Arsenal do not have money to compete anymore!

[tufnelltoughie]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/42916936

According to Wonkey, money is destroying competition in football. Hence Arsenal cannot compete with Citech et al.

A bit rich considering Arsenal have circa £200 mill in the bank.

Excuses, excuses.

What say you guys?

[Santi]

you sound like the daily star

[Ach]

He's right but I have no problem with clubs spending their own money made through years of success and hard work

Chelsea, city, PSG, Barca are disgusting though

[tufnelltoughie]

Well maybe so but Leicester were not mega rich but still won the Prem, so it makes Wonkey look bit naff.

[Ach]

Leicester had a good manager. Good managers are ruining the game

[tufnelltoughie]

Leicester had a good manager. Good managers are ruining the game

LOL

[Arsenal Tone]

Leicester had a good manager. Good managers are ruining the game

[tufnelltoughie]

Leicester had a good manager. Good managers are ruining the game

Not to mention the bad managers.

Step forward Mr. W

[Arsene Nose]

Leicester fluked it. Every 100 years you'll get one of those. The exception doesn't make it the rule.

[UFGN]

Fans should crack a book and read a little football history. The here and now is different only because there are more zeros on the cheques nowadays

But there are also more zeros being earned.

When our greatest ever manager, Herbert Chapman, took over the club and revolutionised football he did so with a healthy budget, but not a huge one. He used to sign players on the cheap by getting his opposition manager drunk during transfer negotiations. He'd slip the waiter a few quid to make sure his own drinks contained no alcohol, while the Oppo would be getting hammered on doubles.

He had to defeat much bigger and richer clubs to achieve what he did.

Then you have the legendary George Graham. A legend on the pitch, he was given the job despite having limited managerial experience. Did he spend a lot? Well yes actually, quite a lot but not as much as some of our competitors. He signed David Seaman for £1.8M at a time when a match ticket cost about £14 iirc, and there was hardly any TV money in the sport.

He won the league twice against the all powerful Liverpool. If any of his players had been caught celebrating finishing fourth they'd have been fined on the spot and sent training with the reserves.

At every turn, to achieve success our club has had to take on bigger and more powerful rivals. Throughout the decades that has included Huddersfield Town, Leeds, Nottingham Forrest, Liverpool and Manchester United.

Now we have Chelsea and City.

The only difference now is that we have a manager who hasn't got the stomach for a fight and some fans who are only too keen to feast on his regurgitated cowardice.

[Sims]

i wouldnt be surprised if we spent net ~£120-150m in the summer

[theHotHead]

UFGN, spot on. Throughout history there is a regular theme that shows for the most part the richest clubs win the most, but that other clubs are still able to compete during those periods - and win!! Its bollox to say the richest clubs always win. Before PSG got their riches Lyon dominated France but they were not rhe richest.

When the Thai guy bought Man City and they started spending big millions City win f**k all. It was only when they brought in good managers that they started to win (Mancini, Pellegrini).

You can't win anything substantial with a dumbass for a manager. Arsenal are proof that you can compete with a good manager against richer clubs (Man U and Liverpool during Graham's era)

Its excuses to hide behind his failure to be competitive throughout a league season

[Dejan]

i wouldnt be surprised if we spent net ~£120-150m in the summer

Dont be naive

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G920F met Tapatalk

[Ach]

i wouldnt be surprised if we spent net ~£120-150m in the summer

Are we sacking Wenger?

[22-0]

we have tons of money we dont spend also if we really needed it we always got usmanov