Arsenal Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours 2020/2021

Soups123

They’ll 100% follow once it’s 100% on, they are in a good position to sit tight. A couple of the premier league teams like us I think had to commit now at the risk of being left out

Jmac24128

Soups123 wrote: »

They’ll 100% follow once it’s 100% on, they are in a good position to sit tight. A couple of the premier league teams like us I think had to commit now at the risk of being left out

First time I've watch Monday night football from the start...

Soups123

Jmac24128 wrote: »

First time I've watch Monday night football from the start...

Same lol

It’s hard to break down genuine disgust and the Sky machine trying to protect itself for the same reason as SL owners

omega man

Soups123 wrote: »

It’s not hypocritical. There is a whole lot more going on here than having money to buy better player’s. If you want to sell it that way and that’s all that matters good for you

But it is hypocritical. The premier league was founded out of something similar. Supporters want their clubs to spend big money but when they make big commercial decisions like this they start waffling on about grass roots etc.
Ffs the likes of Chelsea and City are oil clubs but now all of a sudden they’re talking about the people’s sport and that the super league is elitist and a closed shop. Don’t make me laugh.

Awesomeness

Talk we could be kicked out of the Europa League on Friday along with United

Soups123

omega man wrote: »

But it is hypocritical. The premier league was founded out of something similar. Supporters want their clubs to spend big money but when they make big commercial decisions like this they start waffling on about grass roots etc.
Ffs the likes of Chelsea and City are oil clubs but now all of a sudden they’re talking about the people’s sport and that the super league is elitist and a closed shop. Don’t make me laugh.

Your in an Arsenal thread talking about Arsenal and hypocrisy, there has always been huge consistency here that people don’t want an oil arc or sugar daddy, we want reasonable investment in the squad in a self sufficient way. That’s not everyone but an over whelming magority.

is_that_so

FixitFelix wrote: »

Read somewhere that Bayern and Psg will follow and join as the CL will be seen as the inferior competition and the TV money will fall substantially. Plus they risk losing players who want to play in the top competition. Which with with teams involved it looks like being.

Both Dortmund and Bayern have said no today and PSG have already rejected it.

omega man

Soups123 wrote: »

Your in an Arsenal thread talking about Arsenal and hypocrisy, there has always been huge consistency here that people don’t want an oil arc or sugar daddy, we want reasonable investment in the squad in a self sufficient way. That’s not everyone but an over whelming magority.

I’m talking about the super league of which Arsenal may be part of. My points are in reference to the general hypocrisy from the wider football community, not specifically Arsenal.

Jmac24128

is_that_so wrote: »

Both Dortmund and Bayern have said no today and PSG have already rejected it.

I will bet u any amount of money PSG will be in it.

omega man

Jmac24128 wrote: »

I will bet u any amount of money PSG will be in it.

They’re tied up with tv rights and membership of UEFA boards. They’ll sit on the fence for a while.

is_that_so

Jmac24128 wrote: »

I will bet u any amount of money PSG will be in it.

I don't think they need it and they really want the trophy! I can see it falling apart completely especially if national federations start throwing the book at them.

Jmac24128

omega man wrote: »

They’re tied up with tv rights and membership of UEFA boards. They’ll sit on the fence for a while.

Not for too long, they will love the smell of that super league.

omega man

Jmac24128 wrote: »

Not for too long, they will love the smell of that super league.

I agree. Their owners have significant TV rights to the CL so they’re somewhat torn!!

Jmac24128

Wenger would never have let this happen......

omega man

omega man wrote: »

But it is hypocritical. The premier league was founded out of something similar. Supporters want their clubs to spend big money but when they make big commercial decisions like this they start waffling on about grass roots etc.
Ffs the likes of Chelsea and City are oil clubs but now all of a sudden they’re talking about the people’s sport and that the super league is elitist and a closed shop. Don’t make me laugh.

The Premier League was just a mere name change. A marketing rebrand if you like. There was still promotion to and from the Premier League (although ironically, Phil Gartside, the then chairman of now lowly Bolton, proposed 10 years or so ago, that the Premier League become a closed shop which was thankfully rejected). The bad thing about the formation of the Premier League is that it hid football behind a paywall where it previously had a full national audience. In spite of its flaws, It still had a strong sense of competition about it. I would say the Bosman rule was more seismic as it increased the amount of foreign players in the league.

