"The journey continues" - Mikel signs extension until 2025: Page 6 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

"The journey continues" - Mikel signs extension until 2025

Coombs

Keep moving those goalposts.

innervisionscm

jones wrote:
We have spent more than anyone in the world last season

Yes, but on young players, whose high market value was based not on their current ability, but on their future ability and future resale value. As you can see from our wage bill, a distant 5th in the PL (_£80m, much closer to the likes of Everton and Leicester than to 4th-highest Liverpool at £134m), we don't have a lot of established UCL-level professionals. You could argue Thomas Partey is the only one in the entire squad.

I think people here are letting optimism about our young squad lead them to overestimate its present-day ability, both regard to performance and consistency. Martinelli and Smith Rowe need to keep developing their games, Ramsdale and White need to get more consistent, etc. And we've gotten nothing from the striker position all year! I would have liked the extension to wait until the end of the year, but Arteta deserves it. The idea that some other trendy fitness-merchant manager could stroll in here and get better and more entertaining football from this squad is ridiculous, and ignores how far the club fell from ₂₀₁₅ or so.

jones

innervisionscm wrote:
jones wrote:
We have spent more than anyone in the world last season

Yes, but on young players, whose high market value was based not on their current ability, but on their future ability and future resale value. As you can see from our wage bill, a distant 5th in the PL (_£80m, much closer to the likes of Everton and Leicester than to 4th-highest Liverpool at £134m), we don't have a lot of established UCL-level professionals. You could argue Thomas Partey is the only one in the entire squad.

I think people here are letting optimism about our young squad lead them to overestimate its present-day ability, both regard to performance and consistency. Martinelli and Smith Rowe need to keep developing their games, Ramsdale and White need to get more consistent, etc. And we've gotten nothing from the striker position all year! I would have liked the extension to wait until the end of the year, but Arteta deserves it. The idea that some other trendy fitness-merchant manager could stroll in here and get better and more entertaining football from this squad is ridiculous, and ignores how far the club fell from ₂₀₁₅ or so.

It doesn't matter whether we spend our whole budget on young players or old ones, it's the club's decision to do it either way and they have to lie in the bed they made. No one forced them to spend 55m on White when they could've gotten another Partey level signing for that money, in fact most of us including those who are happy with the club's overall trajectory advised to do exactly that.

If you talk about wages it's not like Arteta and Edu haven't spent all of their money on just youngsters. They were the ones who got Partey on a big contract, they were the ones to extend David Luiz and tried to do it again, they gave Willian a big contract, extended Auba before paying Barcelona to take him off us, tried to extend with Mustafi etc. Not exactly thrifty spending on wages either.

As for the "trendy fitness-merchant manager" that's some Daily Mail level comment section type of input, just needs the Johnny foreigner or continental fairy attribute to round it out. We have a bloke in charge whose only quality even by account of those who think he deserves his extension is his ability to scout and sign good young players yet we're constantly seeing disparaging comments here on those with actual coaching experience and prowess.

innervisionscm

Young vs old players does matter when you're assessing Arteta's performance this year. And are you really arguing that we should have bought more established players last summer? We do not have the resources to go that route. We have to buy when they're young, develop them, and turn them into great players for us or at least recoup some resale value.

I'm not defending every one of Arteta/Edu's moves. I'm saying that a wage bill is a better proxy for the current ability/value of a squad than the previous summer's transfer net spend. '5th in the PL in wages' reflects the quality of our team a lot more than 'spent more than anyone on transfers last summer'.

I don't mean to disparage other managers, I'm just very skeptical of the idea that a significant improvement is around the corner with a new and more experienced coach. Arteta's virtues as a manager so far are twofold: 1. he has clearly created a positive, unified atmosphere around the club, from the team to the coaches to the fans, and 2. he has used our light schedule this season to impose a certain identity and organization onto our play.

