Has Arteta Truly Turned it Around?: Page 48 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Has Arteta Truly Turned it Around?

mdgoonah41

which i think is why this club needs an identity, the club itself, not just the current first team. we are the arsenal, for 20 years under wenger our identity was to play attacking football and dictate the terms of the game. toward the end of his run, our defense didnt have the resources or acumen to handle their end of the bargain, but we still could take the game to teams, especially to average or worse teams. we've lost that identity and it hasnt been replaced by anything coherent. in fact, our identity now is of a decidedly average, midtable club. that plays in a 60,000 seat state of the art stadium, with a first team that cost hundreds of millions of pounds on some of the biggest wages in the country.

managers come and go. there should be a core set of beliefs that transcend a particular manager. right now, lack of identity is the most galling thing about this club. lets be real, we're all going to support the club no matter what, but i think we have the right to be pissed at what has happened and not just throw our hands up and say "well, this is how it goes"

KurtEisner

You can't just build a team around every manager you hire though, what we need more than anything else is a clear idea of the kind of football Arsenal wants to play and the personell to implement this idea throughout our academy teams and scout players and managers who fit that kind of football. We're not City or United, we can't spend our way out of trouble everytime something goes wrong, we need a longterm plan. If you look at our most promising players, they all play a similar brand of football and Saka, ESR, Nelson, Willock etc. learned to play the same way in the academy. Odegaard is the kind of smart signing that compliments those players. And the club needs to be as smart with its managers. We went from Wenger to Emery and Arteta, who both seem to have very specific demands of players and a very specific idea of how to play, but both of them want to play a completely different style and neither is similar to Wenger either. Maybe giving the job to Freddie would have been a better idea in hindsight, he knows the club inside out and he knew our players. As it stands, we invested in two projects that have failed spectacularly, because the club wanted someone to take over footballing decisions for them, which only works if you find someone exceptional like Wenger, Klopp or Pep.

Claudius

You need a short term plan, Kurt.
The DoF’s job is to ensure you don’t do stupid shit like keep signing old men, and extend old men to big contracts consistently. But he isn’t there to plan for the long term. He needs to make sure the manager has the resources in the present to compete. Just ensure that the manager operates within boundaries to create sustainability. It takes 12-24 months to build a team depending on your starting point. We should always be looking to build quickly. As long as we haven’t violated the rules of good squad building, any manager should be able to come in and reformat his club.

Look at city at Pool. If Klopp walked into the City job, he’d probably get a few more workhorse midfielders, but he’d be happy with the overall squad building. He wouldn’t blow up the whole squad because they have a good DoF.

KurtEisner

I think planning for the long term is precisely what the DoF is there for. It is a lot easier for any manager to come in and build a team if there's already an established identity and a solid foundation of players to build on. You need to make sure there's someone who makes sure that the players we sign actually fit each other and the way we want to play, because leaving those kind of decisions up to the manager is always a gamble. As much as I hate their guts, Bayern are as successful as they are in part because they have a longterm plan and hire managers that fit their team instead of building a new team for every manager they hire.

Claudius

The long term stuff for me is a set of rules to ensure you have good player lifecycle management. Have a process for graduating academy players. Have a good process for sourcing and evaluating transfers and likewise for sales.

The long term stuff should really only be rules to ensure you don’t wake up tomorrow with a squad where everyone is over 28. Go look at the Crystal Palace squad for an example of what happens when you don’t have squad building rules: avg age 29, squad value £182m of which £40m is in Zaha. This team is in dire straits. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/crystal-palace/kader/verein/873

Anzac

Coombs wrote:
jones wrote:
Emery 78 games, 43 wins 16 draws 19 losses
Arteta 74 games 38 wins 15 draws 21 losses

Yep. The question of management becomes less relevant the more data we get. The team is a mess and we have tumultuous season after tumultuous season. The only consistency is the lack of it, and it's sinking the club.

ManU mk2, and the worst of it is that it is self inflicted on and off the pitch, as ever.

