The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

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.
User avatar
SteveO 35
Posts: 22160
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 7:01 pm
Location: Abou's fan club

The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by SteveO 35 »

A lot of stats have been put forward recently comparing our current shit start to the season. This current start is our worst in terms of league points since 1994/95 when we eventually went on to finish 12th with GG losing his job in February (a good omen I pray for this season)

Looking back at that side it had some pretty decent players. Its certainly not clear to me that the present crop are much better. Have a look at the squads and make your mind up - which team did you think was the better of the two

Our current first choice XI seems to be Chesney, Sanga, Gibbs, Mertesacker, Vermaelen/Koscielny, Arteta, Wilshere, Cazorla, Podolski, Giroud, Walcott (arguably)

The players who played the most games in a 4-4-2 back then were: Seaman, Dixon, Winterburn, Adams, Bould, Schwarz, Parlour, Merson, Jensen, Wright, Campbell


I don't think there can be any doubt over the choice of keeper and the back line. There's a case for Sagna and Chesney but I'd go for Dixon and Seaman above them every time. The midfield has definitely improved although if we wanted a hard running, workhorse out wide Parlour is better than anything we've currently got doing that job. Up front Wrighty would walk into this side - the problem being Kevin Campbell who scored only 5 goals. I look at the back-up strikers they had then like John Hartson and he's certainly better than whatever we've got in reserve these days

I remembered that 94/95 team for the shit midfield players GG brought in like Carter, McGoldrick, Hillier, Morrow etc but they weren't first choices.

There's not much in it is there? We had a better back 5 and CF back then and a better midfield now. Roll on 12th place and a new boss in February.....if we can only persuade Lord Wenger to take a backhander signing some shit Scandinavian midfielders :D

User avatar
augie
Posts: 31031
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by augie »

Have to say that, for the one season he was with us, schwarz was absolute class - he had a sweet left foot, took a good free kick (sampdoria away anybody :barscarf: ) but at the same time he sure did like a tackle 8) He would walk into the current team imo along with the back 5, merse and iwww and campbell would be a 50/50 call tbh

falkirk goon
Posts: 4867
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:33 am
Location: In a darkened room

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by falkirk goon »

class of 94/95 were cup winners cup holders 8) and almost defended the thing..no contest imo

goonermarc
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:36 pm

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by goonermarc »

augie wrote:Have to say that, for the one season he was with us, schwarz was absolute class - he had a sweet left foot, took a good free kick (sampdoria away anybody :barscarf: ) but at the same time he sure did like a tackle 8) He would walk into the current team imo along with the back 5, merse and iwww and campbell would be a 50/50 call tbh
Seem to remember that free kick being a bit of a shocker? I remember it took a split second to realise we'd scored from it when watching it live!

User avatar
I still Exiled-Gooner
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:48 am
Location: The spirit of 69

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by I still Exiled-Gooner »

falkirk goon wrote:class of 94/95 were cup winners cup holders 8) and almost defended the thing..no contest imo

Totally agree,Falkirk i like to add that i compare this lot more to Don Howe's reign but the difference being that old Don brought through Adams,Rocky,Keown etc while Wenger has.......never mind.

markyp
Posts: 3155
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 2:54 pm
Location: location location

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by markyp »

we had a better calibre of player by far back then the thing is that GG had lost the dressing room,history is repeating itself but this time with worse players who dont give a flying fuck about our club,we are doomed :banghead:

User avatar
MK Gould
Posts: 3863
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:25 pm
Location: North Bucks

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by MK Gould »

SteveO 35 wrote:Our current first choice XI seems to be Chesney, Sanga, Gibbs, Mertesacker, Vermaelen/Koscielny, Arteta, Wilshere, Cazorla, Podolski, Giroud, Walcott (arguably)

The players who played the most games in a 4-4-2 back then were: Seaman, Dixon, Winterburn, Adams, Bould, Schwarz, Parlour, Merson, Jensen, Wright, Campbell
When I saw the thread title I'd have guessed today being the better of the two.

But looking at the teams, player for player, then I'd go for 94/95 without a doubt. Graham never did get the credit he deserved. Won the league in 89 and 91 (only losing one game). Played some fantastic football at that time - as good as anything we've seen under Wenger. He lost it though after winning the cup double in 93.....couldn't seem to handle talented players. All downhill team wise after that. Amazing thinking back that I was calling for his head only 4 years after winning the league (the bung scan was just convenient timing to avoid paying compensation in my view), and yet I'd sill be supporting of Wenger 7 years after our last title.....

This Is The Daybreak
Posts: 845
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:32 pm
Location: London

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by This Is The Daybreak »

It's quite a similar situation in my opinion, I look at the players who started yesterday and minus Gervinho I feel each one has something to offer the club, but for whatever reason are not put into a system that works and not motivated right. This is down to the manager.

The 1995 team had heard it all before and Graham had lost the dressing rooms, in one off cup games we were a lot stronger but over the course of the league season couldn't sustain it. This current team sadly don't have the mentality for the one off games nor for the season so I might edge the 1994/95 team but I feel with the correct management and motivation there is a team that is capable of being successful.

