Has Arteta Truly Turned it Around?: Page 168 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Has Arteta Truly Turned it Around?

Don Pacifico

goon wrote:
There's a handful of games where we've played well under Arteta and in every single one of them we've pressed aggressively high up the pitch. Setting aside big games, two that come to mind are Southampton and Wolves (the first half anyway...) last year. I don't understand why it's so hard to replicate that template.

I can live with the execution not being perfect and us getting killed on the counter now and then or conceding goals like we did against Palace, but inability to sustain pressure is puzzling.

This is where I'm at. There have been demonstrable examples of us getting things right but the problem is that they are currently outliers. The inability to replicate, as you say, is mystifying.

Where my head always wonders to in these situations, is whether it's a case of the players no longer working for the manager (which is a death knell if indeed the case) but that doesn't seem to reflect what I see in terms of player body language (etc.). Then I think, perhaps Arteta isn't able to cohesively communicate his ideas/strategy and that as time has gone on, potentially be has overcomplicated things.

Clrnc

How is it mystifying? In fact it's so rare it's exactly what is to be expected of a average to poor coach's team. You see it with all the poor relegated sides, they can suddenly win a match against a top team, press well and play fantastically. But overall they are still a poor side and the bigger sample size don't lie. It's extremely easy for a poor team to have a few good matches. Even Newcastle under Bruce dominated a few matches but most of their fans ain't under the impression they could replicate it

awooga83

Well I look at things in a different way, if you can't demonstrate a consistency in performance levels then the conclusion I draw is it's unlikely something deliberate that you can attribute to Arteta and all the more reason there is no evidence to continue with him.

AAStyle

Don Pacifico wrote:
goon wrote:
There's a handful of games where we've played well under Arteta and in every single one of them we've pressed aggressively high up the pitch. Setting aside big games, two that come to mind are Southampton and Wolves (the first half anyway...) last year. I don't understand why it's so hard to replicate that template.

I can live with the execution not being perfect and us getting killed on the counter now and then or conceding goals like we did against Palace, but inability to sustain pressure is puzzling.

This is where I'm at. There have been demonstrable examples of us getting things right but the problem is that they are currently outliers. The inability to replicate, as you say, is mystifying.

Where my head always wonders to in these situations, is whether it's a case of the players no longer working for the manager (which is a death knell if indeed the case) but that doesn't seem to reflect what I see in terms of player body language (etc.). Then I think, perhaps Arteta isn't able to cohesively communicate his ideas/strategy and that as time has gone on, potentially be has overcomplicated things.

Di Matteo's chelsea had also 2 or 3 good games after winning the Champions league. Should Chelsea had given him 2+ years to reach that on a constant basis?

This argument is madness, sorry.

Meatwad

roman has standards, the kroenke's don't know what that is.

AAStyle

It is nauseating to see Arsenal as some sort of kindergarten for a wannabe manager. There was a time when any top tier manager would have jumped to the opportunity to be here. All our pride and name is being destroyed by allowing to be perceived as a laughingstock who hire a complete noob as coach.

Ask any other PL club if it would consider Arteta as a coach. There is your answer regarding Arteta being a good choice for Arsenal.

mdgoonah41

the funny thing is, we only have to look across town and see how chelsea handled it. they are a shit club with a scummy owner and i hate everything about them, but they went with one of their own, a young and promising lampard, and as soon as they realized he wasnt up for it, they pulled the rip cord and changed course. unlike arteta, lampard also actually had experience managing a team, not just setting up the training cones for a famous manager. the summer before he was sacked, they spent a ton of money on new players. they were dogshit for 4 months and in 9th, and they had enough and sacked him. they have cycled through tons of managers so maybe they arent the poster child for how to run a club, but with all the turmoil, they've always recovered quickly and havent spent long outside the top 4.

Meatwad

"Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta says managers are being put off taking jobs because of the sort of abuse suffered by Steve Bruce at Newcastle."
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/59004774

over to you arsenal supporters.

Ricky1985

mdgoonah41 wrote:
the funny thing is, we only have to look across town and see how chelsea handled it. they are a shit club with a scummy owner and i hate everything about them, but they went with one of their own, a young and promising lampard, and as soon as they realized he wasnt up for it, they pulled the rip cord and changed course. unlike arteta, lampard also actually had experience managing a team, not just setting up the training cones for a famous manager. the summer before he was sacked, they spent a ton of money on new players. they were dogshit for 4 months and in 9th, and they had enough and sacked him. they have cycled through tons of managers so maybe they arent the poster child for how to run a club, but with all the turmoil, they've always recovered quickly and havent spent long outside the top 4.

Chelsea gave Lampard half a season to make a team after spending a lot of money to build the side he wanted in the summer - that's exactly what I expect will be the case here, if Arteta can't get the team progressing.

