The Kroenke Problem

Arsenal news and interviews
Discuss anything Arsenal related, players, tactics etc.

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:14 pm

jayramfootball wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:EK and Jayram, what are you guys on about? The cause of your dissatisfaction is controlled and was encouraged by the man you guys don’t seem to think is a problem.

EliteKiller wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Still a billionaire though and he has missed a massive opportunity to not only improve his portfolio but set us up to be one of the best clubs in the world.


Paid 500m for the club now worth 2,500m .... not sure what the massive missed opportunity was ... even with a Title and a CL or two the value of the club wouldn't be all that much higher



City and Chelsea were once irrelevant now look at where they are. How you can’t see the missed opportunity is beyond me. And even if that path is not your cup of tea, Liverpool’s path could have been achieved by us much earlier if the board and owner were more proactive. Again, how you can’t see the missed opportunity is beyond me.


EliteKiller wrote:- Chelsea have 3 European Trophies and 3 EPL titles in the last decade still worth less than us ... Spuds have won feck all in years and soon they will be worth the same as us ....


If we continue on our trajectory and with good management at Chelsea, they will eventually become worth more than us if they aren’t already. I won’t check but I bet Chelsea were nowhere near us in the past in terms of club value. In recent years they have closed that gap significantly all because their owner pumped massive amount of funds into their club.Heck, you even said yourself that Sp*rs will be worth the same as us soon so why not Chelsea. You’ve contradicted yourself here.

EliteKiller wrote:Spending Man City level billions to get bugger all additional financial return at Arsenal? ... apart from the ego boost why would a billionaire (or anyone else) do that?


Spending billions to get bugger all returns? Ask City shareholders what returns they believe they’ll be making in the future. They’ve set their club up to dominate England if not Europe for the long term and only incompetent management will prevent them from achieving that objective.

jayramfootball wrote:
Kroenke:
- bought the club and has invested hundred of millions in players

I don't think we ever had a 'Kroenke' problem. We had a Wenger problem and it ruined our club from top to bottom.


You realize you’re defending a man who doesn’t care enough about you or your club, right?


I am not defending Kroenke - I don't like the man.
I am defending the truth.
Kroenke has spent millions of his own money investing in the team and facilities.
Our decline is due to the idiot we had managing the team.

Absolutely this. I fail to see how people cannot see that. So Kroneke decided not to pump loads of his own money in, who cares. He didn't saddle us with debt like the Glazers did with their leveraged purchase of Man U. have we all forgotten the Man U protests ???

Wenger flopped the club, Wenger with a splash of Gazidis.
User avatar
theHotHead
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6229
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:18 pm

StLGooner wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
StLGooner wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
StLGooner wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
StLGooner wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
UFGN wrote:Jayram its funny you say you're not defending Kroenke and then you go and do just that


I guess if speaking the truth means defending an individual then so be it, but not the intent.
It's not really that difficult to grasp.



You don't know the truth though, nor does anyone on this forum.


Yeah, I do. It's all in the accounts. Kroenke has spent hundreds of millions on players.
We bought players like Xhaka for £40m, when for £10m less than that Spurs picked up Sissoko. That's not Kroenke's fault. That is piss poor management by the people, led by Wenger at the time, choosing players.
We are 3rd in the PL on net spend on players over the last 5 years and our wage bill is massive.

It's not reasonable to blame Kroenke for not providing the cash - he has.



Who's in charge of management? Do they just make their own rules and do as they please? Even a boss has a boss. There also have been times when we didn't have the money to get the right player, or a better player. So we were told, but again none of us know.

Again, to blame just one thing or one person is wrong. It's a collective failure.


Wait, are you saying it's Kroenke agreed to the funds Wenger was after to sign Xhaka?
I'd be more concerned if Kroenke was picking players. That was Wenger's job to lead on when he was at the club, unless you are suggesting otherwise?
Bottom line is that the money has been available and been spent, we just spent on too many shite players.

We're in a mess because of one man - Arsene Wenger.



No, how would i know what goes on behind the scenes? Nor do you. Kroenke is the owner, he's in charge of everything, even if he puts other people in charge of certain things, and they don't perform, then its his fault for putting them in charge. If he would pay more attention to this club instead of all his other shit, then he could have seen these so called people failing like you say. You're sitting here telling me that you're so smart enough to see that Wenger was to blame for EVERYTHING, but yet our own owner couldn't? Doesn't say too much about our owner does it? You're concentrating on the money issue too much and thinking that is the end all and be all of our problems, or arguing that it wasn't, when in fact it can and probably is a little bit of everything. Quit being so narrow minded, blaming just one person or issue is what a child does.


No, I am concentrating on a combination of the money - of which a lot has been spent - and the shite players we got for that money.
Our owner has invested heavily.
Wenger decided on the players he wanted - which is one of the reasons he was proven to be a shite manager.



So just going to ignore all them other points. Got it! :Peace:

At the end of the day, we also have a shit owner. Not hard to see.

How is he shit ? I can't stand the idiot but he has not obstructed the football people from doing their jobs and he has allowed them to spend the money the club earned. Where is this shitness ???
User avatar
theHotHead
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6229
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby LMAO » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:22 pm

Why is it such a black and white issue?