Anzac

Bring Back Kerrea Gilbert wrote:
Rebuild, rebuild, rebuild.

When will it be "built"?

ManU are still not 'built' post SAF,
and AW always left us 1-2 players short post The Invincibles.

QuincyAbeyie

Not sure if you want to be compare to the most notoriously badly run club in England, a country full of badly run clubs.

Anzac

mdgoonah41 wrote:
heres what arteta has proven:

his tactical vision involves sitting back defensively, and hoofing crosses into the box. he is happy with creating 3-4 chances per match and hoping to win 1-0

his man management is questionable at best, and actively damaging the club at worst

he has shown no ability to consistently field his best team or get consistent effort from his players, which is why its always 2 steps forward and 3 steps back

no one expects us to hire klopp or guardiola. weve scored 40 goals this season in 30 games. in wenger's last season, with an inferior squad, we scored 74 goals. the product we are putting out there right now is embarrassing.

I disagree as follows:

* his tactical vision revolves around exploiting the half spaces with technical players who are progressive on the ball, and like to use quick movement and passing to keep the ball in constant motion;

* his man management is done with the underlying objective of changing the culture at the club, on and off the pitch = it's not perfect and IMO it took a hit / was undermined when the club didn't purge the squad last summer;

* his best team when available has us around top4 this calendar year in terms of performance metrics, even if our results and performances have been inconsistent. IIRC after WHU we still had the 2nd best GF and 3rd best GA. Half our goals conceded this year have been the direct result of individual errors. This w/end we were without both Saka and ESR at the same time for the first time this calendar year, as well as both Luiz and Xhaka. All are injured and the team selection was forced rather than intended. If anything it reinforces the fact that most of the squad are not fit for purpose;

* IMO AW's squad may have had less quality but it was better suited to what AW wanted for his style of play . The players performed better because they were indulged on and off the pitch with frakk all responsibility or accountability, as AW was more concerned with beautiful football rather than results. Once AW left the shit hit the fan in terms of both expectation and culture shift and the players were unable and/or unwilling to adapt to step up;

* IMO at times the football we have played in various halves has been as good/attractive/attacking/thrilling as any. We have dominated halves without outcome and have been unable to follow through unlike LFC in their 2nd half against us. It is this block, the inconsistency and the individual errors that continues to undermine our performances and results more so than Arteta's style of tactics.

Anzac

jones wrote:
Coombs wrote:
Yep. The question of management becomes less relevant the more data we get. The team is a mess and we have tumultuous season after tumultuous season. The only consistency is the lack of it, and it's sinking the club.

Nonsense. The team is a mess because the man in charge doesn't know what the fuck he's doing. You need to distance yourself from the team and look at other clubs and leagues, clubs everywhere with shit managers are underperforming and clubs with great coaches do better than expected. Tuchel came into an underperforming Chelsea and just had his first loss after fifteen games. Kovac went to Monaco and got them from midtable to fighting PSG for the title. I could list dozens of examples just start looking elsewhere, Arsenal are far from "sinking" we have loads of cash and talents we just made a poor call on who to give the job to lead.

1 - COVID says NO;

2 - the club is still in shit street off the pitch and that is reflected in their decision making as to what happens on the pitch.

IMO the biggest error re appointing Arteta was/is in not giving him the best possible support and resources to actually succeed, and I'm not talking about needing elite level players as opposed to both players and staff who are fit for purpose. For example IIRC when he was appointed he was only able to bring in 4 staff after Emery had departed taking at least 9. I understand about downsizing our operations post COVID but IMO you still need to ensure you have the best quality you can get, and more so when trying to achieve with less.

Anzac

Klaus wrote:
goon wrote:
I just think it's the reality though. You look around at the very best managers and they all have very specific wants and needs when it comes to players the players at their disposal. Klopp changed 90% of the Liverpool first 14 within 24 months.

I think that's just normal player movement though, maybe a little accelerated because they had an extraordinary amount of shit in their squad; it wasn't even half as good as ours is at the moment. We only have 7 players left now who were part of the first team squad in the summer of 2018 when Wenger was replaced though, and that's only 2,5 years ago.