Qwiss

If Lampard had been 12th after 8 games they'd have gotten rid of him a lot earlier.

Ricky1985

Maybe, maybe not, but the situations aren't exactly the same anyway and the comparison is a bit forced imo to begin with. They signed players mostly for immediate success, players considered ready to play at the very top right away - Thiago Silva, Chilwell, Ziyech, Werner and Havertz all for massive money/monster wages.

We've changed practically the entire XI in the space of 12 months, ripped the squad up on top of that, and almost exclusively bought U23 players that have never played at the top level. And we have the youngest squad in the Premier League. Even with all of those differences to Chelsea, I expect Arteta won't last beyond Christmas if he doesn't get this team going.

I think Arteta should definitely be given that time. It would take a disaster - a string of losses and the players downing tools, for example - for me to think it would be right to fire him before then.

Qwiss

Whatever way you spin it the squad has always been better than our league position, everything else is just excuses.

Ricky1985

Qwiss! wrote:
Whatever way you spin it the squad has always been better than our league position, everything else is just excuses.

If you say so, I don't agree things are ever that black and white.

And I obviously don't see it as spin, and certainly don't intend it to be. I see it as relevant facts that have to be taken into consideration when deciding on Arteta's performance so far, the chances of him improving and definitely when making a comparison to Chelsea.

Qwiss

If you want to compare him to the Chelsea situation just listen to Tuchel. He went in there and said he didn't care who they signed, etc he just wanted to get on with who they had and make it work as well as it could. Meanwhile Arteta was out there telling the press we needed half a new team.

Ricky1985

As I say, the two situations are not the same. I suspect the outcome will be the same as Lampard though, should Arteta fail to make progress.

Ray

Ricky1985 wrote:
As I say, the two situations are not the same. I suspect the outcome will be the same as Lampard though, should Arteta fail to make progress.

He had got Chelsea into the CL, so earned that half a season. Arteta earned the sack based on last seasons performance alone, not to be given 200m to spend to fail again. And I suspect he won’t be sacked half way through the season either, because just like last season, he will win a few games, and the fantasists will be out in full force singing his praises for what he can do with a bit more time.

QuincyAbeyie

Qwiss! wrote:
If Lampard had been 12th after 8 games they'd have gotten rid of him a lot earlier.

Plus Lampard's bad stint came after a season of actually having gotten top 4, while Arteta's current stint is after the stinker that was last season.

Klaus

Yeah, Lampard took over a squad full of kids, during a transfer ban, right after they lost their star player, and he got them back into CL. He wasn't good enough for the Chelsea job but but he was a different level to Arteta's management. Everyone was gloating back then over how they were falling apart.

The difference is that Chelsea recognise the limits of their coaches. Everyone knew Emery should have been sacked after his first season. Everyone knew Arteta should have walked last November. We have fixed nothing because the biggest issue was not the players.

jones

Meatwad wrote:
"Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta says managers are being put off taking jobs because of the sort of abuse suffered by Steve Bruce at Newcastle."
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/59004774

over to you arsenal supporters.

How about these fuckers leave on their own accord then? People talk about abuse from fans towards managers but what about the abuse of my eyes every weekend? Sure its not nice to be called a cabbage head (not his fault he had one thrown at him either) but the fat and tactically inept part are blatantly true. Lose some weight and try improving your ability as a coach, I don't think he's changed at all since the days at Wigan or Sunderland when every game Fungus had against him was a free three points.

Same with Arteta. He's learning at the job and talks about putting things in the right place, put yourself back into an assistant position, hold your hand up and be shit somewhere else I'm pretty sure whatever timid abuse he gets would cease immediately. Coming from the dickhead who's thrown half his squad under the bus in public this talk is pretty rich.

AAStyle

Ricky1985 wrote:
Maybe, maybe not, but the situations aren't exactly the same anyway and the comparison is a bit forced imo to begin with. They signed players mostly for immediate success, players considered ready to play at the very top right away - Thiago Silva, Chilwell, Ziyech, Werner and Havertz all for massive money/monster wages.

We've changed practically the entire XI in the space of 12 months, ripped the squad up on top of that, and almost exclusively bought U23 players that have never played at the top level. And we have the youngest squad in the Premier League. Even with all of those differences to Chelsea, I expect Arteta won't last beyond Christmas if he doesn't get this team going.

I think Arteta should definitely be given that time. It would take a disaster - a string of losses and the players downing tools, for example - for me to think it would be right to fire him before then.

To start, why entrust a complete rookie with the task of overhauling the team?

All opinions are respected, but it really amazes me to see people believe in a beginner coach that over 2+ years has shown nothing sustainable.

« Previous Page Next Page »