Sorry Rick, but this is just silly. Looking at this from a purely footballing perspective, how can you not see that failing to make the CL for even one or two seasons in a row would have a DISASTROUS effect? The best players are those who are the most ambitious. If playing for Arsenal means no CL for several seasons, why would an ambitious player stay? Why would a transfer target choose to come? Sure, I suppose there are those who would stay for "the love of the club". However, those types of players are few and far between in this day and age. Thierry is an interesting case. His number one goal is to win the Champions League with Arsenal. He could have gone to Barca last year, but it means more to him to win it with Arsenal. That type of loyalty is rare nowadays, and we definitely can't count on it.
Again, for those who are against a putative takeover, are you generally opposed to investment in the club or just investment coming from foreigners?
It'll be interesting to see how Bayern handles the situation next year since they're almost certain on missing out on the CL for the very first time since it's inception.
Mike, please do not take offence at this, but you have just showed where the big difference is between the English fans and the new non English fans. You see long term in terms of a couple of years. I see it as ten years down the line.......... So what if we didn't make the CL for two seasons in a row? We are not Leeds with Millions of debt and no assets. We can service that debt without being in the CL and without compromising on wages. Yes, it would affect us in TV money - but it would be far from "disastrous". "Disastrous" is what happened to Leeds. They financied and had no assets so when they were not in the CL - they suffered. We are a rich club and have nothing like those problems. You have to remember 1989 was the first time we had won something in 17 odd seasons. Since 1997 we have won more in that time period than at any other time period in our history. Been in contention for more league titles and been in more Cup Finals than at any time in our history. You have had it good Mike whilst you have been a fan. But don't think that we deserve to be there. No-one does. We certainly do not need to compromise on our long term security by selling out to become just another business in someone's portfolio to stay in the CL for the next couple of seasons. Thats not what football is about - and many don't know that because they have never seen the years away from trophies. So what if we miss out for a couple of years? We have a great young squad on long term contracts who would get us back there. Yes, some would leave - again thats football. On Henry, well I wouldn't be concerned if he left at all. He is not Arsenal. Again a big difference. Many on here have never known the club without Henry and Vieira so think that life doesn't go on without them. It's a terrible way of thinking. We carried on after O'Leary, Adams, Wright etc etc. We will cope without Henry. Not every player can choose to be in the CL teams. Many will think they can bring Arsenal back into it and they will do. At present I see two benefits of missing out. a) it would get rid of unrealistic, moaning fans who are not content with CL finals and being one of the top clubs in the country. b) it would hopefully get rid of possibility of us being taken over.
Arsene to pick Dein's replacement. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/6581073.stm "There will definitely be a director of football coming and it will definitely be my choice," Wenger said.
I think it's an unfair statement Ali. If an English billionaire who had no history with a team went and bought a basketball team do you honestly think some fans wouldn't say "Keep it American"? I am not against investment in the club as long as it is done by keeping ownership of the club with the present board. However I certainly do not want ownership of this club going to someone who is using it as a business. As only foreigners (for the most part) would be doing that, then I am against foreign ownersship by default. Foreign ownership is completly different to having foreign players on contracts. One is for good and affects the clubs stability, the other is a temporary employee.
Now that would a be plus to not making the CL. I totally agree that we do not need the money from the CL but as an Arsenal supporters we want to see success and in football today success includes Europe. Thinking long term a year or two without CL would be disappointing, not a disaster. I don't think not making the CL will discourage a takeover attempt from anyone. Look at Villa.
Except that he and his wife met in college. Back then Wal-mart was a small regional chain with stores in small towns. Remember Wal-mart really didn't become what it is today until the late 1980s. By the time the ownership in Wal-mart had become something substantial, Kroenke was already doing very well in real estate. I'm not saying you should want him as owner. Just a clarifying things a bit.