The speed and depth of the LFC rebuild is exactly what we have failed to do, and that we still have 7 players from AW's 1st team squad is still a big part of the issue = they have now failed to deliver under 3 manager as part of the starting/match day squad.

Anzac

goon wrote:
Always felt like he was adapting to Coutinho though. Him leaving just made it easier to switch to something that didn't have to accommodate a player that he had to accommodate.

Klaus wrote:
I think that's just normal player movement though, maybe a little accelerated because they had an extraordinary amount of shit in their squad; it wasn't even half as good as ours is at the moment. We only have 7 players left now who were part of the first team squad in the summer of 2018 when Wenger was replaced though, and that's only 2,5 years ago.

It's driven by necessity imo, that kind of turnover needs to be quick because you won't (nor should you) get 5 years to build your team. Since that initial period Liverpool's squad has been stable, as has City's. Once teams get to where they want they're normally quite stable. It's what we have to aim for imo, and to be fair I think we're close.

By contrast we're busy trying hard to emulate all the worst examples of the ManU experience post SAF.

Anzac

Claudius wrote:
goon wrote:
Always felt like he was adapting to Coutinho though. Him leaving just made it easier to switch to something that didn't have to accommodate a player that he had to accommodate.

It's driven by necessity imo, that kind of turnover needs to be quick because you won't (nor should you) get 5 years to build your team. Since that initial period Liverpool's squad has been stable, as has City's. Once teams get to where they want they're normally quite stable. It's what we have to aim for imo, and to be fair I think we're close.

Yup. People sometimes have this mistaken idea that you need forever to build a team. If you have a clear blueprint, you can be done in 2 years. Our problem historically has been a lack of clarity and execution. A manager’s average tenure is too short for team building to take forever.

You need genuine appetite for change to be able to commence change in the first instance, and then to see it through. Judging by the actions or lack thereof last summer I am yet to be convinced we want to change other than by our terms in regards to our self funding financial model and the time frames it dictates. Irony being IMO in doing so it will cost us more regardless of time frames or outcomes.

Klaus

Anzac wrote:
Klaus wrote:
I think that's just normal player movement though, maybe a little accelerated because they had an extraordinary amount of shit in their squad; it wasn't even half as good as ours is at the moment. We only have 7 players left now who were part of the first team squad in the summer of 2018 when Wenger was replaced though, and that's only 2,5 years ago.

The speed and depth of the LFC rebuild is exactly what we have failed to do, and that we still have 7 players from AW's 1st team squad is still a big part of the issue = they have now failed to deliver under 3 manager as part of the starting/match day squad.

Actually it means that 18 out of 25 players have been replaced. Of the ones that started for him only Aubameyang, Bellerin and Xhaka remain, and Auba was his last buy.

The issue isn't that Wenger's spectral being still hovers over the team, it's that the current management doesn't have an ounce of Wenger's ability even when he was at his absolute worst.

Anzac

Kurt Eisner wrote:
I think planning for the long term is precisely what the DoF is there for. It is a lot easier for any manager to come in and build a team if there's already an established identity and a solid foundation of players to build on. You need to make sure there's someone who makes sure that the players we sign actually fit each other and the way we want to play, because leaving those kind of decisions up to the manager is always a gamble. As much as I hate their guts, Bayern are as successful as they are in part because they have a longterm plan and hire managers that fit their team instead of building a new team for every manager they hire.

Was reading a recent analysis of Bayern as a club model, and they emphasised consistency and said their brand of football had remained very consistent for over a decade, which allowed incoming managers to basically become variations of the same theme - much like the ideology at Ajax and Barca during their peak.

IMO the key to this is that the vision is initially driven by the club in terms of how they want to be represented on the pitch in terms of style and results/outcomes for the season. Under AW we had the former but not the latter, and as a result we had no KERs or KPIs in relation to those outcomes.

