Arsenal off the pace against an aggressive Man U

6 Replies

One team treated the game as a pre-season run out, the other team treated it like a proper competitive game.

Manchester United looked sharper, and were certainly more aggressive as they ran out 2-nil winners.

Whilst Arsenal used the game to put patterns they had learnt on the training ground into practise, Manchester United were much more direct.

The core of this Arsenal squad knows what Mikel Arteta wants as a Plan A. This pre-season has been about creating new patterns of play that will benefit us in the long term.

Yesterday we saw Jurrien Timber come in as an inverted right back. This will give us a different option to Oleksander Zinchenko playing in the same role on the left hand side.

We also saw Kai Havertz play as a more progressive 8 than Granit Xhaka did. The German made some good runs into the box and will be an attacking threat next season.

The easy option for Arteta would have have been to play the exact same way as last season, not try and develop our play and run out winners. But that is not what pre-season was for.

Meanwhile, Eric Ten Haag clearly valued getting the win over trying to get his side playing a fluent attacking style. They were all sit deep, long ball, and aggressive in tackles.

What probably sums up the different approach to the game both sides took was the challenges. Man U put in a few naughty ones that you do not really expect in a pre-season game.

As expected, the fallout on social media was “crisis”, although it seems much of the criticism came from Chelsea and West Ham fans. Both piling onto Arsenal tweets. Sums up their lives that they spent their Saturday evening watching us in pre-season.

With any friendly, how serious you take them as a fan depends on your agenda. If you just want to moan and criticise, you will act like a defeat is the worst thing ever.

A valid point to make is that our good season last year was set up by our very positive pre-season games. Victories against Everton, Chelsea, Sevilla, amongst others. And we took the good season into the start of the Premier League.

But you could make a case that we started last season too good, and that is why we ran out of steam at the business end.

Any distance athlete will tell you that they aim for negative splits. Go out at 80% to ensure you have plenty left towards the end of the race.

We were playing at 100% from day one set season. Manchester City were at 80% up until Christmas. They were able to keep a little back whilst keeping on Arsenal’s coattails.

As the season progressed, they cranked up to 100%, whilst Arsenal tailed off to 80%. They won the league, we finished 2nd.

Maybe Mikel Arteta has learned from that and, looking at the fixtures list, will be looking to start the season in and around 80%, building to 100% effort as the season progresses.

The final analysis by Adrian Clarke was spot on. Manchester United players and management treated this like a proper game.

At the end of the day, the most important thing is who wins when the two teams face each other in September.

Keenos

Having spent £580m, would not winning the league be failure for Mikel Arteta?

2 Replies

The goal posts have been moved again.

It used to be “I do not expect Arsenal to win trophies, I just expect us to compete for them.

Now the line seems to be “Arteta has spend £400m, if he does not need win the league than he is a failure”.

To prove their point, they produce infographics which show that since his first summer transfer window (2020) and prior to this window, Arteta has spent £380million, whilst Pep Guardiola has spent £280m.

Kai Havertz, Declan Rice and Jurrien Timber will take his spending to £580m.

Of course, anyone with half a brain will realise Arteta has spent big rebuilding an entire squad, whilst all Guardiola has done is make changes here and there to a squad that won the league title in the two seasons prior to the on Arteta joined us in.

Of Mikel Arteta’s first 18 man squad (a 1-1 draw against Bournemouth in December 2019), Bukayo Saka, Granit Xhaka, Reiss Nelson and Emile Smith Rowe are the only players still with us. You would not be surprised if 50% of those leave us this summer.

Two days later, Manchester City beat Leicester City 3-1. 9 of the 18 are still with Manchester City.

In that period, Manchester City’s squad retention has been 125% more than ours, yet our purchases have only been 35% more.

That shows that whilst Arsenal have spent more, Manchester City have averaged more per player. We have rebuilt a squad whilst City have made tweaks.

And whilst Arteta had spent around £100m more than Pep in their respective transfer windows up until this one, Manchester City’s 2022/23 squad cost them more than 80% more:

The above highlights shows just how far behind others were are in terms of squad investment.

The £200m we look set to spend this summer would only see us leapfrog Liverpool in the table. And the gap between us an City is basically the equivalent of us repeating this window again next summer, and Manchester City not signing (or selling) any players over the next 3 windows. We all know that will not happen.

Imagine a world where we sign Victor Osimhen for £100m (based on his Transfrmarkt value), Josko Gvardiol (who will probably join City this summer) for £65m and Romeo Lavia for £30m.

We do not sell Gabriel, to make space for Gvardiol, or Gabriel Jesus to make space for Osimhen. And Lavia comes in as cover for Declan Rice with Thomas Partey staying at the club.

