Arsenal and their lack of " depth "

SDTimeout

Talking with a mate here and it seems he's using the percieved automatic comeback that Arsenal's squad isn't strong enough if they get any injurys. In comparasion to the apparent never ending abundance of talent that Chelsea have. I'm sorry united fans but i don't see anderson or fletcher as depth, let alone owen and diouf. So i want to limit this to just Arsenal vs Chelsea as it's my opinion it will be these two teams contesting the title.

Now in the media we are reminded of how if arsenal get a few injurys they will fall apart. Yet we've had these injurys and we're still in touching distance and i think that if we didn't have these injurys we would be clear of the league by now.

Anyway compare the squads and the " depth " factor. This imo is arsenal's best 11
Almunia, sagna, verm, gallas, clichy, song, fabregas, rosicky, arshavin, rvp, bendtner.

There are major claims for gibbs, denilson, diaby, rosicky, nasri and eduardo to be included in that line up.

Chelsea is cech, bosingwa, terry, carv, cole, essien, lampard, mikel, malouda, drogba, anelka.

claims to be made for joe cole, kalou, ballack, ivanvic, zirkov...

Is it a media myth that arsenal have crap depth. Because we've been missing bendtner rvp gallas cesc and clichy for parts of the season. Yet still within touching distance

CHD

1st

Good squad but they physically/mentally arent strong enough imo. Latter could change.

eZe^

SDTimeout wrote: »

I'm sorry united fans but i don't see anderson or fletcher as depth, let alone owen and diouf. So i want to limit this to just Arsenal vs Chelsea as it's my opinion it will be these two teams contesting the title.

Fair enough about only wanting to compare Chelsea and Arsenal's squad depth. But to write off the current league holders (champions for the past 3 years), the current league leaders, and the most successful domestic team in a big league over the past 20 years is one of the most naive things I've ever read on these forums.

SDTimeout

That came up again, the mentally we can't handle the pressure. 1-2 years ago we would have cracked in the stoke game, the hull game, the everton game , only a few weeks ago bolton went 2-0 up before half time we won 4-2. The two games we've been cracked in imo are Burnley and West ham earlier in the year.

Where Chelsea dropped to wigan , villa, city twice, B'ham, everton, west ham and hull.

City and villa are hardly bad ones. I'm not trolling at chelsea or anything i just think it's very interesting how the media can have a grip on peoples perceptions. It's like the gerrard thing how he's not getting charged

eZe^ wrote: »

Fair enough about only wanting to compare Chelsea and Arsenal's squad depth. But to write off the current league holders (champions for the past 3 years), the current league leaders, and the most successful domestic team in a big league over the past 20 years is one of the most naive things I've ever read on these forums.

If it's one of the most naive things you read on the forum i guessed you missed the summer " Arsenal will be lucky to stay in the top 4 " discussions that were going on.

greendom

CHD wrote: »

1st

Good squad but they physically/mentally arent strong enough imo. Latter could change.

That's nonsense, they showed plenty of mental strength in beating Stoke after seeing their team-mate go off with their horrific injury.

And they don't get beaten up on away trips to Bolton and the like these days so I'm not sure how much more physical strength they need either

kippy

SDTimeout wrote: »

Talking with a mate here and it seems he's using the percieved automatic comeback that Arsenal's squad isn't strong enough if they get any injurys. In comparasion to the apparent never ending abundance of talent that Chelsea have. I'm sorry united fans but i don't see anderson or fletcher as depth, let alone owen and diouf. So i want to limit this to just Arsenal vs Chelsea as it's my opinion it will be these two teams contesting the title.

Now in the media we are reminded of how if arsenal get a few injurys they will fall apart. Yet we've had these injurys and we're still in touching distance and i think that if we didn't have these injurys we would be clear of the league by now.

Anyway compare the squads and the " depth " factor. This imo is arsenal's best 11
Almunia, sagna, verm, gallas, clichy, song, fabregas, rosicky, arshavin, rvp, bendtner.