User avatar
TeeCee
Posts: 10082
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:26 pm
Location: On the Cusp in SW France

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by TeeCee »

Graham went 'off the rails' much the same as Wenger has. He started playing 5 CB's at the same time, sometimes in midfield, he totally neglected the youth side, hence it needed a complete overhaul when Wenger came in. I was praying for Graham to be sacked as he would have got us relegated given time, and we came pretty damned close.
Arsenal do tend to let managers hit a peak then go on a long downward spiral before taking action. Some may call it loyal, others say it needs a stronger hand in charge to recognise when it's going tits up and address it earlier, that way any new guy comes in before things hit rock bottom and the job is 10 times harder. Unfortunately it's already too late for the next guy after Wenger, whoever comes in is going to inherit a truckload of very expensive dead wood!!

User avatar
Herd
Posts: 6386
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:00 am

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by Herd »

Graham found it difficult to scare the shit out of the players as he had done ,but I think its wrong to say he had lost it .
As for saying he would of got us relegated that's Bollocks but his departure was one which was allegedly arranged to stop the panicking Dein and the club getting dragged under by the Bung scandal !

I was gutted when Schartz left especially as he went because his wife didn't like London ,we were OK that year although we dropped to many silly points ,but as has been stated we had a very thin squad and when the top 13 went we had very poor back up ! Hiller had shown promise before he was injured but when he cam back he was shit ,jensen was a fetch n pass type of player and the merse was very inconsistent . Cambell never played well with wright who bullied the large man unmercifully on the pitch !
But another Euro final came and we were unlucky not to win it ! In those days we valued any Euro Tour !

User avatar
augie
Posts: 31031
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by augie »

TeeCee wrote:Graham went 'off the rails' much the same as Wenger has. He started playing 5 CB's at the same time, sometimes in midfield, he totally neglected the youth side, hence it needed a complete overhaul when Wenger came in. I was praying for Graham to be sacked as he would have got us relegated given time, and we came pretty damned close.
Arsenal do tend to let managers hit a peak then go on a long downward spiral before taking action. Some may call it loyal, others say it needs a stronger hand in charge to recognise when it's going tits up and address it earlier, that way any new guy comes in before things hit rock bottom and the job is 10 times harder. Unfortunately it's already too late for the next guy after Wenger, whoever comes in is going to inherit a truckload of very expensive dead wood!!

Slightly stretching it there teecee no ? Wenger inherited a team containing the back 5,parlour and wrighty from the GG era and inherited Bergkamp and platt from the rioch era so he added, at most, 4 new players that were mainstays of the 98 double team.

User avatar
SteveO 35
Posts: 22160
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 7:01 pm
Location: Abou's fan club

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by SteveO 35 »

One thing's for certain when you look at the sum of the parts for both teams then you have to say that they are/were underachieving.

Its funny how you remember stuff because my abiding memory of that GG team was Hillier, Morrow, Selley etc sideways passing and generally being the worst midfield imaginable, and yet when you look at the stats of who played considerably more games then having the likes of Merson and Schwarz, plus Wrighty up front and the famous back five, they should have fared much better than 12th

And today, the players we have out there should be far better than 10th - but will they be at the end of the season?

The common theme of course with both sides is that the backup players were/are not of the required standard. Steve Morrow played 22 times that year - one of the most limited players I've seen wear the shirt - and there were too many appearances for Kiwomya, Helder, Selley, Dickov, McCgoldrick and Hillier. Back up keeper Bartram was shit as well.

This season really does have a similar feel to it - a team, trying the same approach week in week out, lacking motivation. Capable of producing the odd decent performance here and there, but ultimately out of the title race before it ever got going. GG was infuriating the fans back then who were urging him to go out and sign a midfielder in the class of Roy Keane, and a second top class striker to play with Wrighty, but he'd insist time and time again that the players available were 'no better than what we have already'.

The one thing Wenger had consistently over GG is that his teams played football that was far more pleasing on the eye, although the GG team of 1992 produced some quality stuff as well. Now, I don't think its any more entertaining than in 1995 and that's saying something. Back then (a bit like last year) we had a fella capable of scoring a goal out of nothing and that could win us big cup games and offer some hope value during a tedious 90 minutes. Now sadly, we have a poor man's Kevin Davies lumbering up front doing his Ray Hankin impression

All a bit sad really. The saddest part is that if it wasn't for the bung scandal GG would have been allowed to carry on sleepwalking to midtable mediocrity year after year. I fear we'll need something out of the blue "off the field" to get Wenger out of the job too

User avatar
Herd
Posts: 6386
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:00 am

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by Herd »

Ian selley was a good player but another who got too many injuries ...........Morroow was shit but had the heart of a lion ,goldy was just shit and hiller was abysmal after injuries all he had left was attitude ! glen helder played great for 2 games then got found out !

User avatar
DB10GOONER
Posts: 62257
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:06 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland.
Contact:

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by DB10GOONER »

Glenn Helders ONLY claim to fame; Firing in the assist for The Dennis's first Arsenal goal! True story. 8) :lol:

Skooner
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:50 pm

Re: The class of 94/95 - better or worse?

Post by Skooner »

In some ways it isn’t fair to compare the defenders from the two teams. Personally I think the likes Sagna, Vermaelen, Mertersacker and Koscielny have the ability to be the equals of the defenders from that team, it’s just that the team in 90’s had a manager who worked with them non-stop to make them a unit, whereas Wenger hardly gives it a second thought. Graham made those defenders that good, personally I think none of them would have got to the level they were without him.

Overall though it is an interesting comparison, if I remember rightly virtually no one felt it was the wrong decision to get rid of Graham and felt that the bung issue was just a convenient excuse to do so.

Post Reply