All three men—Kroenke, Gazidis, Wenger—are to blame, but that doesn't mean blame falls equally.

•Kroenke for not seeing our stagnation earlier, for not being proactive in firing Wenger (and should've fired Gazidis too) years before he finally did, and for not updating the club's structure into a modern one.
•Gazidis for being shit with our commercial deals, player contracts, and player incomings/outgoings.
•Wenger for being too stubborn to admit to himself that the game passed him by, player contracts, and player incomings/outgoings.
User avatar
LMAO
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6965
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:53 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:27 pm

StLGooner wrote:Jay, before he appointed those people I had already made up my mind he was shit. Now he appointed new people, if they do well, then maybe I'll change my mind. They haven't done well yet. Is that hard to understand? Can you at least get that simple part?


Yes, I gave you one big reason. He's shit because he isn't running our club well. Can you understand that? We are falling behind? We are out of the top 4 and not able to sign elite players. Do you understand that part?

Here lets start with a simple question

Is Stan Kroneke the owner of Arsenal football club?

Are you smart enough to understand that question?

I will then ask one question at a time, so as not to confuse you. I apologize, I thought maybe you were an adult and could have an adult conversation, now I know that you're just a child, I will speak to you accordingly. My bad bro!

I'm going to put an alternate argument forward. If I buy a company of which I know nothing about and I employ a CEO or whatever the hell Gazidis was to oversee the company because I had neither the time or the knowledge to do so myself and I employed a manager to deal with footballing matters, my "job" at the club is not as job at all, I am the main that signs the cheques. Kroenke is NOT running the club, he just owns it. Other people are running the club. I think there is a clear case to say owning a business and running a business are not necessarily the same thing.
User avatar
theHotHead
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6229
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby theHotHead » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:32 pm

CrimsonGunner11 wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:Kroenke became a Board member around 2008 and was the majority shareholder from 2011.

All the crap that happened with Vieira and Cole and Henry happened before Kroenke had control. Selling off Hleb, Flamini, Ade, Toure happened before he was the main shareholder. From 2004 – 2010 were the worst years of under investment and losing key players. Look it up.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-arse ... /verein/11

In those years we’d barely spend £40m on transfer fees. The signings were cheap and sparse. We had one year where we sold Ade and Toure to City but only brought in Vermaelen! We had 7 seasons of under investment before Kroenke became the main shareholder. This hasn’t all happened under his watch. The previous Board members should also be held accountable because those were our worst years in terms of investment.


Can anyone explain the above?


That’s a separate discussion. Decision making at board level was a problem then. It’s still a problem now. This doesn’t change the fact that the people running the club are ultimately to blame for where the club is at today. Kroenke has been with us for about 12 years, 9 of which he was majority owner. He’s a billionaire and has been the majority owner for nearly a decade but yet we don’t seem to be doing well under his watch. In fact it seems we’re doing worse. Kroenke could have disassociated himself from the traditional way of thinking if he wished but chose not to. No one else to blame but himself for his own wrongdoings.

How is it a separate discussion, it is EXACTLY the discussion. You claimed Kroenke didn't do this and that, but proof has been provided that, in fact, Kroenke has sanctioned or allowed purchases of much more expensive players since he took majority ownership. But somehow the reason we have n unbalanced and physically weak squad is Kroenke's fault. Perhaps Kroenke should be chief scout and head coach, so he can ensure the right players are bought and so he can teach the players to defend.

thats where we have been going wrong all this time. Kroneke should in fact be Player owner.
User avatar
theHotHead
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6229
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby BrunelGooner » Wed Jun 12, 2019 8:46 pm

Power n Glory wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:Kroenke became a Board member around 2008 and was the majority shareholder from 2011.

All the crap that happened with Vieira and Cole and Henry happened before Kroenke had control. Selling off Hleb, Flamini, Ade, Toure happened before he was the main shareholder. From 2004 – 2010 were the worst years of under investment and losing key players. Look it up.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-arse ... /verein/11

In those years we’d barely spend £40m on transfer fees. The signings were cheap and sparse. We had one year where we sold Ade and Toure to City but only brought in Vermaelen! We had 7 seasons of under investment before Kroenke became the main shareholder. This hasn’t all happened under his watch. The previous Board members should also be held accountable because those were our worst years in terms of investment.


Can anyone explain the above?


That’s a separate discussion. Decision making at board level was a problem then. It’s still a problem now. This doesn’t change the fact that the people running the club are ultimately to blame for where the club is at today. Kroenke has been with us for about 12 years, 9 of which he was majority owner. He’s a billionaire and has been the majority owner for nearly a decade but yet we don’t seem to be doing well under his watch. In fact it seems we’re doing worse. Kroenke could have disassociated himself from the traditional way of thinking if he wished but chose not to. No one else to blame but himself for his own wrongdoings.


How is now a separate discussion when you've argued the following.....