That is the sort of dealings we would need to do to close that gap on City. And again, they would have to sign no-one.

At that point, then yes, I would say not winning the league would be seen as a failure by Arteta. But not now whilst the gapis is still big.

“Arsenal have outspent 99% of the league” is another thing that I have seen.

Firstly, it is no surprise that these people have stupid opinions because the clearly failed at school.

99% of 20 is 19.8 teams. Which obviously makes no sense. It reminds me of when City were winning 5-0 and were signing “who put the ball in the Cockney’s net, half of Manchester City”. Ignoring that half of 11 is 5.5 (which is what we sang back!).

If you also take into account that you can not outspend yourself, to outspend everyone else in the league would be 19 teams. And that needs even more maths (you’d have outspent 18.81 of the 19 teams). But I will keep it simple for you and stick with the “5% per team”.

The truth is that 5 times have spent more than us on their squad – prior to this season. 15 have spent less. That means we have only actually outspent 75% of the league.

And even if the argument is that we have outspent 95%. The 5% we would not have outspent is Manchester City. And they are the only team that finished above us last season.

If we finish 2nd, or even 3rd, behind Manchester City (and lets say Liverpool), it should not be seen as a failure.

If you hold yourself to the level that “anything other than 1st is failure” then you are going to spend a lot of your life disappointed.

We have won 13 league out of 124 English top flight titles since we were founded in 1886. That would then be 111 years of failure.

Why would you invest your life in something you deem is a failure 90% of the time? You would not follow a boxer who loses 90% of his fights…

Because of course, football is not just about trophies. And not winning the league, or a trophy, does not mean failure. People only push the line of “if he does not win the league he is a failure” line to push an agenda.

I am delighted that the club, and Stan Kroenke, are finally backing a manager. Investing heavily in the squad. Interestingly, we are following a similar path of KSE’s American franchises.

Exciting young coach, big outlay on bright, younger talent. And that philosphy has bought the group a lot of success the other side of the pond.

So this season for Arsenal? We need to be competing withfor the league again. But I am not going to begin calling for the managers head if we finish behind Manchester City (who could so easily win another treble or have another 95+ points season).

As many others say, ensure you enjoy the journey…

Keenos

Arsenal look to maximise Balogun marketability

2 Replies

I have a theory…

Arsenal are using the tour of America to push the price up of Folarin Balogun. And they are not doing it by giving him a shop window to showcase his ability.

Since deciding that he was American, Balogun has gone “all in” when it comes to trying to brand himself as an all-American hero. This despite him not really being American.

Yes, he was born in the USA, but just because you were born in a stable, does not mean you are a horse.

Balogun was born in America to Nigerian parents and moved to the UK at just 2-years old. He is no more American than Erling Haaland is English.

He has always seen himself as English, with Nigerian heritage. No different to other British-African lads such as Bukayo Saka and Eddie Nketiah.

His decision to play for the USA rather than England or Nigeria was based on competition.

Rather than compete with Harry Kane, Marcus Rashford, Ivan Toney for England, or Victor Osimhen, Kelechi Iheanacho and Emmanuel Dennis for Nigeria, he took the easy option.

For the US Men’s National Team, his competition is Jordan Morris, Jesús Ferreira, Cade Cowell and Brandon Vazquez. “Who?” would be the right question.

Since declaring for USA, he has taken every opportunity to show the world how American he is.

From videoing himself in pre-season training wearing a New York Yankees jersey to picturing himself in the Stars and Stripes, to celebrating Independance Day.

Fo clarity, before declaring for America, Balogun had never previously tweeted about “Independence Day”, the 4th of July (or 4 July or Fourth of July), or even previously posted an American flag emoji on Twitter. He has had his account for 4 years.

Whilst his choice to play for America, and decision to not fight for a place at Arsenal, shows a player that does not have the heart for a challenge, it is something that Arsenal can take advantage of.

Overnight, Balogun has become the posterboy for the US National Team, with his new national teams social media taking every opportunity available to post about him. Clearly the US see the marketing value of having an Arsenal player play for them.

And likewise, his marketing value could drive up his sale price.

Fulham and, more recently, Leeds United have had an increase in followers from the US due to their association with American footballers (or soccer players!). A club in Europe will be thinking “if we sign Balogun, it potentially opens up the US market to us”.

Balogun has recently been linked with Nike sponsored Inter Milan. You can certainly see a club their size increasing their following based on having the American superstar. And that makes him more valuable.

If he proves to be popular with American fans whilst with Arsenal on the US tour, his value will rise. And Arsenal will benefit from this.

For Arsenal, promoting Balogun in America is all about maximising his transfer fee through his potential popularity…

Keenos