Honestly Rick, and I'm not just saying this, I don't think anyone would care whether the owner was American or not with a given NBA team for instance. Some fans would, but I think they would make up only a minority. And I agree with you on your statement re the club being reduced to a business venture for a foreign owner. I would however be willing to look at what's on the table and how it may affect the short term and long term status of the club before making up my mind. That's not unreasonable.
Perhaps thats because you are so used to teams changing hands. I do care, and I am in the vast majority I can assure you that of season ticket holders and shareholders. Thats one of my points Ali. If Kroenke did this by approcahing the board directly and giving them proposals - we would all know where we stand. he hasn't. He said through a spokesman who then became not a spokesman.... he wasn't going to buy, then bought 9.9%. Then he has been buying through a bank and not revealing his identity. If he is so obviously going to be good for Arsenal FC - it isn't exactly the way to endere him to fans is it........................
"he big difference is between the English fans and the new non English fans. You see long term in terms of a couple of years. I see it as ten years down the line.........." Rick, I won't speak for Mike I don't think that's an offensive statement at all. As an American I would probably say that is a fair generalization born out of the way we've seen our sports franchises and leagues evolve. Your perspective is forged from a lifetime of following the club with a great deal of pre-Wenger memories to draw from that a lot of us born on this side of the pond don't have. However, I think there is a good possbility that living in 2007, our perspective on long term vs. short term might be the more apt given where football is and where it is going in the era of big money and globalization. In the past two or three down years, define that how you may (i.e. w/out European football, etc.) might have had little consequence. Today that may or may not hold true ,but I think the danger now is exponentially greater to the club. Absolutely agree that financially we could weather a few down years and not end up like Leeds but I don't think you can so easily measure the overall reprocussions. How many players leave? How many young players that currently sign w/ the club and seem to be our lifeblodd do so because the dream of playing CL matches decide to go elsewhere, and how many season ticket holders that are paying such so, so much quid decide to walk away and say "its just not worth it?" . In particular I drawing on the conversation we had after the West Ham game when we were talking about the cost and 4-year comittment required of the season seats I sat in. Add all those things together and I just think its tough to really say how negatively it affects the club in the longer term. Once start going down that path it might be a lot harder to turn the ship around than anyone thinks Personally, I hope and would rather your perspective be right but I'm just expressing my own personal "fear" given examples I've seen over here. Great franchises like the Boston Celtics in the NBA lost there way and have been trying to get out of the bottom of the table for over a decade. Regardless of what happens I'll be a Gooner for life. Jeff Lau
That's not really fair. I'm talking about the football on the pitch suffering as a result. Look, I appreciate that there was a long dry spell before that night at Anfield. I don't think I'd have to try hard to get you to agree with me that football, and indeed the world, has changed A LOT in the near TWENTY years since that night. However, that's not really where I want to take this discussion. The point that I was trying to make was one about players coming and going from the club. There's no question that our youth system is the envy of the league, but it's my opinion that that's down to the results on the pitch of our current senior side over the last few seasons and a certain Monsieur Wenger. Sure, a kid from the neighborhood might still choose to play for the team he's loved all his life, regardless of league position, but what about that wunderkind from Brazil who has no real affinity to any European club, and offers from several of them. For argument's sake, let's say the three clubs in for him are Arsenal, Chelsea and Barcelona. If Arsenal aren't in the Champions League, but the other two are, where do you think that kid will go? Sure, that might be only one Brazilian kid, but even if Arsenal were the richest club on the planet, without the opportunity to play with and against the best players in the world, Arsenal wouldn't be the most attractive option to the caliber of player we all want to see at this club. Of course we will continue on without Henry, but without the possibility of silverware, how many players of his level would come to Arsenal? It comes down to ambition. The most ambitious players are attracted to the most ambitious clubs. If a player is content to settle for a mid-table spot and occasional forays into Europe, then they're more suited for Spurs, not Arsenal. We want players who want more. As for the club itself, we have seen that ambition at Arsenal in the form of David Dein. Now that he's gone, it's time for the remaining board members to either put up or shut up. I'm willing to give them my support now, but like you said, I'm an American, and my patience is thin. I'm a Gooner. This club found me. It chose me. I'm not throwing that away regardless of the results on the pitch. However, I'd be lying if I said that I'd be happy with Spurs-like results, and I don't think I'm alone in that department.