This joke of a competition has no integrity whatsoever. It will be full of dead rubber games because there is no relegation from it. Its boring. Bascially a billion dollar table full of corporate shysters have conjured this up. People who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

Jmac24128

Jmac24128 wrote: »

Wenger would never have let this happen......

12 years ago, he predicted there would be a European super League in 10 years

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/aug/17/arsene-wenger-european-super-league

The worry for Wenger would be if the European league were to be created by an elite cartel or, to use his term, a "franchise", breaking away to divvy up the wealth rather than it being constructed on a system of merit, involving promotions from the various national leagues.

Wenger on the money once again.

Arne_Saknussem

Jmac24128 wrote: »

Wenger would never have let this happen......

Surprised some on here haven't blamed him for it

omega man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The Premier League was just a mere name change. A marketing rebrand if you like. There was still promotion to and from the Premier League (although ironically, Phil Gartside, the then chairman of now lowly Bolton, proposed 10 years or so ago, that the Premier League become a closed shop which was thankfully rejected). The bad thing about the formation of the Premier League is that it hid football behind a paywall where it previously had a full national audience. In spite of its flaws, It still had a strong sense of competition about it. I would say the Bosman rule was more seismic as it increased the amount of foreign players in the league.

This joke of a competition has no integrity whatsoever. It will be full of dead rubber games because there is no relegation from it. Its boring. Bascially a billion dollar table full of corporate shysters have conjured this up. People who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

I don’t believe the PL was “a name change” only. I’m sure it was a break away league effectively led by the big clubs.

Jmac24128

Jmac24128 wrote: »

Wenger would never have let this happen......

Wenger said that this was inevitable 10 years ago. He is powerless to stop it. He'd be told like the rest, 'Get on the train or f*ck off'

omega man

omega man wrote: »

I don’t believe the PL was “a name change” only. I’m sure it was a break away league effectively led by the big clubs.

I understand it was different in that the organisers of the Premier League were no longer the football league as they had resigned, but, the format stayed the same. There were three up and three down (or in one case in 94/95, 2 up and four down). If for example, one of the big five clubs was relegated, then they lost their place in the top flight. this new league is a whole step up from this. With the Premier League, each club had an equal vote whether you were a club just promoted, or one of the so-called big 5 or 6.

To use another analogy, beforehand, they brought the girlfriend on the adventure but this time they've kicked her out of car and picked up a few models for the journey

Basil3

Basil3 wrote: »

12 years ago, he predicted there would be a European super League in 10 years

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/aug/17/arsene-wenger-european-super-league



Wenger on the money once again.

Hardly. This concept was on the table back in 1998

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/football/199930.stm

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hardly. This concept was on the table back in 1998

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/football/199930.stm

Yeah. I know. I'm not saying he game up with the idea.....

omega man

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I understand it was different in that the organisers of the Premier League were no longer the football league as they had resigned, but, the format stayed the same. There were three up and three down (or in one case in 94/95, 2 up and four down). If for example, one of the big five clubs was relegated, then they lost their place in the top flight. this new league is a whole step up from this. With the Premier League, each club had an equal vote whether you were a club just promoted, or one of the so-called big 5 or 6.

To use another analogy, beforehand, they brought the girlfriend on the adventure but this time they've kicked her out of car and picked up a few models for the journey

No it was a breakaway league by the top clubs. Sound familiar?
But anyway won’t teams still qualify? It’s just the founding teams that are permanent and sure most of them will never get relegated from their respective domestic leagues and generally qualify for the CL (except us!!)...

FixitFelix

is_that_so wrote: »

Both Dortmund and Bayern have said no today and PSG have already rejected it.

For now

omega man

omega man wrote: »

No it was a breakaway league by the top clubs. Sound familiar?
But anyway won’t teams still qualify? It’s just the founding teams that are permanent and sure most of them will never get relegated from their respective domestic leagues and generally qualify for the CL (except us!!)...

Yes to be fair, it was a breakaway league, but it was still recognised as the de-facto top tier of the pyramid as opposed to a rival league.