There are major claims for gibbs, denilson, diaby, rosicky, nasri and eduardo to be included in that line up.

Chelsea is cech, bosingwa, terry, carv, cole, essien, lampard, mikel, malouda, drogba, anelka.

claims to be made for joe cole, kalou, ballack, ivanvic, zirkov...

Is it a media myth that arsenal have crap depth. Because we've been missing bendtner rvp gallas cesc and clichy for parts of the season. Yet still within touching distance

In fairness to United, they've been using their deep squad extensively all season.
You forget about their injuries all season, will Hargreaves, O Shea, Vidic, Ferdinand, Giggs and indeed more who have been out long term this season. You mentioned Fletcher there as a squad player, he is but he gets a lot of starts as well.
Uniteds squad this season may not be as strong as the past couple of years but theres feck all wrong with it.

Arsenal have had to do without key players all season, so have chelsea and so have united as far as I can see. Chelsea have really suffered these last two seasons with Essiens injuries. He really is a top class player.

Bounty Hunter

OT: Fletcher not considerd depth hmm thats odd as many would consider him uniteds best CM this season.

greendom wrote: »

That's nonsense, they showed plenty of mental strength in beating Stoke after seeing their team-mate go off with their horrific injury.

And they don't get beaten up on away trips to Bolton and the like these days so I'm not sure how much more physical strength they need as well.

They are physically more imposing atm too, Bendtner up front, Vermaelen and Sol in def, Song and Diaby in CM etc not that they play a physical style or anything as a team but still.

Headshot

Fletch as a squad player

well that's a major fail

SDTimeout

Yeah i realisted re fletcher, he's been good when i seen him. I didn't mean to rule united out but this forum is about opinions and in mine i don't think the united aura will carry them to this league. Not when Arsenal and chelsea are this close.

CHD

greendom wrote: »

That's nonsense, they showed plenty of mental strength in beating Stoke after seeing their team-mate go off with their horrific injury.

And they don't get beaten up on away trips to Bolton and the like these days so I'm not sure how much more physical strength they need either

This is nonsense, ha have some of that.

carlop

SDTimeout wrote: »

Talking with a mate here and it seems he's using the percieved automatic comeback that Arsenal's squad isn't strong enough if they get any injurys. In comparasion to the apparent never ending abundance of talent that Chelsea have. I'm sorry united fans but i don't see anderson or fletcher as depth, let alone owen and diouf. So i want to limit this to just Arsenal vs Chelsea as it's my opinion it will be these two teams contesting the title.

Now in the media we are reminded of how if arsenal get a few injurys they will fall apart. Yet we've had these injurys and we're still in touching distance and i think that if we didn't have these injurys we would be clear of the league by now.

Anyway compare the squads and the " depth " factor. This imo is arsenal's best 11
Almunia, sagna, verm, gallas, clichy, song, fabregas, rosicky, arshavin, rvp, bendtner.

There are major claims for gibbs, denilson, diaby, rosicky, nasri and eduardo to be included in that line up.

Chelsea is cech, bosingwa, terry, carv, cole, essien, lampard, mikel, malouda, drogba, anelka.

claims to be made for joe cole, kalou, ballack, ivanvic, zirkov...

Is it a media myth that arsenal have crap depth. Because we've been missing bendtner rvp gallas cesc and clichy for parts of the season. Yet still within touching distance

I got this far and realised I could make better use of my Saturday morning than reading on.

gosplan

The difference is in the defences.

Chelsea have a very solid reserve back four (Ferrera, Alex, Ivanovic, Zhirkov).

Arsenal have Eboue, Djourou, Silvestre, Campbell, Gibbs, Traore.

Of those, Eboue is competent; Djourou & Gibbs appear to have potential but are very unproven; Campbell is still reasonable but can't really play many games any more; and I get scared any time I see Silvestre or Traore on a teamsheet.