I’ve not said anywhere in my post that Wenger is absolved of all blame but maybe if he was not so financially strapped during a difficult period, maybe he would have handled things differently and better. I pointed out Wenger’s successes in my post for a reason because it highlights what he’s capable of. You’ve mentioned the duds Wenger has signed but you ignore the brilliant players he’s given us. You talk about fitness issues but you ignore how Wenger changed the diet and fitness of players who looked hopeless in this regard. You say Wenger sold players at the wrong time but you ignore the point that maybe he didn’t have a choice. Despite how Wenger left the club, I know one thing and it’s that my respect for the man and what he has given this club knows no bounds.


And should have better supported a manager (who delivered the invincibles, delivered CL football for 2 decades, has won many domestic trophies, has an attractive football philosophy, is well respected by countless players, and speaks multiple languages) during a time when shareholder financing was out of control and the stadium debt was still being paid off


As said, Stan took over in 2011 and we had 7 seasons of under investment before he arrived. Wenger was able to invest in better quality players (Ozil, Sanchez, Cech, Lacazette, Auba) and not have to sell key players and had the backing of the owners to break the wage barrier to hold on to key players. We invested restructured the club around him so he had better fitness coaches and equipment to help manage the constant injuries, better negotiators to deal with contracts, you name it. But we saw the same sort of results. Stans error was not firing Wenger much sooner identifying the source of the problem.

Also, you keep missing a key point. We're in a situation where FFP rules restrict us from increasing the wage bill by a massive amount, raking up debt and spending money that's not generated from club revenue. I've yet to see anyone delve into that and explain how we get around it.


Excellent post. Well put.
BrunelGooner
Nigel Winterburn
Nigel Winterburn
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:54 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby jayramfootball » Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:54 pm

theHotHead wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:Kroenke became a Board member around 2008 and was the majority shareholder from 2011.

All the crap that happened with Vieira and Cole and Henry happened before Kroenke had control. Selling off Hleb, Flamini, Ade, Toure happened before he was the main shareholder. From 2004 – 2010 were the worst years of under investment and losing key players. Look it up.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-arse ... /verein/11

In those years we’d barely spend £40m on transfer fees. The signings were cheap and sparse. We had one year where we sold Ade and Toure to City but only brought in Vermaelen! We had 7 seasons of under investment before Kroenke became the main shareholder. This hasn’t all happened under his watch. The previous Board members should also be held accountable because those were our worst years in terms of investment.


Can anyone explain the above?


That’s a separate discussion. Decision making at board level was a problem then. It’s still a problem now. This doesn’t change the fact that the people running the club are ultimately to blame for where the club is at today. Kroenke has been with us for about 12 years, 9 of which he was majority owner. He’s a billionaire and has been the majority owner for nearly a decade but yet we don’t seem to be doing well under his watch. In fact it seems we’re doing worse. Kroenke could have disassociated himself from the traditional way of thinking if he wished but chose not to. No one else to blame but himself for his own wrongdoings.

How is it a separate discussion, it is EXACTLY the discussion. You claimed Kroenke didn't do this and that, but proof has been provided that, in fact, Kroenke has sanctioned or allowed purchases of much more expensive players since he took majority ownership. But somehow the reason we have n unbalanced and physically weak squad is Kroenke's fault. Perhaps Kroenke should be chief scout and head coach, so he can ensure the right players are bought and so he can teach the players to defend.

thats where we have been going wrong all this time. Kroneke should in fact be Player owner.


I suspect that those who put Wenger before club, believing him to be some kind of God, when in fact he was an awful football manager, are looking for some other reason (and scapegoat) so as not to have to come to terms with the fact that they were wrong about Wenger.

So Kroenke takes the blame, regardless of reality.
We've got our Arsenal back
User avatar
jayramfootball
Tony Adams
Tony Adams
 
Posts: 2511
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:58 pm
Location: Midlands UK

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby CrimsonGunner11 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:05 am

Power n Glory wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:Kroenke became a Board member around 2008 and was the majority shareholder from 2011.

All the crap that happened with Vieira and Cole and Henry happened before Kroenke had control. Selling off Hleb, Flamini, Ade, Toure happened before he was the main shareholder. From 2004 – 2010 were the worst years of under investment and losing key players. Look it up.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-arse ... /verein/11

In those years we’d barely spend £40m on transfer fees. The signings were cheap and sparse. We had one year where we sold Ade and Toure to City but only brought in Vermaelen! We had 7 seasons of under investment before Kroenke became the main shareholder. This hasn’t all happened under his watch. The previous Board members should also be held accountable because those were our worst years in terms of investment.


Can anyone explain the above?


That’s a separate discussion. Decision making at board level was a problem then. It’s still a problem now. This doesn’t change the fact that the people running the club are ultimately to blame for where the club is at today. Kroenke has been with us for about 12 years, 9 of which he was majority owner. He’s a billionaire and has been the majority owner for nearly a decade but yet we don’t seem to be doing well under his watch. In fact it seems we’re doing worse. Kroenke could have disassociated himself from the traditional way of thinking if he wished but chose not to. No one else to blame but himself for his own wrongdoings.


How is now a separate discussion when you've argued the following.....

