mr ashley
Well-Known Member
- Jan 27, 2011
- 3,176
- 8,619
Ok tell me another way it’s comparable then
The Deadline Day ITK Discussion Thread - 1st September
- Thread starter Archibald&Crooks
- Start date
- Status
- May 8, 2005
- 41,857
- 25,920
- Admin
- #1,962
I'm about to jump in the car for a long journey, so going to be dipping out of the discussion, but I'll leave by saying this...
I don't disagree that we could and should have done more. But to reduce the whole situation down to Levy in essence actively trying to undermine the manager and the club is just utterly ridiculous.
Could he be a bit more ambitious? Of course! Do I wish he would be? Yes! But to look at what we've done and try to claim that he's only about the money or not bothered about success on the pitch is just hugely reductive.
I don't disagree that we could and should have done more. But to reduce the whole situation down to Levy in essence actively trying to undermine the manager and the club is just utterly ridiculous.
Could he be a bit more ambitious? Of course! Do I wish he would be? Yes! But to look at what we've done and try to claim that he's only about the money or not bothered about success on the pitch is just hugely reductive.
Aleks
Well-Known Member
- Aug 18, 2012
- 1,341
- 7,018
I'm gonna give it a go.
Out of the 4 signings Arsenal made the only one directly adding something right now is Rice
Havertz: Huge question marks
Timber: Injured for a long time, they should have gotten another fullback
Raya: not sure if he's first choice
- May 8, 2005
- 41,857
- 25,920
- Admin
- #1,964
The quality of players for the holes/weaknesses in the first 11/squad, I believe we have filled better than they have.
mil1lion
This is the place to be
- May 7, 2004
- 42,714
- 78,643
We shouldn't look at the prices spent. Rice and Havertz were way overpriced. It's more about who identified their weaknesses and addressed them. Then you add the sale of Kane which adds a new weakness. Arsenal had less weaknesses to address and maybe have done that but Arteta is tinkering a bit much. We've left ourself short in depth. It doesn't matter if we spend less to get them though.
It’s the first window of a painful rebuild under a new manager. We all know the gaps so I don’t buy it that Ange and Daniel et al don’t. If you don’t expect the most violent of rollercoasters this season particularly after the last week then you need to get off - or grip tightly and make out like you’re enjoying the ride.
Archibald-CPH
Well-Known Member
- Mar 15, 2005
- 961
- 1,006
Do we know, who was in the house last night. Did it get confirmed it was Bremer?
I mean, if we are going to look at it from this perspective, we had a waaay better window than Arsenal.
Don't think that's your point, though.
Bluto Blutarsky
Well-Known Member
- Mar 4, 2021
- 15,383
- 71,445
Not sure what you are getting at.
The main point with any career is to earn wages. They are earning wages at the highest level.
Is getting games at a lower level, at lower wages, somehow better for a career that is winding down? I suppose that is an individual choice - and I can see both sides.
Think after 20 years in charge he still hasn’t worked out how to support success on the field.
only1waddle
Well-Known Member
- Jun 18, 2012
- 8,243
- 12,536
I'm certainly not saying he actively undermines managers, I don't think the majority of posters are, I just don't think he's bothered if a manager is undermined as a biproduct of his decision making.
Dazzazzad
Well-Known Member
- Jan 17, 2006
- 1,241
- 4,394
You're not naive, it's a ridiculous conspiracy theory.
JamieSpursCommunityUser
Well-Known Member
- Jan 27, 2011
- 1,937
- 10,231
It isn’t one hit though is it? It’s 10 windows over 5 years.
This is dead wood we’ve been trying to shift for nigh on half a decade in Sanchez case.
We even turned down £10m from Rennes for Dav, who we will loose for free and isn’t good enough in the meantime. So his replacement will end up costing us double.
That we’re finally replacing other players who left years ago simply isn’t good enough.
There is absolutely no excuse not to sign a competent ball playing centre back for a high line, with the proceeds of our best ever player.
I expect competence and a transfer policy that is able to see the wood for the trees.
Once again we are failed by Levy’s ego, arrogance, and foolishness.
I get that people want to be positive after Conte, but we must stop enabling and excusing Levy.
He is always guided by the bare minimum he thinks he can get away with.
It’s like people are shocked that footballers might not want to move clubs or home or a take a pay cut.
Lots of people in the Kane thread were hoping Kane would stay because Bayern aren’t big enough, or he wouldn’t want to uproot his family etc but apparently all those considerations go out the window when it comes to players we want to sell. They should just leave under whatever terms suit the club because they’re no longer needed.
only1waddle
Well-Known Member
- Jun 18, 2012
- 8,243
- 12,536
It delays another purchase by a year is my guess, taking the hit and selling Sanchez for say £7m or buy another player with say a £12m lump sum and then yearly payments, or delay it another year and pray AP scrapes Europe with Sanchez as back up and we get lucky with injuries.
Not sure why Højbjerg is even a point of discussion for either of you, since we in fact accepted Fulham's offer. Whether Levy thought he was worth more or less we don't know, so it doesn't really make a difference?
But sending players out on loans for free, being open for others to leave for free and accepting low-ball offers for players like Tanguy and Sanchez, how is that not being open to compromise? We are literally open to give some away. Hell, from the perspective of our chairman it has to be the equivalent of running around naked in the streets with a white flag.
Also, surely it's not the case that players who are sold for lower fees tend to get higher wages, as you suggested earlier? That's just the case with free agents, otherwise it's the other way around, no? If a buying team can't pay the price tag for a player, generally the salary demands of that player wouldn't be within their budget anyway? (Genuinely curious about this one.)
- Jun 8, 2003
- 28,037
- 65,177
- Admin
- #1,977
We acceptred Fulham's (high) offer but he had no interest in going there. If we'd have accepted lower offers, someone else would have taken him., he'd be gone and we'd have signed the one player the manager wanted. That's the whole point.
mil1lion
This is the place to be
- May 7, 2004
- 42,714
- 78,643
Doris the tea lady. She's often mistaken for a 6ft centre back.
I think your post trying to summarise that this is what the majority of fans a reducing the whole situation down to is actually hugely reductive
Of course Levy cares about on field success but on his own terms
He won’t change his approach even if others are and on field success is not his singular focus at the expense of running a profitable enterprise
personally I think top 4 is becoming less rather than more important to Levy than it used to be as the competition and cost to make it grows.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
- Locked
