 years, shows we are run worse than a club who can only spend beyond their means. 

[Superblue 6,370]

33 minutes ago, Mana said:

Keyword, "Had". HAD. It's all paid off for years now. Still no difference.

Kroenke used his own money (and Arsenal's profits) to build his ranch and expand Los Angeles Rams in America. So don't pretend the owners (and Arsenal) don't have any money to spend. They do. Just in the wrong areas, and that's down to Kroenke.

That's based in the last 10 years. And within that 10 years, didn't we win the league 3 times and the Champions League? What did Arsenal win compare to that time?

To Kroenke's credit what the Rams have done over the last couple of years in relocating a poor franchise, rebuilding the team to an elite championship challenging team with a young, progressive head coach has been pretty phenomenal.

Arsenal fans won't take any consolation in that mind, because his lack of enthusiasm with them is laughable.

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

40 minutes ago, Mana said:

Yep, and that's why Arsenal fans are pissed off at Kroenke. What Kroenke did with the Rams is unbelievable, yet he has done zero with Arsenal. All what Kroenke is doing with Arsenal is take their profits. He's like a leech.

@MoroccanBlue Who would you rather have? The Arsenal board or our current board? If it's our board, then stop playing with this argument. 

You are clearly not seeing my point. 

I don't see a board, who can only utilise funds that were generated by the operations of the club, more incompetent than a board who wastes unlimited funds generated by the owner. Especially when we reflect on how those funds were used. I don't see how you can rationally compare the two. Arsenal aren't a big club anymore and the board are only doing with what they are given. The owner and board are two separate entities. Goodness sake look at Sunderland before they got relegated. 

If we are ranking board incompetence, it needs to be rationally compared to a club that is operated in the same way. 

Man City (2016 - Present)

Mahrez - 65 Million, Laporte - 65 Million, Mendy - 57 Million, Walker - 52 million, Ederson - 40 Million, Danilo - 30 Million, Bernardo Silva - 50 Million, Stones - 50 Million, Sane - 50 million, Jesus - 32 Million, Gundogan - 27 Million = 518 Million 

Chelsea (2016 - Present)

Kepa - 80 Million, Pulisic - 65 Million, Jorginho - 57 Million, Morata - 66 Million, Bakayoko - 40 Million, Drinkwater - 37 Million, Rudiger - 35 Million, Zappacosta - 25 Million, Emerson - 20 Million, Giroud - 17 Million, Barkley - 17 Million, Batshuayi - 40 Million, Kante - 35 Million, David Luiz - 35 Million, Marcos Alonso - 25 Million = 594 Million 

It's evident that we have an ambitious owner, but an incompetent board. Again, they are two separate entities. Those in bold are the examples of incompetence from our board. Spending over the means on bang average players. Matching no profile what so ever. 

 

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

41 minutes ago, Mana said:

Arsenal's board at least didn't do this to their best of their ability. Chelsea didn't either, but we have done more than what they had done in the past five years. Fact.

What are you on about? They brought in Lacazette, Aubameyang, Sokratis, and Torreira with money they generated as a club. They are looking extraordinarily better than they did last season. 

They cost the same as Morata, Drinkwater, Bakayoko, and Zappacosta combined. With funds generated by the owner. 

You measure incompetence by efficiency. And our board is far from effective. 

41 minutes ago, Mana said:

Lol. I don't know where to begin with this. Because they certainly are a big club, and they are bigger than us in terms of trophies, history and fanbase. Take your bias elsewhere.

Oh jog on with your moral high ground 

I specifically said anymore. Are Inter and Milan bigger than us? Porto? Benfica? Modern football has diminished their footprint and spending power and to reject that claim shows your delusion. 

41 minutes ago, Mana said:

 

it depends. But in Arsenal's board, Kroenke is part of the board as a director. And FFS, as I said time and time again, the board is full of Kroenke's yes men especially Keswick.

Why are you changing the shift from Arsenal v Chelsea, to Chelsea v City? We are not discussing who is a better board between us and City. It's clear who's doing better in that area.

Because you cant reasonably compare a board that has restricted funds to a board that has unlimited funds. How many times do I have to tell you?

 

41 minutes ago, Mana said:

But answer my question because you ignored it. Which board would you rather have? Arsenal's or ours?

If it's ours, let's end the discussion because then you agree with me that we are the second worse run board out of the top 6.

But how do you know Arsenal's board would perform worse if they were given unlimited funds? Oh that's right you don't. Because it's a logical fallacy. 

[Tomo 21,733]

19 minutes ago, MoroccanBlue said:

What are you on about? They brought in Lacazette, Aubameyang, Sokratis, and Torreira with money they generated as a club. They are looking extraordinarily better than they did last season. 

Are they? They look quite similar to me.

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

39 minutes ago, Mana said:

All of these signings (both sides) were done in the last 2 years. I thought we are talking about since Marina was at Chelsea? Or you are now changing the goalposts?

Also extraordinarily better? We are only 3 points behind them with all of that!

So you think bringing up the Rahman's, Pato's, Falcao's, Hector's, Djilobodji's, etc will strengthen your argument? I did you a favor

We are 3 points behind yet outspent Arsenal nearly 5x. Our spending is comparable to City yet we are almost 20 points behind. Now what does that say about how we are run? 

39 minutes ago, Mana said:

It's not ANYMORE. They still are. Just because they are not in the CL for 2 years doesn't mean their fanbase and brand recognition has declined. Look at United and Liverpool (especially the latter FFS). You're the one who's deluded here. Inter, Milan, Porto etc. were never bigger than Arsenal.

A joke run club can still be a massive club.

No. They are not. A player isn't going to prefer playing at Milan over City FFS

Modern football has completely shifted the market footprint of top clubs. The administration of both Inter and Milan both failed to adjust to the changes and Benfica and Porto don't bring in nearly enough ad revenue to compete against the other top leagues. The premier league in general. Arsenal are following the same path as Milan, but their board are identifying good players. That is the only difference. 

39 minutes ago, Mana said:

And how many times do I have to tell YOU that it's all about the ambition. It's not all about the fecking money. Kroenke CAN invest in to Arsenal. He's a board member AND the owner. 

39 minutes ago, Mana said:

And again, you avoided my question. If Arsenal had unlimited funds, I bet it's all going to the Rams.

Please watch the Sunderland till I die documentary then get back to me. 

The fact you think the board and owner share the same brain, speaks volumes. 

 

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

28 minutes ago, Tomo said:

Are they? They look quite similar to me.

https://twitter.com/sportingintel/status/1104825889458667520