I’ve not said anywhere in my post that Wenger is absolved of all blame but maybe if he was not so financially strapped during a difficult period, maybe he would have handled things differently and better. I pointed out Wenger’s successes in my post for a reason because it highlights what he’s capable of. You’ve mentioned the duds Wenger has signed but you ignore the brilliant players he’s given us. You talk about fitness issues but you ignore how Wenger changed the diet and fitness of players who looked hopeless in this regard. You say Wenger sold players at the wrong time but you ignore the point that maybe he didn’t have a choice. Despite how Wenger left the club, I know one thing and it’s that my respect for the man and what he has given this club knows no bounds.


And should have better supported a manager (who delivered the invincibles, delivered CL football for 2 decades, has won many domestic trophies, has an attractive football philosophy, is well respected by countless players, and speaks multiple languages) during a time when shareholder financing was out of control and the stadium debt was still being paid off


As said, Stan took over in 2011 and we had 7 seasons of under investment before he arrived. Wenger was able to invest in better quality players (Ozil, Sanchez, Cech, Lacazette, Auba) and not have to sell key players and had the backing of the owners to break the wage barrier to hold on to key players. We invested restructured the club around him so he had better fitness coaches and equipment to help manage the constant injuries, better negotiators to deal with contracts, you name it. But we saw the same sort of results. Stans error was not firing Wenger much sooner identifying the source of the problem.

Also, you keep missing a key point. We're in a situation where FFP rules restrict us from increasing the wage bill by a massive amount, raking up debt and spending money that's not generated from club revenue. I've yet to see anyone delve into that and explain how we get around it.


I don’t know what you’re trying to get out of me. I’m not a businessman. I’m just an Arsenal fan that posts on an Arsenal forum. I only know what I see and I see that we’ve been heading backwards under Kroenke‘s watch. I see that Kroenke doesn’t value us as much as his other assets. I see that he has not put a cent into the club since taking over. I see that he signed off on Wenger staying longer than he should have. Yet people are arguing with me that they don’t see Kroenke as a problem. I won’t always get my facts right because I don’t work at the club and I’m not some business genius but I can tell you that I can only trust what is presented to me and what I believe is accurate.

But to get back to your post:

Why are we still using the self-sustaining model under Kroenke for one? There have been a few seasons under Kroenke where a couple more funds could have been helpful and FFP does not completely eliminate shareholder financing as far as I know. Secondly, we saw some improvement initially with Wenger not the same results. Once Wenger could spend more money, we saw 3 fa cups, 3 community shields, a League Cup final, a Europa League final and a 2nd place League finish in 5 seasons. Is it not reasonable to think that Wenger could have achieved more with more funds? Finally you said Kroenke’s error was not firing Wenger sooner a point I’ve already made and made clear that he should be faulted for if you can’t fault him for putting his money into the club. Yet I have people trying to tell me that Kroenke’s not a problem. Again I can only talk about what I’ve seen and from what I know of Kroenke so far, he’s a problem.

Wrt FFP, again I’m not some genius who knows how the rules work. All I know is that FFP has been circumnavigated before and I’m sure it can be circumnavigated again. Only those who genuinely care about their club’s success would know how to do so and from what I’ve seen Kroenke is one of the few people at the club who doesn’t care enough. Reason enough to say he’s a problem.

theHotHead wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:Kroenke became a Board member around 2008 and was the majority shareholder from 2011.

All the crap that happened with Vieira and Cole and Henry happened before Kroenke had control. Selling off Hleb, Flamini, Ade, Toure happened before he was the main shareholder. From 2004 – 2010 were the worst years of under investment and losing key players. Look it up.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-arse ... /verein/11

In those years we’d barely spend £40m on transfer fees. The signings were cheap and sparse. We had one year where we sold Ade and Toure to City but only brought in Vermaelen! We had 7 seasons of under investment before Kroenke became the main shareholder. This hasn’t all happened under his watch. The previous Board members should also be held accountable because those were our worst years in terms of investment.


Can anyone explain the above?


That’s a separate discussion. Decision making at board level was a problem then. It’s still a problem now. This doesn’t change the fact that the people running the club are ultimately to blame for where the club is at today. Kroenke has been with us for about 12 years, 9 of which he was majority owner. He’s a billionaire and has been the majority owner for nearly a decade but yet we don’t seem to be doing well under his watch. In fact it seems we’re doing worse. Kroenke could have disassociated himself from the traditional way of thinking if he wished but chose not to. No one else to blame but himself for his own wrongdoings.

How is it a separate discussion, it is EXACTLY the discussion. You claimed Kroenke didn't do this and that, but proof has been provided that, in fact, Kroenke has sanctioned or allowed purchases of much more expensive players since he took majority ownership. But somehow the reason we have n unbalanced and physically weak squad is Kroenke's fault. Perhaps Kroenke should be chief scout and head coach, so he can ensure the right players are bought and so he can teach the players to defend.

thats where we have been going wrong all this time. Kroneke should in fact be Player owner.


It’s a separate discussion because the thread is about Kroenke not the ownership before he arrived. Sorry if I said something inaccurate about Kroenke but the main point remains the same and that is that Kroenke’s a problem, at least from my perspective. I have not seen a legitimate argument yet that proves otherwise.

