As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
Henry Norris 1913 wrote:And I'd take him at Arsenal over 3 more years of the same old excuses and broken promises.
I'm having to rub my eyes to read this, really?
The geezer hates us with a passion
he hates wenger for a passion, he feels nothing for any of the clubs he has managed, he'd manage anyone if they had the right offer on the table and a big transfer budget. if he really felt love for chelsea, why is he going to the mancs? i don't believe mourinho has any solid principles tbh, he resents our club perhaps for putting the balance sheet ahead of trophies, in a similar way to the way that he resented wenger for having no pressure on his shoulders to deliver while earning big money.
2 years then cut all ties and take another manager would suit me fine if it pays the dividends it did chelsea or inter.
Hate him with a passion! The man is a disgrace as a human being! I realise there is no such thing as morals any more in the stinking pile of greed and shite that calls itself Premier League football, but I would still say no to the arrogant prick. Good mate of mine is an old school Manc, not a modern JCL from the home counties, and he is dreading the crunt running his club.
This isn't about Mourinho instead of Wenger, it's about pride, both on and off the pitch, and we'll get that back, it's just a matter of how long?????
Nos89 wrote:LVG did a great intermediary job at Utd. Brought in players the squad needed, kept hold of the quality and ushered in a group of youngsters that have shown they can perform in the league. Ultimately, not finishing in a Champions League place cost him his job as well as his age. Mourinho will inherit a team similar to the one he had at Porto, and to a certain extent Chelski.
However, this just backs up the boards support of Wenger. Van Gaal got CL football with no trophy, kept job. Then delivered a trophy but not CL football and got the sack. Wenger delivers CL football. Two trophies in last 3 years. Shown progression in last 3 consecutive seasons finishing 4th, 3rd, and albeit a poor 2nd. Keeping on this track we should finish top next season, throw in a Cup for good measure. Optimistic I know but that's part of being a supporter.
haha - you were doing quite well right up to the bit in red!
If Wenger doesn't strengthen this summer (top class Striker, DM, CH minimum) then we will not even get near the PL crown. All the so-called "big clubs" will strengthen and, having mostly pragmatic managers, they will strengthen where they need it, not just accumulate tippy tappy midfielders.
I know it sounds ridiculous but got to be optimistic.
Henry Norris 1913 wrote:And I'd take him at Arsenal over 3 more years of the same old excuses and broken promises.
I'm having to rub my eyes to read this, really?
The geezer hates us with a passion
he hates wenger for a passion, he feels nothing for any of the clubs he has managed, he'd manage anyone if they had the right offer on the table and a big transfer budget. if he really felt love for chelsea, why is he going to the mancs? i don't believe mourinho has any solid principles tbh, he resents our club perhaps for putting the balance sheet ahead of trophies, in a similar way to the way that he resented wenger for having no pressure on his shoulders to deliver while earning big money.
2 years then cut all ties and take another manager would suit me fine if it pays the dividends it did chelsea or inter.
Arsenal are a club of principles and history, the way Maureen behaves in general doesn't generally fit in with our values. Agreed those values have been compromised in more recent times, but don't forget we used to be called "the Arsenal" for a reason.
Taking a manager because he guarantees you trophies is quite shallow tbh. Perhaps they would take that down the Seven Sisters road, but we do things with class and style.
Whoever replaces AW when that time comes has to be a long term replacement. I am not interested in 2 years of glory if it puts us back to square one at the end of that time.
By the way, to say he didn't have any affection for the clubs he managed is rubbish, he had and still probably has a soft spot for chelski.
DB10GOONER wrote:Moron-hio is the classic "quick fix" for a club. He has never had true sustained success at any one club anywhere. The longest he's lasted was 3 and a bit seasons at the chav. The max everywhere else was 2 - 3 seasons. But he has had major success everywhere he went.
He can't sustain success at any single club because he comes in, spends millions on players, drills a very "industrial" (ie; boring but effective) brand of football into those players, wins a couple big trophies, falls out with every fucker at the club from the owner down to the tea ladies, then either gets sacked or flounces out.
He will most likely deliver the manc filth the PL and CL and be gone by June 2019.
He aint winning a league anytime soon with that squad - £250m lvg spent and they are no better than a parks football team
I too was totally in the "dont let this c.unt into our club ever" camp, then for a while I wavered cos the prospect of more wenker has me looking for a shotgun ( ), but after reading the book on his time as madrid manager I am most definately against him ever managing our club
The thing that I find annoying with the manure fans here is their constant criticism of the style of lvg football, but at the same time pointing to the need to win trophies and wanting moaninho to be their next boss - the portugese c.unt may well bring trophies back to them, but he sure as shit wont do it by his team playing stylish attacking football If stylish attacking football as so important to them then they had better look elsewhere for a new manager cos moaninho is a results based manager and he wont give two f.ucks what type of football the manc c.unts are used to
Exactly, so much for "playing football the busby way".