Yes he makes some bad decisions and is a bit of a prick, and yes he received an extension a few weeks early because our club is run by stooges, and yes it's possible that he may not be able to, for instance, coach attacking football well enough for us to challenge for the PL. But overall Arsenal is finally in a respectable position with a future again, so let's not pretend he was going anywhere.

jones

innervisionscm wrote:
Young vs old players does matter when you're assessing Arteta's performance this year. And are you really arguing that we should have bought more established players last summer? We do not have the resources to go that route. We have to buy when they're young, develop them, and turn them into great players for us or at least recoup some resale value.

Surely you see some sort of contradiction, "we don't have the resources to go that route" vs "we have outspent everyone else"? It's not a matter of fees or wages but one of resource allocation. No one forced Arteta to spend a combined 80m on White and Ramsdale, those are the 7th and 5th most expensive players ever in their respective positions. If we wanted we could have instead done with the serviceable players we have as their backups now and invested that money elsewhere.

The youth argument is valid when we were picking guys up like Cesc Anelka or RVP up for peanuts, not when we spend big boy fees on them.

RC8

We have won more games (21) this season than we did in 2016 when we finished 2nd (20).

We have also won more games this season than Liverpool won last year (20) as they finished third with 69 points. One more win and we would equal them on points, too.

It seems highly likely to me that the indicators of whether to renew Arteta were set in points/wins and not on league position.

In the last 8 seasons only teams in the top 5 have managed more than 20 wins in the league, and we got there with 4 games to spare. It is the bare minimum we should be accepting at this stage, but it is an improvement from the absolute shambles we were in two years ago.

Big Willie

RC8 wrote:
We have won more games (21) this season than we did in 2016 when we finished 2nd (20).

We have also won more games this season than Liverpool won last year (20) as they finished third with 69 points. One more win and we would equal them on points, too.

It seems highly likely to me that the indicators of whether to renew Arteta were set in points/wins and not on league position.

In the last 8 seasons only teams in the top 5 have managed more than 20 wins in the league, and we got there with 4 games to spare. It is the bare minimum we should be accepting at this stage, but it is an improvement from the absolute shambles we were in two years ago.

Couldn't have been in such a shambles if we're offering a new contract for basically matching Emery's spectacular failure at the end of 2018/2019. I mean even under Emery's first season we had won 20 games with 5 games left and still ended up with 70 points.

At the time it was offered to Arteta we were on 55 points and 17 wins at that point, and on the bwck of three straight losses so it doesn't seem to be based off wins/points either.

RC8

Emery's "spectacular failure at the end of 2018/2019" was rewarded with a contract extension, was it not?

And then he was sacked for only managing 4 wins in 13 league games (with something like only 1 win in the 9 games prior to his sacking). All 4 of those league wins were close games won by a single goal, too.

In hindsight it's obvious that Emery's early good form was unsustainable. The thesis that Wenger was underperforming with the squad at his disposal has been thoroughly rebuked by history.

QuincyAbeyie

RC8 wrote:
The thesis that Wenger was underperforming with the squad at his disposal has been thoroughly rebuked by history.

Not sure about that, but even so - so what? Wenger built that squad. If he didn't underperform with it then it just means that he built a bad squad.

Big Willie

RC8 wrote:
Emery's "spectacular failure at the end of 2018/2019" was rewarded with a contract extension, was it not?

And then he was sacked for only managing 4 wins in 13 league games (with something like only 1 win in the 9 games prior to his sacking). All 4 of those league wins were close games won by a single goal, too.

In hindsight it's obvious that Emery's early good form was unsustainable. The thesis that Wenger was underperforming with the squad at his disposal has been thoroughly rebuked by history.

Emery didn't sign a new contract. As far as I remember Raul tried to offer him one but it was never signed in the end.

Also, if he was sacked for winning just 4 games in 13, should Arteta not have been sacked in 2020 having won just out of 12 league games, losing 8 in the process. Both thise league wins were also by the single goal.