I'm not sure if there is a qualification process but I personally think no club will want to participate in it beyond the 12 clubs. UEFA and FIFA will make it too difficult for them

I get your point with Sky and the PL, but at least the integrity of the competition remained someway intact and it was inclusive of all those who earned the right to be there. You got the rewards based on performance. Its far from perfect either. Financial doping has crept in since the noughties, but you earned a champions league spot due to league position. that element of competition is gone now. This 'Super league' is nothing more than a juiced up tournament, not much better than the pre-season friendlies you'd see during July

jonneymendoza

Barlett wrote: »

Well it gives Kroenke more reason to hang on as owner, I wonder how long it'll be before we get sick of finishing 8/9/10th every season in this new ESL. From Premier League also rans to the whipping boys of the ESL. Very exciting indeed.

Maybe with that extra 400m we'll sign some decent players

namloc1980

jonneymendoza wrote: »

Maybe with that extra 400m we'll sign some decent players

Every other Super League team will have the same money so it'll just lead to player transfer fee inflation.

tayto lover

So who’s going get Top 4 now?

jonneymendoza

namloc1980 wrote: »

Every other Super League team will have the same money so it'll just lead to player transfer fee inflation.

They will have a advantage in the premier League (if they're allowed to compete)

Ol' Donie

jonneymendoza wrote: »

They will have a advantage in the premier League (if they're allowed to compete)

The same advantage as 5 other teams.

We already have an advantage over most teams in the Prem, and we're still 9th.

Quazzie

Ol' Donie wrote: »

The same advantage as 5 other teams.

We already have an advantage over most teams in the Prem, and we're still 9th.

No we don't in fact out of all 20 premier League clubs, Arsenal are the ONLY club that is self supporting from self generated finances. No other club is using this model with no loans or owner input.

Ol' Donie

Quazzie wrote: »

No we don't in fact out of all 20 premier League clubs, Arsenal are the ONLY club that is self supporting from self generated finances. No other club is using this model with no loans or owner input.

Isn't this our choice? I mean if we wanted to borrow cash or God help us have an owner throw us a few quid, we could?

In terms if income we have an advantage over 15 or so teams, certainly have done over most of the past 15-20 years.

Quazzie

Quazzie wrote: »

No we don't in fact out of all 20 premier League clubs, Arsenal are the ONLY club that is self supporting from self generated finances. No other club is using this model with no loans or owner input.

Are Spurs not financed by loans for their stadium just like we did?
United's owners take money out year after year to cover their own debt.

Anyway the point of what you quoted was resources available, not their source.

Royale with Cheese

I had to laugh at the end of Gary Neville's rant last night, said this goes to show Arsenal fans that Stan Kroenke doesn't give a toss about them. Um, thanks for the newsflash Gary.

Royale with Cheese

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

I had to laugh at the end of Gary Neville's rant last night, said this goes to show Arsenal fans that Stan Kroenke doesn't give a toss about them. Um, thanks for the newsflash Gary.

It certainly rubber stamps what most of us had worked out already for sure. In fairness though, I genuinely believe that Neville is absolutely outraged by this and not just batting for Sky.

Royale with Cheese

I don't doubt he's being genuine (even if he got a little hysterical at times last night) but he's obviously not clued in to the arsenal fan base at all if he thinks Stan Kroenke is held in anything other than complete disdain already.

OmegaGene

OmegaGene wrote: »

we all know why these big companies buy into football clubs, it is to make money and to borrow against the club and they are not supporters of the club its nothing new
kroenke enic glazers etc they are all the same and premiership football isnt a game for the average man or woman on the street anymore and hasnt been for many years we have been priced out of it

Ellis Short
The Glazers
Kroenke
Hicks and Gillett
John Henry
Randy Lerner

All American venture capitalists, all in it for what they can get, and no interest in football whatsoever.

I think a big factor in Spurs decision is that they have a stadium that cost 1 bn to build, and no fans allowed in the ground so they are desperate for cash. it might be their only chance to keep Harry Kane also. Still no excuse. The crowds would have most likely resumed soon and Spurs would have been in a better position to finance the ground. Barca and Real have their financial issues. Have no sympathy on all three.