The second step is to have a squad fit for purpose in regards to those criteria, and where the individual units of Defence, Midfield and Attack are balanced amongst themselves AND more importantly they compliment each other to form a cohesive team suited to the criteria of the club vision. This then makes managerial selection AND recruiting easier and more consistent because you know what you are looking for in each.

IMO the club still don't have a frakking clue as to what they want other than to regain UCL revenues, and I base this upon the fact that all 3 of our last managers are not at all similar in terms of style, tactics or squad/player requirements. As a result our recruiting (managerial and players) has been disjoint, disfunctional and counter-productive on the pitch and a financial disaster off it. Instead of addressing and fixing the issues that should have been identified as to why AW was sacked/released, we've followed ManU post SAF and we've actually managed to compound those issues because we have not as yet accepted the need to change the compromise culture that still exists throughout the club and owners.

Anzac

Klaus wrote:
Anzac wrote:
The speed and depth of the LFC rebuild is exactly what we have failed to do, and that we still have 7 players from AW's 1st team squad is still a big part of the issue = they have now failed to deliver under 3 manager as part of the starting/match day squad.

Actually it means that 18 out of 25 players have been replaced. Of the ones that started for him only Aubameyang, Bellerin and Xhaka remain, and Auba was his last buy.

The issue isn't that Wenger's spectral being still hovers over the team, it's that the current management doesn't have an ounce of Wenger's ability even when he was at his absolute worst.

No - it means the squad still lacks balance and is not yet fit for any purpose other than AW's style, which has not been repeated by any top flight manager that I am aware of.
It also means that until Jan we also still had the likes of Ozil, Mustafi & Kolasinac as part of the senior / match day squad, which is effectively AW's core/spine.
Laca was also an AW signing as were the likes of Elneny, Holding, Chambers & the youngsters all came through the Academy during his tenure = AW's finger prints are still very much all over this squad both directly and indirectly.

Klaus

Anzac wrote:
No - it means the squad still lacks balance and is not yet fit for any purpose other than AW's style, which has not been repeated by any top flight manager that I am aware of.

This is delusional. How is the squad unfit for any purpose other than Wenger's style when the only two regular players still here are our star player and Xhaka? It's not Wenger who is forcing Arteta to pick the latter of them, mind you. And he's not the one who extended with Aubameyang either.

Anzac wrote:
Laca was also an AW signing as were the likes of Elneny, Holding, Chambers & the youngsters all came through the Academy during his tenure = AW's finger prints are still very much all over this squad both directly and indirectly.

😆 A bunch of bit-part players, most of whom Arteta has actively brought back into the mix from fringe obscurity and loans, are supposed to be what holds us back because of some past affiliation with Wenger?

Anzac

Probably better suited for the Tactics thread.

My biggest criticism of Arteta to date has been his persistence of the 4231 when he has indicated his preference is for the 433, which I think would actually work better for our midfield options. IMO if he is prepared to compromise on shape then he could have also looked to made things a lot easier by simply playing a 4222 directly, rather than looking to line-up in a 4231 but with 4222 roles.

Anzac

Klaus wrote:
Anzac wrote:
No - it means the squad still lacks balance and is not yet fit for any purpose other than AW's style, which has not been repeated by any top flight manager that I am aware of.

This is delusional. How is the squad unfit for any purpose other than Wenger's style when the only two regular players still here are our star player and Xhaka? It's not Wenger who is forcing Arteta to pick the latter of them, mind you. And he's not the one who extended with Aubameyang either.

It simply means the issues regarding balance within the units/components and as a cohesive team have not yet been addressed/resolved, and the last style of play the players were closest to fitting was AW's. The recruiting failure to take corrective action was during the time after AW & before Arteta, but that's on Sanllehi & Co. IMO as yet there is no single piece of the team that is yet fit for purpose as a unit, let alone to work together as a team.

Klaus

There are more players in the current squad who only remember Emery as a past manager than there are who can tell you what it's like to play under Wenger.

« Previous Page Next Page »