The BBC did an article about where it went wrong for LVG. When highlighted the boring style of football they did a table of backwards passes.
We were second in this (United 3222 and Arsenal 2946), yet people would have you believe we play beautiful football.
Henry Norris 1913 wrote:And I'd take him at Arsenal over 3 more years of the same old excuses and broken promises.
I'm having to rub my eyes to read this, really?
The geezer hates us with a passion
he hates wenger for a passion, he feels nothing for any of the clubs he has managed, he'd manage anyone if they had the right offer on the table and a big transfer budget. if he really felt love for chelsea, why is he going to the mancs? i don't believe mourinho has any solid principles tbh, he resents our club perhaps for putting the balance sheet ahead of trophies, in a similar way to the way that he resented wenger for having no pressure on his shoulders to deliver while earning big money.
2 years then cut all ties and take another manager would suit me fine if it pays the dividends it did chelsea or inter.
Arsenal are a club of principles and history, the way Maureen behaves in general doesn't generally fit in with our values. Agreed those values have been compromised in more recent times, but don't forget we used to be called "the Arsenal" for a reason.
Taking a manager because he guarantees you trophies is quite shallow tbh. Perhaps they would take that down the Seven Sisters road, but we do things with class and style.
Whoever replaces AW when that time comes has to be a long term replacement. I am not interested in 2 years of glory if it puts us back to square one at the end of that time.
By the way, to say he didn't have any affection for the clubs he managed is rubbish, he had and still probably has a soft spot for chelski.
As much as we loved being referred to as The Arsenal and being viewed as a club with a touch more class than the rest. we also have to be realistic and accept that those days are no more We are a club whose "values" now are measured solely on pounds and pence - for starters when you sue a Spanish hat shop for money, and you change your crest purely for money, then there is no point pretending that we are something that we are not.
I would argue that taking a manager that guarantees you trophies, is far, far less shallow than keeping a manager just to keep top 4 regardless of trophies
I would actually argue that whoever replaces wenger doesn't need to be or maybe shouldn't be a long term manager. I am quite comfortable with the idea that the next manager might not work out and might need to be shown the door by the end of his second season - I want the next manager to come in and dismantle a system that is not working, and start by putting passion, commitment, toughness and a much better level of organisation into the team and that for me will be progress. The next manager coming in will have a b*stard of a job cos they will have to face the wrath of the akb w*nkers, plus they will have to sort out the mess that they will be inheriting and this is why I would be comfortable bringing in a manager for two seasons to bridge the gap until we get a top manager to start challenging again
Btw I am saying all that but still do not want moaninho in my club
NickF wrote:The BBC did an article about where it went wrong for LVG. When highlighted the boring style of football they did a table of backwards passes.
We were second in this (United 3222 and Arsenal 2946), yet people would have you believe we play beautiful football.
Tippy Tappy sideways shit, no end product and absolutely no shooting from outside the penalty area....the Wenger way
Henry Norris 1913 wrote:And I'd take him at Arsenal over 3 more years of the same old excuses and broken promises.
I'm having to rub my eyes to read this, really?
The geezer hates us with a passion
he hates wenger for a passion, he feels nothing for any of the clubs he has managed, he'd manage anyone if they had the right offer on the table and a big transfer budget. if he really felt love for chelsea, why is he going to the mancs? i don't believe mourinho has any solid principles tbh, he resents our club perhaps for putting the balance sheet ahead of trophies, in a similar way to the way that he resented wenger for having no pressure on his shoulders to deliver while earning big money.
2 years then cut all ties and take another manager would suit me fine if it pays the dividends it did chelsea or inter.
Arsenal are a club of principles and history, the way Maureen behaves in general doesn't generally fit in with our values. Agreed those values have been compromised in more recent times, but don't forget we used to be called "the Arsenal" for a reason.
Taking a manager because he guarantees you trophies is quite shallow tbh. Perhaps they would take that down the Seven Sisters road, but we do things with class and style.
Whoever replaces AW when that time comes has to be a long term replacement. I am not interested in 2 years of glory if it puts us back to square one at the end of that time.
By the way, to say he didn't have any affection for the clubs he managed is rubbish, he had and still probably has a soft spot for chelski.
As much as we loved being referred to as The Arsenal and being viewed as a club with a touch more class than the rest. we also have to be realistic and accept that those days are no more We are a club whose "values" now are measured solely on pounds and pence - for starters when you sue a Spanish hat shop for money, and you change your crest purely for money, then there is no point pretending that we are something that we are not.