Barlett

This isn't going to happen, it's going to fall apart before the end of the week.

Royale with Cheese

How would people feel about Arsenal if it doesn't? I would find it hard to fully get behind the club as long as Kroenke is in charge after this, even if it falls through.

Pogue eile

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

How would people feel about Arsenal if it doesn't? I would find it hard to fully get behind the club as long as Kroenke is in charge after this, even if it falls through.

You would be hopeful that if it does fall through that the likes of Kroenke will sulk and take their ball home and end their 'interest' in football.

Maybe I am an optimist but it helps as an Arsenal fan

Irish Aris

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

How would people feel about Arsenal if it doesn't? I would find it hard to fully get behind the club as long as Kroenke is in charge after this, even if it falls through.

yeah, I can understand the sentiment.
For me it would be a case of not spending money directly on the club. I have a red membership for a few years now and my plan at the moment is to not renew it.

Royale with Cheese

I was a silver member up until last summer and let it lapse as I did not want to financially reward the club for the mediocrity and lack of ambition on display. That said I used to go over and watch a game once or twice a season but hadn't been in a couple of years as I'm just getting older now and priorities have changed, so it was less of an issue for me to lose my place in the queue.

I can't say I wouldn't watch the latter stages of this super league either as I've been enjoying the Champions League knockouts and that's basically what this thing will end up becoming if it goes ahead and gets a few more clubs on board.

Jmac24128

The premier League as a whole needs to wake up and not sleep through billionaires buying these clubs. They don't do it for the love of the game or the fans or to win.

It's one thing. More ****ing money.

omega man

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

How would people feel about Arsenal if it doesn't? I would find it hard to fully get behind the club as long as Kroenke is in charge after this, even if it falls through.

I’ll still watch no issues there.
I’m far less emotionally invested in the club the last few years so I’ll be blunt, I don’t really care about the club much. It’s a 2 way street and the owners don’t give a toss and nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to their commercial activities.
Arsenal hold a place in my heart but it’s more of a fond memory now since supporting them from the mid 80’s. They’re just another product now competing for my business. I know where I stand.

tayto lover

Pogue eile wrote: »

You would be hopeful that if it does fall through that the likes of Kroenke will sulk and take their ball home and end their 'interest' in football.

Maybe I am an optimist but it helps as an Arsenal fan

I said the other day that this might be a blessing in disguise. If it fails then Kronke might decide to sell and we’d be rid of him. Really hope it happens.

FixitFelix

tayto lover wrote: »

I said the other day that this might be a blessing in disguise. If it fails then Kronke might decide to sell and we’d be rid of him. Really hope it happens.

Reading whats being put up online doesn't seem like it's gonna fall through, even though sky sports keep saying that 2 clubs are getting "cold feet".

tayto lover

FixitFelix wrote: »

Reading whats being put up online doesn't seem like it's gonna fall through, even though sky sports keep saying that 2 clubs are getting "cold feet".

It may not, but if it does and FIFA or EUFA decides to punish the ringleaders with relegation etc then there’s less money for Kronke then he might sell. Hopefully grasping at straws here.

Soups123

FixitFelix wrote: »

Reading whats being put up online doesn't seem like it's gonna fall through, even though sky sports keep saying that 2 clubs are getting "cold feet".

100% so many are getting there information from sky, you have to get out to other media outlets sky is propaganda all one way. I’m 100% against all this but it’s not lost on me what Sky are doing?

Soups123

Barlett wrote: »

This isn't going to happen, it's going to fall apart before the end of the week.

Out of the 6 clubs I think we are fcukd the most if/when it fails and does not proceed. Kroenke is going to be in a huge huff and the spend in our club will freeze. Selling us will take a long time if that’s the route he goes. We will end up in a bigger mess than now.

I hate the prospect of SL but with how far it’s gone I fear what happens to us if it doesn’t go ahead with our owners

Soups123

OmegaGene wrote: »

Kroenke will look at this as a business deal and will not be emotionally invested so thinking he will get the hump and sell up is only a pipe dream, he has massive loans against the club so it is a fantastic asset for him

I’m not so sure, I think this was part of his plan all along. I don’t think he’ll let us fall apart but he may well reduce costs and look to sell.