Arsenal Thread 2013/14

[supercrystal7]

Significantly worse team?! Pull the other one, we still had Patrick Vieira as a PLAYER!

And we got third and the FA Cup thank you very much ;)

Fair enough, but they also got out of an equally difficult CL group as yours.

You had Vieria, but you also had Yaya, Kompany, Tevez, Dzeko, Adebayor, Barry, Balotelli and De Jong. I have always maintained that the Arsenal sqaud is not that great. Do you think the Arsenal team have players of the quality I listed? They have Ramsey, Walcott and Wilshere.

Just listing the players we had is a perfect illustration of the point. Forgivable as you can't watch every team all of the time, but at the time Arsenal were a far more established top side than we were. They had the experience of juggling top level European football and third place with the FA cup was an over acheivement.

That was a team still very much in the building stages. Hangovers from Hughes, new signings from Mancini, all the while trying to instill a winning mentality from a club that had as good as none. Silva new, Yaya new, Balotelli new, Milner new, Kolarov new, Dzeko only came in January.. Barry, Adebayor and Tevez only came the season before. It was complete upheaval from a yoyo club to 4th place contenders. There's no way on gods green earth the Arsenal side Ozil joined was significantly worse than the City Silva joined.

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

 

[Anonymous]

Fair enough, but they also got out of an equally difficult CL group as yours.

You had Vieria, but you also had Yaya, Kompany, Tevez, Dzeko, Adebayor, Barry, Balotelli and De Jong. I have always maintained that the Arsenal sqaud is not that great. Do you think the Arsenal team have players of the quality I listed? They have Ramsey, Walcott and Wilshere.

Just listing the players we had is a perfect illustration of the point. Forgivable as you can't watch every team all of the time, but at the time Arsenal were a far more established top side than we were. They had the experience of juggling top level European football and third place with the FA cup was an over acheivement.

That was a team still very much in the building stages. Hangovers from Hughes, new signings from Mancini, all the while trying to instill a winning mentality from a club that had as good as none. Silva new, Yaya new, Balotelli new, Milner new, Kolarov new, Dzeko only came in January.. Barry, Adebayor and Tevez only came the season before. It was complete upheaval from a yoyo club to 4th place contenders. There's no way on gods green earth the Arsenal side Ozil joined was significantly worse than the City Silva joined.

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

Agree to disagree.....

We're celebrating the Rags result ;)

 

[supercrystal7]

Just listing the players we had is a perfect illustration of the point. Forgivable as you can't watch every team all of the time, but at the time Arsenal were a far more established top side than we were. They had the experience of juggling top level European football and third place with the FA cup was an over acheivement.

That was a team still very much in the building stages. Hangovers from Hughes, new signings from Mancini, all the while trying to instill a winning mentality from a club that had as good as none. Silva new, Yaya new, Balotelli new, Milner new, Kolarov new, Dzeko only came in January.. Barry, Adebayor and Tevez only came the season before. It was complete upheaval from a yoyo club to 4th place contenders. There's no way on gods green earth the Arsenal side Ozil joined was significantly worse than the City Silva joined.

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

Agree to disagree.....

We're celebrating the Rags result ;)

Good point. Let's hope it's the last time they see CL football for a while.

 

[Anonymous]

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

Agree to disagree.....

We're celebrating the Rags result ;)

Good point. Let's hope it's the last time they see CL football for a while.

I think that's about all Moyes is up to.

 

[adrianr]

Just listing the players we had is a perfect illustration of the point. Forgivable as you can't watch every team all of the time, but at the time Arsenal were a far more established top side than we were. They had the experience of juggling top level European football and third place with the FA cup was an over acheivement.

That was a team still very much in the building stages. Hangovers from Hughes, new signings from Mancini, all the while trying to instill a winning mentality from a club that had as good as none. Silva new, Yaya new, Balotelli new, Milner new, Kolarov new, Dzeko only came in January.. Barry, Adebayor and Tevez only came the season before. It was complete upheaval from a yoyo club to 4th place contenders. There's no way on gods green earth the Arsenal side Ozil joined was significantly worse than the City Silva joined.

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

Agree to disagree.....

We're celebrating the Rags result ;)

Balls to that. He said the Arsenal side of this year was significantly worse than the City side of Silva's first year and that's just bollocks. When I'm not on my phone I'll happily explain why. For now I will simply say that for a very long period of this season Arsenal were title contenders along with getting out of a tough CL group, and we weren't anything close for Silva's whole first year. Significantly worse my left nut.

 

[supercrystal7]

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

Agree to disagree.....

We're celebrating the Rags result ;)

Balls to that. He said the Arsenal side of this year was significantly worse than the City side of Silva's first year and that's just bollocks. When I'm not on my phone I'll happily explain why. For now I will simply say that for a very long period of this season Arsenal were title contenders along with getting out of a tough CL group, and we weren't anything close for Silva's whole first year. Significantly worse my left nut.