I would argue that taking a manager that guarantees you trophies, is far, far less shallow than keeping a manager just to keep top 4 regardless of trophies
I would actually argue that whoever replaces wenger doesn't need to be or maybe shouldn't be a long term manager. I am quite comfortable with the idea that the next manager might not work out and might need to be shown the door by the end of his second season - I want the next manager to come in and dismantle a system that is not working, and start by putting passion, commitment, toughness and a much better level of organisation into the team and that for me will be progress. The next manager coming in will have a b*stard of a job cos they will have to face the wrath of the akb w*nkers, plus they will have to sort out the mess that they will be inheriting and this is why I would be comfortable bringing in a manager for two seasons to bridge the gap until we get a top manager to start challenging again
Btw I am saying all that but still do not want moaninho in my club
This idea that we are going to appoint someone after Wenger that is going to try and a build a dynasty simply isn't going to happen. Ferguscum was a one off in terms of long term success and changing managers every few years (at most) doesn't seem to hurt all the teams that have been winning major trophies since we last did.
And surely Wenger is a massive reason as to why we shouldn't look at it that way. We've got a manager who used to be great, and now is out of his depth. If once Wenger goes we have say 6 managers in the next 20 years then that seems reasonable as long as it goes with success, if we are generally unsuccessful I'd expect it to be a few more.
Have to agree with Augie as well, the next guy has a hell of job on his hands and is likely to not last all that long given what he will inherit.
Skooner wrote:This idea that we are going to appoint someone after Wenger that is going to try and a build a dynasty simply isn't going to happen. Ferguscum was a one off in terms of long term success and changing managers every few years (at most) doesn't seem to hurt all the teams that have been winning major trophies since we last did.
Yeah, but who exactly are "all the teams that have been winning major trophies"? It's a tiny handful (or a "SPUDMASHER" ) of teams. The vast majority that play the revolving manager merry-go-round are not successful. I would say it's not about building a "dynasty", it's about bringing a manager in and giving them enough time to do what needs to be done to rebuild or develop a team.
Skooner wrote:This idea that we are going to appoint someone after Wenger that is going to try and a build a dynasty simply isn't going to happen. Ferguscum was a one off in terms of long term success and changing managers every few years (at most) doesn't seem to hurt all the teams that have been winning major trophies since we last did.
And surely Wenger is a massive reason as to why we shouldn't look at it that way. We've got a manager who used to be great, and now is out of his depth. If once Wenger goes we have say 6 managers in the next 20 years then that seems reasonable as long as it goes with success, if we are generally unsuccessful I'd expect it to be a few more.
Have to agree with Augie as well, the next guy has a hell of job on his hands and is likely to not last all that long given what he will inherit.
I don't understand that "building a dynasty" argument at all. It's not simply possible anymore and we've got one already building a dynasty and look how that ended up. It's frightening to even think that someone's coming in and staying over 10 years. Everything will go stale at the end and I think that probably 2-3 year cycle between different managers would be optimal, maybe even 4-5 if we can genuinely compete.
Skooner wrote:This idea that we are going to appoint someone after Wenger that is going to try and a build a dynasty simply isn't going to happen. Ferguscum was a one off in terms of long term success and changing managers every few years (at most) doesn't seem to hurt all the teams that have been winning major trophies since we last did.
Yeah, but who exactly are "all the teams that have been winning major trophies"? It's a tiny handful (or a "SPUDMASHER" ) of teams. The vast majority that play the revolving manager merry-go-round are not successful. I would say it's not about building a "dynasty", it's about bringing a manager in and giving them enough time to do what needs to be done to rebuild or develop a team.
Yes, have to agree with that. To give enough time if there is clear evidence that club is progressing and can genuinely compete is the right way to go, let it be 3 or 7 years or whatever.
Skooner wrote:This idea that we are going to appoint someone after Wenger that is going to try and a build a dynasty simply isn't going to happen. Ferguscum was a one off in terms of long term success and changing managers every few years (at most) doesn't seem to hurt all the teams that have been winning major trophies since we last did.
Yeah, but who exactly are "all the teams that have been winning major trophies"? It's a tiny handful (or a "SPUDMASHER" ) of teams. The vast majority that play the revolving manager merry-go-round are not successful. I would say it's not about building a "dynasty", it's about bringing a manager in and giving them enough time to do what needs to be done to rebuild or develop a team.
Yes, have to agree with that. To give enough time if there is clear evidence that club is progressing and can genuinely compete is the right way to go, let it be 3 or 7 years or whatever.
I agree you need to provide a manager time to make an impact so you can assess whether they will progress the club, but there are people whose main reason for not appointing someone like Pep or Mourinho is they are unlikely to stick around for more than a few years. Obviously there are other reasons to not want Mourinho but I think it odd that him not generally staying for more than a few years is one of them. None of the top managers are hanging around at any clubs these days.
), but after reading the book on his time as madrid manager I am most definately against him ever managing our club 
We are a club whose "values" now are measured solely on pounds and pence - for starters when you sue a Spanish hat shop for money, and you change your crest purely for money, then there is no point pretending that we are something that we are not.