"Thats one of my points Ali. If Kroenke did this by approcahing the board directly and giving them proposals - we would all know where we stand. he hasn't. He said through a spokesman who then became not a spokesman.... he wasn't going to buy, then bought 9.9%. Then he has been buying through a bank and not revealing his identity. If he is so obviously going to be good for Arsenal FC - it isn't exactly the way to endere him to fans is it.." Rick, that is the part that gives me the greatest sence of uneasiness about this. First the club agrees to a partnership with his MLS club, which will help his club more than AFC, and how does he respond? Makes my stomach feel ill. Jeff
And Rick, I think you have just illustrated the difference between many English and American fans- from the US perspective. Two things: 1. The idea of a player "being" Arsenal or not. Free agency in the US has created an environment where you end up with Joe Montana finishing out his career with the KC Chiefs, or Michael Jordan deciding to play for the Washington Wizards, etc... It is very, very rare in the US that a player plays, AND devotes, all of his career to a city or team. But, I think Ashley Cole has shown that this day is coming to English football- he was as Arsenal as they come now a days, and he's gone. It's nice to try to hold on to thought that the clubs mean as much to the players as the players do to the club, but from my US view, this just isn't true anymore. That's where one difference probably comes from. 2. We are used to teams changing hands- and we're telling you from our experience, that very rarely does it actually matter who's paying the bills, as long as they are paying them. Team sports are a funny game, you hit it right sometimes and sometimes it goes horribly wrong. But, probably moreso in English football than any US sport, the more money, the better- Chelsea and United have dominated recently. Arsenal spend less and less, and really, they look less and less likely to challenge for third now. It's funny you bring up the point about getting rid of the moaning fans because I completely understand this. My university- the University of Illinois, made it to the Championship game a couple years ago- people came out of the woodwork, and now winning 23 games and making the NCAA basketball tournament isn't good enough anymore, when pre-championship game run, that would have been a fantastic season. I've been on board with Arsenal long enough to remember the time when finishing third would have been an accomplishment. But I think it's a different game now- one that us US folks are accustomed to seeing. I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, simply that just as you highlighted why Mike illustrated the differences in your eyes, I think that you illustrated them great in my eyes...
I've supported Arsenal since Vieira was the new kid on the block and before Henry was around, so I have no qualms about a team without him, even next season. Four years ago I couldn't think of an Arsenal team without Thierry or Bobby, but players move on expectedly, and we cope.
listen to rick b peoples he knows whats up and how anti fan, do u possibly know what any of the british chairmen know about english football? im pretty sure they know a fair bit, especially someone like hil wood whose been there a while football isnt just a hobby to these people
Kroenke probably doesn't understand Hockey and Basketball but he owns the team and they're pretty successful because he allows people who understand the game to run the club. I don't see how that's any different. And missing out CL IS a huge threat. Money has become so important in sports and since football doesn't have any sort of salary cap to promote parity it would just create a bigger gap between Arsenal and the other top clubs. We are just lucky to have Wenger around as he can find cheap young talent and develop them to world class players. But once he's gone we won't have that luxury which is why it is important for the team to always make the CL as atleast some players would be attracted to come to play for the club.