I am interested to here you reply. I have always said this Arsenal team was not particularly great, but taking advantage of the situation. Chelsea had a very unbalanced squad and were building a new team. City lost points, because Pellegrini was adjusting to the league. Even with all that I have always said that City, Chelsea and United had better squads than them, though apart from City there was not a big difference between the other 5 teams. The fact they did is a credit to the contribution Ozil made. I think an argument could be made that the Arsenal team of 2010/2011 was stronger than the one Ozil went to. That Arsenal team still had Fabregas, Nasri, RVP, and Clichy. Sadly due to injuries the Wilshere of today is not even much better than back then if at all. Ramsey, Walcott and Koscielny have come on since then though.

 

[Marvin]

Agree to disagree.....

We're celebrating the Rags result ;)

Balls to that. He said the Arsenal side of this year was significantly worse than the City side of Silva's first year and that's just bollocks. When I'm not on my phone I'll happily explain why. For now I will simply say that for a very long period of this season Arsenal were title contenders along with getting out of a tough CL group, and we weren't anything close for Silva's whole first year. Significantly worse my left nut.

I am interested to here you reply. I have always said this Arsenal team was not particularly great, but taking advantage of the situation. Chelsea had a very unbalanced squad and were building a new team. City lost points, because Pellegrini was adjusting to the league. Even with all that I have always said that City, Chelsea and United had better squads than them, though apart from City there was not a big difference between the other 5 teams. The fact they did is a credit to the contribution Ozil made. I think an argument could be made that the Arsenal team of 2010/2011 was stronger than the one Ozil went to. That Arsenal team still had Fabregas, Nasri, RVP, and Clichy. Sadly due to injuries the Wilshere of today is not even much better than back then if at all. Ramsey, Walcott and Koscielny have come on since then though.

What is this mythical contribution Ozil made? The man that made Arsenal tick was Ramsey.

 

[supercrystal7]

Balls to that. He said the Arsenal side of this year was significantly worse than the City side of Silva's first year and that's just bollocks. When I'm not on my phone I'll happily explain why. For now I will simply say that for a very long period of this season Arsenal were title contenders along with getting out of a tough CL group, and we weren't anything close for Silva's whole first year. Significantly worse my left nut.

I am interested to here you reply. I have always said this Arsenal team was not particularly great, but taking advantage of the situation. Chelsea had a very unbalanced squad and were building a new team. City lost points, because Pellegrini was adjusting to the league. Even with all that I have always said that City, Chelsea and United had better squads than them, though apart from City there was not a big difference between the other 5 teams. The fact they did is a credit to the contribution Ozil made. I think an argument could be made that the Arsenal team of 2010/2011 was stronger than the one Ozil went to. That Arsenal team still had Fabregas, Nasri, RVP, and Clichy. Sadly due to injuries the Wilshere of today is not even much better than back then if at all. Ramsey, Walcott and Koscielny have come on since then though.

What is this mythical contribution Ozil made? The man that made Arsenal tick was Ramsey.

This is Ozil going missing in a big game against Liverpool in the FA Cup.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hXt5O9zjQc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hXt5O9zjQc</a>
Ozil not doing much against Everton.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul0Zx5J3R8I" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ul0Zx5J3R8I</a>
Those two matches are the reason they may win the FA cup and he was the best player in both those games and that was when his form had dipped.

This is an example of the things he was doing before the games caught up with him.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aayGFUFGthg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aayGFUFGthg</a>
In a key game to qualify for the CL.

Ramsey was Arsenal's best player, but to read what people are writing you would think he had played like Felaini or Torres.

 

[adrianr]

Ok lets break it down as I think you have a couple of things confused,

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

Hart, another who only started playing that same season, and Zabaleta who only established himself as a world class right back much later. Regardless you can be as fair or unfair as you want, put up the whole squad if you like, listing players is missing the point and it looks to me that's what you're basing your entire argument on.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

Arsenals ability to juggle European football ties in to the exact reasons they were not a 'significantly worse' team than our 2010/11 side. If you agree to them being able to do this you must also by extension agree there is something there, the ability to work as an effective team, perhaps? Something our 2010/11 was certainly no better at.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

Ok so Arsenal finished 4th a point ahead of Tottenham, and City finished 5th, 3 points behind. Which one of these is supposed to be the "significantly worse" side, exactly? Narrowly indeed, margins often are at the top. Rarely are they significant, to use your word.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

So Arsenal added less players to an already better team, quelle surprise! Proves nothing other than we were still firmly in the midst of a HUGE overhaul of the first team.