If Emery was sacked because of his poor run of form the following year then why wasn't Arteta? If the answer is Wenger and Emery were not underperforming with the squad, and that it was in fact shit, then why weren't they, in particular Emery given the time and resources to change that. If he could get that shit team to 70 points, the same as Arteta has done now with a complete revamp of the squad then imaging what he could have done with the current squad.

Just shows that we were either way too hasty sacking Emery or way too late in sacking Arteta.

RC8

Not necessarily. I don't think Emery's coaching led to his poor results directly, but he did lose the dressing room in the process.

Arteta didn't lose the dressing room and by December 2020 it was well obvious the squad truly was awful. Even so, he probably came dangerously close to getting sacked and it took good 5 wins in the next 6 games to win back the fans.

RC8

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
RC8 wrote:
The thesis that Wenger was underperforming with the squad at his disposal has been thoroughly rebuked by history.

Not sure about that, but even so - so what? Wenger built that squad. If he didn't underperform with it then it just means that he built a bad squad.

He absolutely built a bad squad (I argued as much at the time, too), but that was not what most of his detractors accused him of.

Big Willie

RC8 wrote:
Not necessarily. I don't think Emery's coaching led to his poor results directly, but he did lose the dressing room in the process.

Arteta didn't lose the dressing room and by December 2020 it was well obvious the squad truly was awful. Even so, he probably came dangerously close to getting sacked and it took good 5 wins in the next 6 games to win back the fans.

Honestly, that could be true but it would have only been possible to prove in hindsight. Had Arteta got sacked at that point people could easily have said he lost the dressing room.

But as he was given time to turn it around it didn't prove to be the case. Had Emery been given more time who's to say he couldn't have turned things around?

For me it was right to sack Emery at the time, just as Arteta should have been back then. Difference being that Emery had already proven he could amass a pretty decent points haul with that bad squad he had.

Who knows if he'd have been either backed or if he was he'd have bought the right players. Arteta, to his credit has put together a really good group of players.

But I do feel he'd have been more likely to do better with what we have now than Arteta based on the fact he reached the points and win tally you mentioned earlier with what is bring accepted as a vastly inferior squad.

RC8

I mean, yes, Emery is a much better manager than Arteta if that's what you are getting at... but as someone who is fond of Unai, it does not seem like a coincidence that his best performances have come in spanish-speaking dressing rooms. If Emery had pulled a Bielsa and just relied on an interpreter I suspect he might still be our manager, but he didn't and he is gone.

Thankfully, once it became clear that our squad was a mess, Arteta was backed to clear it and - as you point out - put together a very good group of players. That we are back where we were in 2018-19 but with one of the youngest teams in the league is good news.

I might be totally off since it's true we hadn't yet secured the 20 wins or whatever when the contract was allegedly offered, but I suspect the 'goal for the season' that would trigger contract renewal was something like that rather than a league position or qualification to Europe.

deardevil

RC8 wrote:
Emery's "spectacular failure at the end of 2018/2019" was rewarded with a contract extension, was it not?

And then he was sacked for only managing 4 wins in 13 league games (with something like only 1 win in the 9 games prior to his sacking). All 4 of those league wins were close games won by a single goal, too.

In hindsight it's obvious that Emery's early good form was unsustainable. The thesis that Wenger was underperforming with the squad at his disposal has been thoroughly rebuked by history.

The argument was always 'anyone could do better than Wenger' or 'things can't possibly get any worse'. Wenger did build the squad that saw the end of him so he deserves criticism for that and we added more shit to it which led to Emery's sacking and Arteta's 8th placed double.

People moaned for years talking about changing the slack culture that existed at the club. Arteta completely revamps the team and the culture whilst getting rid of all questionable actors. Instead of accepting the obvious consequence that such a transition leads to growing pains, people use it as a stick to beat him with.

It's quite simply an inability to see the bigger picture. If Arteta fails to build on this team now that we've transitioned to a new team and vision, then he deserves whatever comes his way. But to want his head for navigating us from the old squad to the new one is unfair and unreasonable.

Transitions are always painful.