Thanks Jeff. I didn't want to sound offensive - and I have tried not to throughout many subjects - but unfortunatly this subject is a very good example of where being Politically Correct goes out the window. I think Mike (and many others on here) know me well enough by now to take what i say without getting offended. The fact is - Americans will see this differently than the English fans who have been around the block with Arsenal. Thats the difference in mentality and quite simply it's the English Arsenal fans that own the shares, own the season tickets and will do their dammest to stop any takeover. I disagree Jeff. Our conversation was more on ticket pricing, which personally I feel is a different subject albeit related to where football is going. I agree as we spoke about at West Ham that prices have to come down and without this we will find certainly Club level getting quite empty. I don't think thats a bad thing. We need the shock of that to lower prices and quite frankly thats another reason why not being in the CL for 2 years wouldn't be a bad idea. We have the most expensive "cheap seats" (if you follow me) in the Prem. £35 a game is very expensive for those going every week. We need to do something about that. Again - young players may decide to go elsewhere, but I personally don't think many will. If they are not good enough to get Arsenal into the CL spots then they are not good enough for another CL club. They will know that. I would suggest that many season ticket holders who held at Highbury would be quite glad of new fans walking away................................that is not a throwaway comment. The true fans will not walk away and thats the fans we need. Arsenal as I said have money, a lot of it. More than people seem to give us credit for. Flager and others seem to think the board have not done well financially for the club. In black and white? We are the richest club in Europe comparitivly when you look at fanbase, investment and what we own in assets. There is no fear of us going for years into the duldroms. There will always be players who will come to a club like Arsenal. There is no negative future for Arsenal with the current board. There is a big possibility for it with Kroenke. Why take the risk when we have no need to?
It is fair Mike. Whether you like it or not you and I think very differently about Arsenal Football Club. I think you also should know me well enough by now that I am not trying to be offensive to anyone or any Americans. Far from it. Thats why I thought I could say what many haven't............ So what if the world has changed? Again - if the football on the pitch was bad for 3 years a lot of new fans would disapear. The football was bad well before Wenger and at somepoint it will be again. You have been spoilt and maybe, just maybe this is what Arsenal needs. You have up's and downs in football. None of the new fans have even begun to experience a down yet. It would certainly do them some good to experience one. Sorry Mike but thats rubbish. Please name me one player who has come to Arsenal at the top of their game because we tried to sign them and not because a club was selling them. It hasn't happened. We are not that club. Henry came when he was awful at Juve. Dennis came when he had a bad time at Inter. We have not signed a top top player at the top of their game who was being courted by the big clubs. See above - we have never been the attractive option. henry was at a crap level when he came here. Don't forget that Mike. So how many of his level, well probably quite a few actually. Henry's level now? Well can you point out anyone of Henry's current level who has joined us? Your last sentance whilst said sarcastically, is unfortunatly very true and shows on this thread. I have gone years without seeing Arsenal close to winning anything - yet I never complained as Arsenal are my team through thick and thin. Thats not the case with many of our newish fans. It is simply what happens when fans join whilst a team is at the top. When have we had "Spurs like results"? When have we finished below them whilst you have been a fan? Never. If you are not going to throw away the club, then think very carefully over it's long term future. because if you back a unknown quantity, a non football fan, someone not associated with the club in any way before 4 months ago, someone who treats sports clubs over business's, someone who has obviously tried to hide his intentions in how he is acting with Arsenal, someone who hasn't come out and said "I want to invest in Arsenal - this is my proposal" but has gone about it in an underhand way over the current Arsenal board who have taken what was basically a small and lotal fanbased club in an old fashioned stadium with an average attendence of 20,000 in the 1990's to a first class stadium, have some of the best talent in the world, be in the CL final just a year ago, won countless trophioes in the past ten years, push the club into the top class of Europe and all the while building up a supurb asset base making the club one of the richest in Europe without having to have outside investment. Think about that choice Mike, because if you were a shareholder in any business that looked at those models you wouldn't even be having this discussion.........................
I think you mis-understood why I wrote that about Henry. I didn't mean it as "He is not Arsenal as he didn't grow up supporting us........." I meant it as no player is bigger than the club. None. Thats something which many here need to learn when I see comments saying we will be nothing if henry leaves etc etc Well over here it does matter. Thats the point. Plus as I said in the post above - we have a board who have done nothing wrong financially for the club. Why change that to an unknown quantity? It makes absolutly no sense. Finishing third would be an achievement? I remember when top 8 was good!!! trying to get into Europe was good. More importantly? I remember when finishing above Spurs actually meant something to people apart from a joke like many on here treat it as..........................