You could say that Arsenal have more creative players in their squad but it's just because Chelsea haven't really done in for that type of player recently.

davyjose

SDTimeout wrote: »

I'm sorry united fans but i don't see ... fletcher as depth,

Me either, mate - he's one of the best midfielder's in the league, and probably United's second most important player this season. I see him as one of the first names on the team sheet, not "depth". Say what you want about Owen and Diouf, but added to Rooney and Berbatov, I'd say we're a hell of a lot more stocked up in that regard, than Arsenal.

To answer your question, United and Chelsea have consistently been league/CL challengers for the last few seasons. I think the perception that Arsenal have no real depth lies in the fact that for the last 5 seasons, Arsenal haven't really had the legs that those two teams have had for an entire season. The general consensus is that you need a large squad to compete for a league. Some people maybe feel this is the reason a team with Arsenal's obvious talent haven't been able for it. what would you say the reason is, if not a lack of depth?

Having said that, Arsenal have already proven, this season, that they DO have the squad to compete, so it's a bit of a non-issue at this stage. But in the past, I can see it.

Pepe LeFrits

gosplan wrote: »

The difference is in the defences.

Chelsea have a very solid reserve back four (Ferrera, Alex, Ivanovic, Zhirkov).

Arsenal have Eboue, Djourou, Silvestre, Campbell, Gibbs, Traore.

Of those, Eboue is competent; Djourou & Gibbs appear to have potential but are very unproven; Campbell is still reasonable but can't really play many games any more; and I get scared any time I see Silvestre or Traore on a teamsheet.


You could say that Arsenal have more creative players in their squad but it's just because Chelsea haven't really done in for that type of player recently.

The difference there imo is that both Gibbs and Djourou have been out for almost the entire season.

Silvestre and Traore would only be 5th choice CB and 3rd choice LB respectively. Which to me, works in favour of what the OP is trying to say.

davyjose

SDTimeout wrote: »

If it's one of the most naive things you read on the forum i guessed you missed the summer " Arsenal will be lucky to stay in the top 4 " discussions that were going on.

Nope. Arsenal finished last season 4th, a fair way back. Because people were wrong, doesn't mean they are naive.

You've written off - completely dismissed - United's chances, despite being multiple league winners, and yop of the league. Calling that naive is being kind. Many would say it was stupid, or that you know nothing about the game outside your own Arsenal bubble.

Pro. F

For me, the problem with Arsenal's squad is not lack of depth, it's the lack of a good first choice keeper. I think it shows just how good the Arsenal squad is that they are doing so well while having a rubbish goalie as well as their fair share of injuries.

gosplan

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

The difference there imo is that both Gibbs and Djourou have been out for almost the entire season.

Silvestre and Traore would only be 5th choice CB and 3rd choice LB respectively. Which to me, works in favour of what the OP is trying to say.

IMO Ivanovic/Alex + Zhirkov > Djourou + Gibbs

kryogen

the OP post hurt my head a little

for one thing, Arsenal have had injuries

plenty of them, so have Chelsea, so have united

You dont include Fletcher as depth? well i guess you could be right, he isnt a squad player he is one of the best midfielders in england now

tbh, i didnt read much else of the post after i had seen that, and that the title is between chelsea and arsenal, not the team top of the league with 9/10 games to go


Chelsea have better strength in depth then Arsenal, so do united

arsenals lack of success recently is not so much due to lack of depth however, it is more due to lack of leaders and experience in tight situations

/thread

Pepe LeFrits

gosplan wrote: »

IMO Ivanovic/Alex + Zhirkov > Djourou + Gibbs

Well that's easy to say now considering the Arsenal duo are still developing and have missed the entire season.

As far as I can see, Chelsea have 23 players who'd be considered part of their first team squad. Arsenal have 27. Both teams are having similar seasons; Chelsea further in the FA cup, Arsenal further in the CL, close in the league. According to physioroom.com, Arsenal have had 74 injuries this season, Chelsea 48.