And, again, I have not once blamed Kroenke for how the players perform. I’m not sure how many times I have to say that Wenger should not be absolved of blame.


theHotHead wrote:
jayramfootball wrote:
I am not defending Kroenke - I don't like the man.
I am defending the truth.
Kroenke has spent millions of his own money investing in the team and facilities.
Our decline is due to the idiot we had managing the team.

Absolutely this. I fail to see how people cannot see that. So Kroneke decided not to pump loads of his own money in, who cares. He didn't saddle us with debt like the Glazers did with their leveraged purchase of Man U. have we all forgotten the Man U protests ???

Wenger flopped the club, Wenger with a splash of Gazidis.


You should care that he’s not doing whatever it takes to make your club the best club on the planet.


jayramfootball wrote:
theHotHead wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:
Power n Glory wrote:Kroenke became a Board member around 2008 and was the majority shareholder from 2011.

All the crap that happened with Vieira and Cole and Henry happened before Kroenke had control. Selling off Hleb, Flamini, Ade, Toure happened before he was the main shareholder. From 2004 – 2010 were the worst years of under investment and losing key players. Look it up.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-arse ... /verein/11

In those years we’d barely spend £40m on transfer fees. The signings were cheap and sparse. We had one year where we sold Ade and Toure to City but only brought in Vermaelen! We had 7 seasons of under investment before Kroenke became the main shareholder. This hasn’t all happened under his watch. The previous Board members should also be held accountable because those were our worst years in terms of investment.


Can anyone explain the above?


That’s a separate discussion. Decision making at board level was a problem then. It’s still a problem now. This doesn’t change the fact that the people running the club are ultimately to blame for where the club is at today. Kroenke has been with us for about 12 years, 9 of which he was majority owner. He’s a billionaire and has been the majority owner for nearly a decade but yet we don’t seem to be doing well under his watch. In fact it seems we’re doing worse. Kroenke could have disassociated himself from the traditional way of thinking if he wished but chose not to. No one else to blame but himself for his own wrongdoings.

How is it a separate discussion, it is EXACTLY the discussion. You claimed Kroenke didn't do this and that, but proof has been provided that, in fact, Kroenke has sanctioned or allowed purchases of much more expensive players since he took majority ownership. But somehow the reason we have n unbalanced and physically weak squad is Kroenke's fault. Perhaps Kroenke should be chief scout and head coach, so he can ensure the right players are bought and so he can teach the players to defend.

thats where we have been going wrong all this time. Kroneke should in fact be Player owner.


I suspect that those who put Wenger before club, believing him to be some kind of God, when in fact he was an awful football manager, are looking for some other reason (and scapegoat) so as not to have to come to terms with the fact that they were wrong about Wenger.

So Kroenke takes the blame, regardless of reality.


An awful football manager doesn’t win the PL at least three times, doesn’t win the FA cup at least 7 times, doesn’t win manager of the season at least three times, doesn’t win manager of the month at least 15 times, doesn’t win world manager of the year at least once.
Leno
(Martinez/Macey)
Bellerin Saliba Sokratis Tierney
(Niles/Osei-Tutu) (Mustafi/Dinos) (Holding/Medley) (Kolasinac/Bola)
Xhaka(c)
(Luiz?/Chambers)
Guendouzi --- Ceballos
(Torreira/Elneny) --- (Ozil/Willock)
Pepe -------------------- Auba
(ESR/Mkhi) -------------------- (Nelson/Saka)
Lacazette
(Martinelli/Nketiah)


Last Updated: 9/19/19
User avatar
CrimsonGunner11
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 18034
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:14 pm
Location: The Peach State

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby EliteKiller » Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:57 am

CrimsonGunner11 wrote:An awful football manager doesn’t win the PL at least three times, doesn’t win the FA cup at least 7 times, doesn’t win manager of the season at least three times, doesn’t win manager of the month at least 15 times, doesn’t win world manager of the year at least once.


You make a very good point -

Arsene Wenger 1996-2006 was unquestionably a great manager - EPL x 3 - FA Cup x 4 - CL Final

but

Arsene Wenger 2007 to 2012 well OK but hardly stellar - EPL always top four - FA Cup none - CL QF x 2 SF x 1

Arsene Wenger 2013 - 2018 all going a bit wrong - EPL dropped out of the top four - FA Cups x 3 - dropped out of the CL into the EL

So from being a great manager, no question about that, he became first average and then frankly rather poor ...

There's no shame in being set in your ways, old age catches up with all of us in the end ... but this is the Kroenke thread so what does it mean -

Kroenke inherited a great manager, he made the mistake (in hindsight) of giving that manager far to much power, he probably should have replaced him in 2012 or '14 or '15 but loyalty, and FA Cup runs stopped that happening ...

Finally Kroenke stepped in and got rid of what was by then clearly a sadly out of touch failing manager ... he did what an owner needed to do.