"I disagree Jeff. Our conversation was more on ticket pricing, which personally I feel is a different subject albeit related to where football is going. I agree as we spoke about at West Ham that prices have to come down and without this we will find certainly Club level getting quite empty. I don't think thats a bad thing. We need the shock of that to lower prices and quite frankly thats another reason why not being in the CL for 2 years wouldn't be a bad idea. . " Rick, Sorry, was trying to tie two things together that you reference above not put our conversation in a different light, but not doing a good job of it. What I was trying get at was a supply demand link implication in your note to Mike. By that I mean that when those bonds Arsenal floated to finance our stadium and Highbury Square projectthey were underwritten and rated given certain cashflow assumptions. Please correct me if I'm wrong but those cashflows primarily, if not exclusively, come from matchday ticket receipts. If demand drops due to a lack of CL involvement on the part of the club and ticket prices are neccessarily reduced those cashflows to the bondholders shrink as well. Now the club would have to step-up and pay the difference. Where does that money come from, the transfer budget? Funds set aside for the signing of young players? If the clubs now global fanbase shrinks and you sell less TH14 and CF4 shirts how does that impact the bottom line? Like I said I hope your perspective is the right one and I'm not claiming the future some clubs over here have experienced are doomed to be repeated by AFC. My concern is that if the scenario you laid out happened things might not turn back around so quickly and a bad patch that met my definition of long term might end up meeting your definition of long term. I think globally football is moving in a direction which there are not many models to put in context against and just worry things could get away from us. I get paid to worry about risk and investment so I suppose that just make me a "nervous nellie" by trade and that carries through to other things. Jeff
No need to apologise, I see what you are getting at now. Basically in simple terms the stadium only has to be half full at currect prices to pay back the finance that is underwritten. Plus we own approximatly £300M in property that hasn't been fully developed to be sold yet. The concern was that London house prices were set for a crash, instead it's just been a slight adjustment. This has meant that the projections the board had for our debt payments were correct in terms of our assets are bigger. Put it this way, the Directors boxes and Club Level are generating the same amount we used to get in total at Highbury. That means we have at present about 52,000 x an average price of £42 in profit per game. Thats £2,184,000 per game more than we got at Highbury. With an average of 23 games per season at The Emirates if we didn't have CL games (thats an average of 4 Cup games per year) that would bring in £50,232,000 per year more than Highbury. Our debt payments are approximatly £19M per year. I am sure you can see where I am saying we would have to do very very badly to not be able to afford the debt.................yes of costs are higher than Highbury - but even if only half the stadium was full (which will never be the case as anyone offered a season ticket will take it however well we are doing) we can still service that debt quite comfortably. And we have not even started to talk about TV money, sponsorship etc etc etc yet....................no need to be a nervous nellie with the current board, instead be a confident Arsenal fan!!!!
A friend of mine suggested (though it cannot happen now, I believe) that Arsenal not being in the CL next season could be good for them. He argued that a year (or more) to rebuild at a less hectic pace, with that as a goal, could be a clear, defining difference for them. As far as team character goes, committment, etc., I found the theory interesting at least. And when you do follow a team for long term (I am a Flyers fan--you may know just how poor they were this season) there are major droughts; during those times, you look for the angle that sparks rebuilding. I suppose this is a silly point for Arsenal right now though. But Rick, I will point out that many media voices, English accents included, have said "for them not to make the Champions League would be disastrous..." or "it is the minimum expected of Arsenal..." As much as supporting a team through thick and thin is, well, what supporting really is, hearing those types of statements made by "pundits" English and non does get under one's skin. You can't believe them of course--you start putting stock in their sensationalism and pretty soon everything is a wash--but it does, on occasion, leave an aftertaste.