So are we sure their strength in depth is so much better, really?

kryogen

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

Well that's easy to say now considering the Arsenal duo are still developing and have missed the entire season.

As far as I can see, Chelsea have 23 players who'd be considered part of their first team squad. Arsenal have 27. Both teams are having similar seasons; Chelsea further in the FA cup, Arsenal further in the CL, close in the league. According to physioroom.com, Arsenal have had 74 injuries this season, Chelsea 48.

So are we sure their strength in depth is so much better, really?

i am personally yes

Bubs101

It depends where you look. Creatively Arsenal have buckets more depth than anybody. Defensively Chelsea do. United are probably the middle ground. Liverpool have nobody

keane2097

Bubs101 wrote: »

It depends where you look. Creatively Arsenal have buckets more depth than anybody. Defensively Chelsea do. United are probably the middle ground. Liverpool have nobody

lol

davyjose

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

So are we sure their strength in depth is so much better, really?

Out of curiosity, if Arsenal fans don't see strength in depth as an issue, what do they see as the reason they've been behind Chelsea and united for the last few years?

Bubs101

davyjose wrote: »

Out of curiosity, if Arsenal fans don't see strength in depth as an issue, what do they see as the reason they've been behind Chelsea and united for the last few years?

They didn't have the money to compete with Chelsea and they nobody had anything to compete with Ronaldo and Rooney at the same club for the last two years. This has now changed.

kryogen

Bubs101 wrote: »

They didn't have the money to compete with Chelsea and they nobody had anything to compete with Ronaldo and Rooney at the same club for the last two years. This has now changed.

not exactly true though

Liverpool competed well last year up to a point, and Chelsea always compete

L'prof

davyjose wrote: »

Out of curiosity, if Arsenal fans don't see strength in depth as an issue, what do they see as the reason they've been behind Chelsea and united for the last few years?

Too many injuries too key players to be honest but, not being able to cope with that is partly down to the lack of strength in depth. Failure to buy a good keeper is a big issue too.

davyjose

Bubs101 wrote: »

They didn't have the money to compete with Chelsea and they nobody had anything to compete with Ronaldo and Rooney at the same club for the last two years. This has now changed.

so they were just worse?

Bubs101

davyjose wrote: »

so they were just worse?

They invested the money in a new stadium. They could have splurged it on players but they picked what was best for them in the long term. They did also get to a Champion's League final in that period so it wasn't a complete wash

kryogen

Bubs101 wrote: »

They invested the money in a new stadium. They could have splurged it on players but they picked what was best for them in the long term. They did also get to a Champion's League final in that period so it wasn't a complete wash

So before they put the money into this new stadium, Wenger had the reputaton for spending big on the squad?

Bubs101

kryogen wrote: »

not exactly true though

Liverpool competed well last year up to a point, and Chelsea always compete

Chelsea ran United very close when Ronaldo emerged as the powerhouse that he is but I think it's fair to say that the Rooney in that season was less developed than the Rooney in the last two and even in that season we had Terry at his best and Makalele's last season. We weren't close last year. Liverpool's problem is lack of depth because with Gerrard and Torres and a run they're fine. Without them they're a very average team

Bubs101

kryogen wrote: »

So before they put the money into this new stadium, Wenger had the reputaton for spending big on the squad?

He didn't need to because Chelsea changed the field of play in England around the same time that they decided on the Emirates. Back in the Arsenal United monopoly days Leeds were the only team to come close to Serie A spending. You could make the case that Wenger never adapted but he didn't have the money to do so.

Ush1

SDTimeout wrote: »

Talking with a mate here and it seems he's using the percieved automatic comeback that Arsenal's squad isn't strong enough if they get any injurys. In comparasion to the apparent never ending abundance of talent that Chelsea have. I'm sorry united fans but i don't see anderson or fletcher as depth, let alone owen and diouf. So i want to limit this to just Arsenal vs Chelsea as it's my opinion it will be these two teams contesting the title.