How those last five years of club management failure both off and on the pitch is all Kroenke's fault I'm just not sure ... yes he could have put more money in, but remember he did allow 830m of club funds to get used in the last five years of Wonger's tenure, that's more than any other club outside of Manchester. Yes he could have sacked Wonger earlier but with 50% of the fan base still kissing Wonger's arse that was always going to be difficult ...

So your point about Wonger's great first ten years is valid, but equally valid is in the end Kroenkle sacking him couldn't have come to soon ...
EliteKiller
Tony Adams
Tony Adams
 
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:48 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby CrimsonGunner11 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:45 am

EliteKiller wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:An awful football manager doesn’t win the PL at least three times, doesn’t win the FA cup at least 7 times, doesn’t win manager of the season at least three times, doesn’t win manager of the month at least 15 times, doesn’t win world manager of the year at least once.


You make a very good point -

Arsene Wenger 1996-2006 was unquestionably a great manager - EPL x 3 - FA Cup x 4 - CL Final

but

Arsene Wenger 2007 to 2012 well OK but hardly stellar - EPL always top four - FA Cup none - CL QF x 2 SF x 1

Arsene Wenger 2013 - 2018 all going a bit wrong - EPL dropped out of the top four - FA Cups x 3 - dropped out of the CL into the EL

So from being a great manager, no question about that, he became first average and then frankly rather poor ...

There's no shame in being set in your ways, old age catches up with all of us in the end ... but this is the Kroenke thread so what does it mean -

Kroenke inherited a great manager, he made the mistake (in hindsight) of giving that manager far to much power, he probably should have replaced him in 2012 or '14 or '15 but loyalty, and FA Cup runs stopped that happening ...

Finally Kroenke stepped in and got rid of what was by then clearly a sadly out of touch failing manager ... he did what an owner needed to do.

How those last five years of club management failure both off and on the pitch is all Kroenke's fault I'm just not sure ... yes he could have put more money in, but remember he did allow 830m of club funds to get used in the last five years of Wonger's tenure, that's more than any other club outside of Manchester.


and we had at least 3 FA Cups to show for it. In addition to this 3 community shields, a League Cup final, a Europa League final, and a 2nd place League finish as mentioned earlier. Could Wenger have done more? Yes, but the way people go on about how bad a manager he is, he easily could have done worse. Again, I'm not saying Wenger should be absolved of blame because he has made some very questionable decisions but, realistically, achieving more than he did was always going to be difficult.

EliteKiller wrote:Yes he could have sacked Wonger earlier but with 50% of the fan base still kissing Wonger's arse that was always going to be difficult ...

So your point about Wonger's great first ten years is valid, but equally valid is in the end Kroenkle sacking him couldn't have come to soon ...



Why could Kroenke sacking Wenger not have happened sooner? Most on here wanted Wenger gone before he actually left. But still, even if the majority of Arsenal fans did not want Wenger gone, the final decision rests with Kroenke. He needs to know what's best for his investment and the fact that it took him too long to make a decision that a good portion of the fan base knew was right is cause for concern. I mean the Wenger out signs appearing in the stadium should have clued him in about the situation at the club and I guarantee that were he living in the country instead of doing whatever he does overseas, he would not have delayed his decision.
Leno
(Martinez/Macey)
Bellerin Saliba Sokratis Tierney
(Niles/Osei-Tutu) (Mustafi/Dinos) (Holding/Medley) (Kolasinac/Bola)
Xhaka(c)
(Luiz?/Chambers)
Guendouzi --- Ceballos
(Torreira/Elneny) --- (Ozil/Willock)
Pepe -------------------- Auba
(ESR/Mkhi) -------------------- (Nelson/Saka)
Lacazette
(Martinelli/Nketiah)


Last Updated: 9/19/19
User avatar
CrimsonGunner11
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 18034
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:14 pm
Location: The Peach State

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby EliteKiller » Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:10 am

CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Why could Kroenke sacking Wenger not have happened sooner? Most on here wanted Wenger gone before he actually left. But still, even if the majority of Arsenal fans did not want Wenger gone, the final decision rests with Kroenke. He needs to know what's best for his investment and the fact that it took him too long to make a decision that a good portion of the fan base knew was right is cause for concern. I mean the Wenger out signs appearing in the stadium should have clued him in about the situation at the club and I guarantee that were he living in the country instead of doing whatever he does overseas, he would not have delayed his decision.


I wholeheartedly agree with you ... I was very much Wonger out from around 2013 when top four became the 'target' and the embarrassing European hammerings began ... but I can show you a stack of coverage by pundits, other managers, players and journalists galore who all went to bat for "the greatest manager of the decade" .... sure the Wonger out signs had begun but back then it was still a tiny minority ...

Would being in the UK have made a difference? maybe ... but as not many EPL owners are in the UK there's little evidence to support that ...

Kroenke is an absent owner, of that there's no doubt, but who knows if him coming and making all the decisions would be any better? A billionaire Yank hands on running a soccer club? just how fecked might we be then?
EliteKiller
Tony Adams
Tony Adams
 
Posts: 3598
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 11:48 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby theHotHead » Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:30 am

Crimson your post stating the club as going backwards under Kroenke is a massive oversimplification. Lets look at how the football landscape changed under Wenger.