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Whether Arsenal had it or not, again, irrelevant. We didn't have it, not at the start. We bounced all over the place under Hughes despite the money, and still lost out to Spurs despite half a season of Mancini. It was only arguably the FA Cup semi against the rags that was the real corner turned for us.

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

And no, the only thing that's happened here is you missing the point, again, whilst quite brilliantly helping to make mine. I have said nothing about the difficulty of accommodating new signings, nor how difficult that should be based on value. I took issue with your proclamation the Arsenal side that Ozil joined was significantly worse than the City side Silva joined, and a huge part of why I think that's a lot of bollocks and why you listing our squad does nothing to argue your corner is pretty much entirely due to how difficult it was for Mancini to take all those component parts and build a functioning team.

Ozil joined a stable and established top 4 side with an manager experienced in the league who for large parts of the season were genuine title contenders (having amassed more points in a calendar year than anyone else IIRC, clearly they weren't having too much trouble). Silva joined a comparatively unstable and certainly not established top 4 side with a manager who had been here half a season, getting to know a load of players he didn't sign and a load he did, who needed large swathes of the season just to work out the kinks. And that's without me going into another ramble about how defensive the side Silva joined was compared to how attacking the Arsenal side Ozil joined was. Do I think Silva would have done better than Ozil if he had joined Arsenal this season instead? Without a single shadow of a doubt.

Right, back to work.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Ok lets break it down as I think you have a couple of things confused,

I was very fair with the list and did not even mention guys like Zabeleta or Hart, the former going onto become a world class right back. All those payers listed were very good.

Hart, another who only started playing that same season, and Zabaleta who only established himself as a world class right back much later. Regardless you can be as fair or unfair as you want, put up the whole squad if you like, listing players is missing the point and it looks to me that's what you're basing your entire argument on.

I agree with you though, about Arsenal having experience juggling European football and this helped them.

Arsenals ability to juggle European football ties in to the exact reasons they were not a 'significantly worse' team than our 2010/11 side. If you agree to them being able to do this you must also by extension agree there is something there, the ability to work as an effective team, perhaps? Something our 2010/11 was certainly no better at.

However, Arsenal finished 4th the year before Ozil came, 1 point ahead of Tottenham and finished 3rd the year before that once more just a point ahead of Tottenham. Shortly before Silva joined City had finished 5th 3 points behind Tottenham and could have got into the top 4 had they beaten them on the last day. So Ozil and Silva both joined teams that were fighting for top four. In Arsenal's case they had narrowly got top 4 and in City's case narrowly lost it to Tottenham.

Ok so Arsenal finished 4th a point ahead of Tottenham, and City finished 5th, 3 points behind. Which one of these is supposed to be the "significantly worse" side, exactly? Narrowly indeed, margins often are at the top. Rarely are they significant, to use your word.

The difference is then that Arsenal added just Ozil and Flamini to the team that came 4th. Apart from Silva City added Toure, Kolarov, Balotelli, Milner, eventually Dzeko and Boateng. Now why exactly do Arsenal look in a stronger position than this team?

So Arsenal added less players to an already better team, quelle surprise! Proves nothing other than we were still firmly in the midst of a HUGE overhaul of the first team.

As for winning mentality are you seriously trying to tell me that the current Arsenal side have that?

Whether Arsenal had it or not, again, irrelevant. We didn't have it, not at the start. We bounced all over the place under Hughes despite the money, and still lost out to Spurs despite half a season of Mancini. It was only arguably the FA Cup semi against the rags that was the real corner turned for us.

Finally you destroy your own point by commenting on the difficulty in accommodating new signings. Surely players worth 25 million( all would be higher due to football and economic inflation in transfers) should hit the ground running and immediately shine in a new league. Or does this only hold ground when it's a team you don't support.

And no, the only thing that's happened here is you missing the point, again, whilst quite brilliantly helping to make mine. I have said nothing about the difficulty of accommodating new signings, nor how difficult that should be based on value. I took issue with your proclamation the Arsenal side that Ozil joined was significantly worse than the City side Silva joined, and a huge part of why I think that's a lot of bollocks and why you listing our squad does nothing to argue your corner is pretty much entirely due to how difficult it was for Mancini to take all those component parts and build a functioning team.

Ozil joined a stable and established top 4 side with an manager experienced in the league who for large parts of the season were genuine title contenders (having amassed more points in a calendar year than anyone else IIRC, clearly they weren't having too much trouble). Silva joined a comparatively unstable and certainly not established top 4 side with a manager who had been here half a season, getting to know a load of players he didn't sign and a load he did, who needed large swathes of the season just to work out the kinks. And that's without me going into another ramble about how defensive the side Silva joined was compared to how attacking the Arsenal side Ozil joined was. Do I think Silva would have done better than Ozil if he had joined Arsenal this season instead? Without a single shadow of a doubt.

Right, back to work.

That rinsing is better than Ozil.