Now in the media we are reminded of how if arsenal get a few injurys they will fall apart. Yet we've had these injurys and we're still in touching distance and i think that if we didn't have these injurys we would be clear of the league by now.

Anyway compare the squads and the " depth " factor. This imo is arsenal's best 11
Almunia, sagna, verm, gallas, clichy, song, fabregas, rosicky, arshavin, rvp, bendtner.

There are major claims for gibbs, denilson, diaby, rosicky, nasri and eduardo to be included in that line up.

Chelsea is cech, bosingwa, terry, carv, cole, essien, lampard, mikel, malouda, drogba, anelka.

claims to be made for joe cole, kalou, ballack, ivanvic, zirkov...

Is it a media myth that arsenal have crap depth. Because we've been missing bendtner rvp gallas cesc and clichy for parts of the season. Yet still within touching distance

Well, your Arsenal best 11 is a 4-4-2 which is not what they play this season, so that's that out of the window. They play 4-3-3.

Also, depth doesn't come into it when it's Almunia in goal for starts.

kryogen

We are not going to agree i reckon, i understand what you are saying, agree with it for the most part in fact.

but in my opinion, Wenger would not spend big on the squad either way, it goes against his philosophy

he prefers to build up from a young age rather then buy in established talent

Agree to disagree i guess

Bubs101

kryogen wrote: »

We are not going to agree i reckon, i understand what you are saying, agree with it for the most part in fact.

but in my opinion, Wenger would not spend big on the squad either way, it goes against his philosophy

he prefers to build up from a young age rather then buy in established talent

Agree to disagree i guess

No, I'd actually agree but I think the decision was made for him which kind of suits him. He likes being able to draw on the fact that they don't have as much money as the others as an excuse when they don't perform to the level they used to

PHB

United's squad is weak in central midfield and on the wings. Not because of the squad depth though, but because we've no truly world class players in that position. Everywhere else we are good. If United had say Gourcuff and Ribery, our squad would be, imo, as close to perfect as possible.

davyjose

Bubs101 wrote: »

They invested the money in a new stadium. They could have splurged it on players but they picked what was best for them in the long term. They did also get to a Champion's League final in that period so it wasn't a complete wash

Irrelevant really. I'm asking, if Arsenal fans don't, or didn't, lack strength in depth, then why were they unable to compete, because if it wasn't a lack of depth, then it was either a)they didn't have the head for it, or b)they just weren't good enough.
Saying money is irrelevant because money means nothing once the players take the pitch.

It's more aimed at the OP, and those fans who take such offence at being told the lack depth.

davyjose

PHB wrote: »

United's squad is weak in central midfield and on the wings. Not because of the squad depth though, but because we've no truly world class players in that position. Everywhere else we are good. If United had say Gourcuff and RONALDO, our squad would be, imo, as close to perfect as possible.

Let's be honest.

SDTimeout

Ush1 wrote: »

Well, your Arsenal best 11 is a 4-4-2 which is not what they play this season, so that's that out of the window. They play 4-3-3.

Also, depth doesn't come into it when it's Almunia in goal for starts.

As an arsenal fan i know we play a modded 4-3-3 and the team i gave was a 4-3-3

song cesc rosicky
arsh rvp bendtner

Ush1

davyjose wrote: »

Irrelevant really. I'm asking, if Arsenal fans don't, or didn't, lack strength in depth, then why were they unable to compete, because if it wasn't a lack of depth, then it was either a)they didn't have the head for it, or b)they just weren't good enough.
Saying money is irrelevant because money means nothing once the players take the pitch.

It's more aimed at the OP, and those fans who take such offence at being told the lack depth.

I would say it's a lack of key quality in the big games this year. I'm not sure, but didn't Denilson start in both games against United and Chelsea?

Ush1

davyjose wrote: »

Let's be honest.