When Wenger joined the main clubs always challenging were Leeds, Man U and Liverpool. Then our main rivals became Liverpool, Man U and Chelsea. It was these 4 clubs for a while, Arsenal had a wage bill in the top 3 at this time.

Kroenke had a large stake in Arsenal but not full ownership, in 2011 he made the step to become majority owner.Then Man City made it a top 5. At this time Premier League TV deals were becoming mega. In 2013 Man U lost Fergie, Liverpool seemed to be in permanent transistion under various managers as were Chelsea.

In 2010/11 Arsenal spent £20.7m on players, after Kroenke became majority owner we spent £58.9m in 2011/12, £50.4m in 2012/13 and £44.3m in 2013/14 and £107m in 2014/15. At this point Spurs have become a real competitor, it is a top 6, another bumper TV deal has come into play and the landscape of football has changed yet again.

So like I said, you oversimplify your analysis that we have gone backwards under Kroenke, that is not Kroenke's fault. We are investing far more now in wages and player transfers and we have actually won some silverware. But more clubs are competitive and more clubs have the financial clout of that of Arsenal and for some, considerably more.
User avatar
theHotHead
Dennis Bergkamp
Dennis Bergkamp
 
Posts: 6229
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:44 am
Location: Norf Landon

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Power n Glory » Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:41 am

After 2005 Wenger stopped treating the FA Cup like a top tier competition @Crimson. You remember the 'Top 4 is like winning a trophy' quote from Wenger of course so looking at the money we spent and correlating it to money is misplaced. Objectives changed because of the amount of noise the fans were making about the lack of silverware, FA Cup being one of them and it was no longer acceptable to field a weakened team and get knocked out to the likes of Blackburn, Stoke and Sunderland or decide to bench our new signing on a hot streak when we've drawn Utd.

You've also contradicted yourself by saying we have gotten worse under Kroenke but then go on to admit we did better once Wenger had more money to spend. Which is it?

Also, bear in mind, after Wenger had more money to spend and had been able to retain players and boost wages, we still failed to win the title when it was between us, Spurs and Leicester City. I don't agree with this idea that he needed more support financially. When you still lose out to clubs that are way behind us on talent, finances, infrastructure, name it, it shouldn't take another £100m to pip them in a title race. That's financially doping and would have shown it was money that got us the title and not the manager. A lot of fans and the Board included are/were delusional about Wenger's capabilities as manager.

Maybe if Wenger had unlimited funds and was given even longer to build a team he would eventually win a title. But all credit for that sort of feat goes to the club/ownership and players. I'm sure if Ranieri had stayed with Chelses for much longer he would have eventually won a title if Abramovich allowed it. Same goes for Hughes at City. There is a reason why most on here don't rate the less popular managers with titles at PSG, Barca, Real and Bayern that highly. Heck, Wenger would constantly rant against financial doping. He was against it and even made a blunder when he said he sometimes had to calm Gazidis down when he was hyping up our transfer intentions. He wasn't the type of manager to spend his way out of trouble because deep down he knew it would have been the money talking and not his own skill. Wenger was also deluded when it came to his own assessment.
User avatar
Power n Glory
Poster Of The Month
Poster Of The Month
 
Posts: 1939
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:02 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby Phil71 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:09 am

We've never had owners who contribute their own money into the club's coffers.

As others have said, what we need is for the money we make to be spent wisely. Not frittered away on failed youth experiments and useless buys.
User avatar
Phil71
David Rocastle
David Rocastle
 
Posts: 4070
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:04 pm

Re: The Kroenke Problem

Postby CrimsonGunner11 » Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:23 pm

Power n Glory wrote:After 2005 Wenger stopped treating the FA Cup like a top tier competition @Crimson. You remember the 'Top 4 is like winning a trophy' quote from Wenger of course so looking at the money we spent and correlating it to money is misplaced. Objectives changed because of the amount of noise the fans were making about the lack of silverware, FA Cup being one of them and it was no longer acceptable to field a weakened team and get knocked out to the likes of Blackburn, Stoke and Sunderland or decide to bench our new signing on a hot streak when we've drawn Utd.

You've also contradicted yourself by saying we have gotten worse under Kroenke but then go on to admit we did better once Wenger had more money to spend. Which is it?


Getting better in one area is not directly related to heading backwards in a specialized sense.

1. My comment about seeing improvement was wrt your comment about seeing the same results. We saw improvement in that Wenger was delivering results on the pitch that he was not doing for some time.

2. It was clearly a subjective statement when I said it looks like we were heading backwards. I want Arsenal to win the PL and CL but it felt like we were moving further away from that objective in general. The reason will differ from person to person but seeing a repeat of poor money management and decision making from the past is one. Seeing no urgency to reach that objective is another. Not to mention, fans just growing more unified with their displeasure is a good indicator of what I’m talking about.

Power n Glory wrote:Also, bear in mind, after Wenger had more money to spend and had been able to retain players and boost wages, we still failed to win the title when it was between us, Spurs and Leicester City. I don't agree with this idea that he needed more support financially. When you still lose out to clubs that are way behind us on talent, finances, infrastructure, name it, it shouldn't take another £100m to pip them in a title race. That's financially doping and would have shown it was money that got us the title and not the manager. A lot of fans and the Board included are/were delusional about Wenger's capabilities as manager.