QuincyAbeyie

deardevil wrote:
It's quite simply an inability to see the bigger picture.

Or by using "people" to argue against you make it seem like they all have inconsistent opinions that contradict themselves when the truth is probably that there are different people who say different things.

Klaus

I think the bigger picture is exactly what a lot of "people" are worried about, and why they aren't on board with Arteta even though he might achieve an acceptable result in the short-term perspective.

Big Willie

Exactly.

deardevil wrote:
It's quite simply an inability to see the bigger picture. If Arteta fails to build on this team now that we've transitioned to a new team and vision, then he deserves whatever comes his way. But to want his head for navigating us from the old squad to the new one is unfair and unreasonable.

Transitions are always painful.

What you fail to see is that this is one of the aspects he actually gets credit for, even from his biggest critics. He has bought good player and we have a really good squad now. Don't think you'll find anyone questioning that part of things.

People who want his head don't do it because he's navigated us from the old squad to the new one. Its because they see a ceiling in his ability to coach us to greater things. It's because they believe he should have been sacked a year and a half ago already. It's because they see the way he can easily fall out with anyonr at any time and effectively banishing thrm or sacking them forgoing any incoming fee. It's because of the football we regularly trot out isn't enjoyable to watch and even more so when we struggle to create chances.

There's many reasons why "people" don't like the guy being our manager, buy getting us a bunch of new players and forcing the Kroenke's hands to stump up the cash isn't one of them.

Don Pacifico

Big Willie wrote:
Exactly.

deardevil wrote:
It's quite simply an inability to see the bigger picture. If Arteta fails to build on this team now that we've transitioned to a new team and vision, then he deserves whatever comes his way. But to want his head for navigating us from the old squad to the new one is unfair and unreasonable.

Transitions are always painful.

People who want his head don't do it because he's navigated us from the old squad to the new one. Its because they see a ceiling in his ability to coach us to greater things. It's because they believe he should have been sacked a year and a half ago already. It's because they see the way he can easily fall out with anyonr at any time and effectively banishing thrm or sacking them forgoing any incoming fee. It's because of the football we regularly trot out isn't enjoyable to watch and even more so when we struggle to create chances.

I guess this is where I think there is a difference in perspective.

Should have been sacked 18 months ago? Maybe but institutional change doesn't happen overnight and typically encounters a few bumps in the road. A while ago I raised the point that before SAF joined United they'd consistently finished in the top four for the previous four years; after he joined, their average league position for the following four years was 8th if I remember correctly. Now Arteta hasn't demonstrated anything like enough to suggest he's equivalent to SAF but the original point stands.

Does he easily fall out with players? Guendouzi, Pepe and Auba didn't/haven't worked out (and legitimately, that is a concern) but then you see how the rest of the squad react to him. Ultimately, being an authoritarian is a valid management style and even if you disagree with his approach, I personally think this point gets overemphasised in light of the obvious commitment to his work work ethic and ideals that you see from the players on the pitch. And on the selling point, that is legitimately frustrating and concerning but I'd argue that that's more Edu and co. than Arteta.

As for the quality of football, this is one that I'm not sure I get. Yes, it was dreadful last year and yes this year has been mixed but surely there are signs of improvement? Most of our best goals this season have been fantastic team goals, well constructed from back to front. It's by no means perfect but it's evolving in the right direction and even if we don't reach peak Invincibles in style, I think there can be a happy medium. Personally, I think we're getting closer in time and I'd add that inconsistency may be derived from the age of our squad.

Tl;dr - I think the way we interpret various divisive topics can be fuelled by our perspective on things as a whole.

QuincyAbeyie

@Don I'm not sure I get what the SAF point is to be honest. If the point is "but SAF did badly initially too and it turned out well" then that's something you could say about any manager at their new club for their first couple of years but that doesn't mean we should evaluate those years. There are are plenty of managers who have started out badly without turning it around. Not sure why you'd use an outlier to prove a point.

« Previous Page Next Page »