They play on opposite flanks though?

Ush1

SDTimeout wrote: »

As an arsenal fan i know we play a modded 4-3-3 and the team i gave was a 4-3-3

song cesc rosicky
arsh rvp bendtner

Okay but that still looks a bit lobsided to me. I think against a top team like United, that would leave Song with far too much work to do in midfield. For me, they need a better Denilson. One that is more tactically aware, industrious and abit more bite. Someone ala Fletcher or Banega.

davyjose

Ush1 wrote: »

They play on opposite flanks though?

Meh - I'd prefer Ronaldo to Ribery on my team, as I'm sure anybody would.

Edit: you can pretty much put Ronaldo anywhere, anyway.

parker kent

SDTimeout wrote: »

Is it a media myth that arsenal have crap depth. Because we've been missing bendtner rvp gallas cesc and clichy for parts of the season. Yet still within touching distance

OK...I have had to severely reign in all that I could say in response (eZe^ summed up what I though very well!), so I'll just point out that at various points (often prolonged) this season, United have been missing Van der Saar, O' Shea, Brown, Neville, Rafael, Ferdinand, Vidic, Fabio, Hargreaves, Giggs, Anderson, Park, Nani etc. This includes a spell with 7 defenders injured.

So if Arsenal being in touching distance is a sign of magnificent strength in depth, how exactly do you think United have no strength in depth?

Pepe LeFrits

davyjose wrote: »

Out of curiosity, if Arsenal fans don't see strength in depth as an issue, what do they see as the reason they've been behind Chelsea and united for the last few years?

How the team has fared in past years isn't relevant to how I regard the team in the present. Teams change.

The current Arsenal squad is the strongest, in terms of depth, of any I've seen since I've started supporting the club. The first XI could be improved and the injuries could really do with being reduced.

davyjose

Pepe LeFrits wrote: »

How the team has fared in past years isn't relevant to how I regard the team in the present. Teams change.

The current Arsenal squad is the strongest, in terms of depth, of any I've seen since I've started supporting the club. The first XI could be improved and the injuries could really do with being reduced.

So, no excuses for not getting close to maximum points for the rest of the season? Given their run-in?

Pepe LeFrits

There are always excuses, if you look for them!

enfant terrible

Bubs101 wrote: »

No, I'd actually agree but I think the decision was made for him which kind of suits him. He likes being able to draw on the fact that they don't have as much money as the others as an excuse when they don't perform to the level they used to

No its not an excuse its an expensive new stadium that has severely limited their spending compared to United and Chelsea.

Wenger has done an amazing job keeping Arsenal in the top 4 never mind maybe winning the premiership.

I doubt any other manager could do what he's done the last 5 years.

monkey9

Shouldn't the title read 'lack of depth' and not lack of 'depth'?

OPENROAD

A question for utd supporters, how do you feel you guys would cope without Rooney for a good part of the season?




Arsenal have had injuries to some key players over the last few seasons at different times, it does seem we get one key player back and anotherer key player picks up an injury.

We have more or less had to change our complete squad since the invincibles with a very young squad at that, it takes time for players to develop, during this time we have played some magnificent football which makes up for lack of a trophy, we were quite unlucky a couple of seasons back in the league.

Looking at this season, we have coped without our main striker and still we are the leading goalscorers, players like Song and Diaby have moved up another level and still have not fully developed, when we have had injuries players have come and we have coped.

One area of weakness Arsenal might have squad wise is obviously the goalkeeping position, lb and to cb. But can utd/chelsea fans say they have plenty of cover in each position?

Mr Alan

Arsenal nearly won the league 3 years ago before struggling for top 4 for the following couple of years, ditto for Liverpool who came so close last year and are struggling for 4th now. Anyone talking like this Arsenal team has 'arrived' is jumping the gun big time imo.

Pepe LeFrits

That Arsenal team and the Liverpool one last year had arrived. They then departed again through poor business in the summer window.