Maybe if Wenger had unlimited funds and was given even longer to build a team he would eventually win a title. But all credit for that sort of feat goes to the club/ownership and players. I'm sure if Ranieri had stayed with Chelses for much longer he would have eventually won a title if Abramovich allowed it. Same goes for Hughes at City. There is a reason why most on here don't rate the less popular managers with titles at PSG, Barca, Real and Bayern that highly. Heck, Wenger would constantly rant against financial doping. He was against it and even made a blunder when he said he sometimes had to calm Gazidis down when he was hyping up our transfer intentions. He wasn't the type of manager to spend his way out of trouble because deep down he knew it would have been the money talking and not his own skill. Wenger was also deluded when it came to his own assessment.


Wenger needed to go for his own failing you won’t get any complaints from me there. My issue is with the ownership and if they’re doing what’s needed to provide what’s best for Arsenal. It doesn’t have to be an extra 100 mil to buy players but a similar gesture wouldn’t go unnoticed. A simple change to outdated policies would have been nice. Prioritizing the club over other assets would be appreciated. A modicum of ambition would be welcomed. I do not get the feeling with the ownership that they’re serious about the club achieving the highest honors.

theHotHead wrote:Crimson your post stating the club as going backwards under Kroenke is a massive oversimplification. Lets look at how the football landscape changed under Wenger.

When Wenger joined the main clubs always challenging were Leeds, Man U and Liverpool. Then our main rivals became Liverpool, Man U and Chelsea. It was these 4 clubs for a while, Arsenal had a wage bill in the top 3 at this time.

Kroenke had a large stake in Arsenal but not full ownership, in 2011 he made the step to become majority owner.Then Man City made it a top 5. At this time Premier League TV deals were becoming mega. In 2013 Man U lost Fergie, Liverpool seemed to be in permanent transistion under various managers as were Chelsea.

In 2010/11 Arsenal spent £20.7m on players, after Kroenke became majority owner we spent £58.9m in 2011/12, £50.4m in 2012/13 and £44.3m in 2013/14 and £107m in 2014/15. At this point Spurs have become a real competitor, it is a top 6, another bumper TV deal has come into play and the landscape of football has changed yet again.

So like I said, you oversimplify your analysis that we have gone backwards under Kroenke, that is not Kroenke's fault. We are investing far more now in wages and player transfers and we have actually won some silverware. But more clubs are competitive and more clubs have the financial clout of that of Arsenal and for some, considerably more.


Even if that’s the case, that’s just picking out one issue to debate over. I want what’s best for Arsenal and I want the ownership to not only want the same but to be capable of delivering that to the utmost of his abilities. One of the reasons we are where we are now is because we are not the priority and that is unacceptable.

EliteKiller wrote:
CrimsonGunner11 wrote:Why could Kroenke sacking Wenger not have happened sooner? Most on here wanted Wenger gone before he actually left. But still, even if the majority of Arsenal fans did not want Wenger gone, the final decision rests with Kroenke. He needs to know what's best for his investment and the fact that it took him too long to make a decision that a good portion of the fan base knew was right is cause for concern. I mean the Wenger out signs appearing in the stadium should have clued him in about the situation at the club and I guarantee that were he living in the country instead of doing whatever he does overseas, he would not have delayed his decision.


I wholeheartedly agree with you ... I was very much Wonger out from around 2013 when top four became the 'target' and the embarrassing European hammerings began ... but I can show you a stack of coverage by pundits, other managers, players and journalists galore who all went to bat for "the greatest manager of the decade" .... sure the Wonger out signs had begun but back then it was still a tiny minority ...

Would being in the UK have made a difference? maybe ... but as not many EPL owners are in the UK there's little evidence to support that ...

Kroenke is an absent owner, of that there's no doubt, but who knows if him coming and making all the decisions would be any better? A billionaire Yank hands on running a soccer club? just how fecked might we be then?


Living in England might not have changed anything but he needs to be more involved with the club's affairs is what I was hinting at because doing so would enable him to make better decisions for the club. All of what is happening now could have been prevented by Kroenke and if nothing changes in this regard, we should not be surprised if we see more costly decisions in the future.
Leno
(Martinez/Macey)
Bellerin Saliba Sokratis Tierney
(Niles/Osei-Tutu) (Mustafi/Dinos) (Holding/Medley) (Kolasinac/Bola)
Xhaka(c)
(Luiz?/Chambers)
Guendouzi --- Ceballos
(Torreira/Elneny) --- (Ozil/Willock)
Pepe -------------------- Auba
(ESR/Mkhi) -------------------- (Nelson/Saka)
Lacazette
(Martinelli/Nketiah)


Last Updated: 9/19/19
User avatar
CrimsonGunner11
SE13
SE13
 
Posts: 18034
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:14 pm
Location: The Peach State

PreviousNext

Return to Arsenal Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Semrush [Bot], Sims and 5 guests