Spurs set to become bigger and better than Arsenal? – The Truth

55 Replies

By now you all would have read the hilarious article by the Daily telegraph titled Eight reasons Tottenham’s new stadium will make them bigger and better than Arsenal. I am not going to link to it, as it is so clearly click bait, aimed at just getting the hits to increase revenue, that it does not require further promotion. It is a brilliant piece of trolling of Arsenal fans, planted to wind us up. And it has done the job.

You could argue that I have been caught in it’s net, as I have taken my time to write this respond. However, I would say I am merely using my legal right to respond to the article, my freedom of speech, and creating a blog that, when Spurs fans bring up the awful article, Arsenal fans can respond with a link to this blog, highlighting the truth.

  1. It’s bigger than the Emirates

“The new Spurs ground will be exactly 0.9398993910510988% bigger – those extra seats will make a difference.”

In our 2014 accounts, Arsenal’s gate receipts and match day income was £93m. Now if Spurs fans mirror our pricing structure, mirror out ticket sales, and play the same amount of games, they will generate £93.88m in gate receipts. An additional £880,000. Barely enough to pay a top players wages for a month. Not exactly a difference.

And this extra revenue will be negated by Spurs failing to fill their stadium on a regular basis. Numerous times over the last 4/5 years they have had attendances under 25,000 – mainly for Europa League. These missing fans will result in a drop in the gate receipts and match day revenue. The only way Spurs can stop these low attendances is by reducing ticket prices. Which will again drop gate receipts.

I pretty much guarantee that when (and if) Spurs new stadium opens, the Emirates continues to make more annual in gate receipts and match day revenue than White Hart Lane.

  1. It’s better than the Emirates

I will admit, the Emirates was designed to create the best playing surface, and the maximum amount of cooperate revenue. The normal match day going fans and the atmosphere of the stadium was low on the agenda. Spurs 17,000 single tier stand is something that many will be jealous of.

However, it will only be of benefit if they fill the stadium. In 2012/13, their lowest attendance was 23,101. So we have 17,000 in a single stand, 6,101 dotted around the rest of the stadium, and then lots of blue seats. Not exactly going to create a great atmosphere.

“Arsenal famously fail to regularly fill it…the famous White Hart Lane atmosphere won’t disappear”.

Did the ‘journalist’ who wrote this just learn the word famous? I did not realise we FAMOUSLY fail to fill the stadium. We have one of the highest fill percentages in the league. And Spurs FAMOUS atmosphere? That’s a joke right? The loudest they get is booing their own team off at half time.

Lets not just create fallacies to support our strawman srticle.

  1. The NFL deal is a big deal

“Daniel Levy is a famously shrewd negotiator.”

Roberto Soldado and Erik Lamela anyone? He showed his brilliant negotiating skills there.

“The extra money coming in on this deal, Spurs shouldn’t have to suffer nearly as much financial austerity as Arsenal did.”

Wembley generates £3m a game per NFL game. Spurs is 2/3’s the size. So that is £2m. Over the two games, Spurs will generate around £4m in ‘extra money’. Remember, this is generate, not profit. By the time they pay for the design and upkeep of the artificial pitch, as well as the costs associated with putting on a match day event – stewarding, policing, utilities, etc, the profit for the actual event will be far below this.

And let’s not forget, Arsenal put on many events during the Emirates’ early years. Springsteen two nights, Coldplay three nights, Muse two nights & Greenday 3 nights. That is 10 extra revenue days for Arsenal. Add in the 7 times Brazil used the stadium as it’s English base, Arsenal have put on 17 additional events over 10 years. Spurs NFL deal is worth 20 additional events. Will an extra 3 events really ensure Spurs do not suffer financially?

“The increased exposure Spurs will have in the USA shouldn’t be underestimated.”

So let me get this right, earlier in the article, it was about atmosphere. Now the article talks about an increase in American fans. Which in turn will create more tourists going to games. Which in turn will reduce the atmosphere. Make your mind up. You either want a great atmosphere, or more tourists. Can’t have both.

  1. The best players won’t keep leaving

Do Spurs have any top players left?

“ A huge, impressive ground with a great atmosphere will mean the club makes far more of an impression on potential wantaways.”

Because that worked for Arsenal didn’t it.

  1. It will be a nice stable home for the kids to grow up in

“Academy players like Harry Kane, Ryan Mason, Nabil Bentaleb and (to an extent) Danny Rose, are all loyal to the club.”

I would be loyal too if I was an average player being paid millions a year. I am sure the likes of Henri Lansbury, Jay Emmanuel- Tomas, Emmanuel Frimpong & Jernade Meade would have ben loyal had we offered them 5 year deals worth £1.5-£2m a year. But loyalty does not mean you are good enough.

“And the Hotspur Way academy is still producing lots of young talent, who proved their quality by reaching the FA Youth Cup semis last year”

Well done Spurs on reaching the semi-finals of the FA Youth Cup. Tottenham have not win it since 1990 and not made the final since 1995. Meanwhile, Arsenal won it 3 times during the 00’s. Making a semi-final is no an achievement.

In the past 6 years, Fulham, Norwich City, Blackburn Rovers, Sheffield United & Aston Villa have all made the FA Youth Cup Final. In that time, Spurs have made 1 semi-final.

In that time, Chelsea have won the trophy 4 times, and been runners up once, and developed a grand total of 0 regular first team squad players. Being a good youth player does not translate into being a top senior player.

  1. The club is going to remain at home in Tottenham, proving loyalty (probably)

“While the ‘Woolwich Wanderers’ have moved house more times than an accident-prone hermit crab”

And there we have it. A dig at Arsenal. This point adds nothing to the article, except for making a dig at Arsenal being founded in Woolwich. The author has let himself down here, and shows he is a Spurs fan, attempting to big him his own team, and belittle Arsenal. It really is poor, biased, journalism.

  1. They might just have found a manager to stick with

“Victories over Chelsea and, of course, Arsenal as well as a cup final were good achievements.”

We always say that when Spurs play Arsenal it is there cup final, and by putting a victory against Arsenal alongside a cup final (defeat) proves the point.

As for a ‘manager to stick with’, last season, fans were already booing the manager, demanding #PochOut on twitter and phoning up TalkSport and 606 saying he was out of his depth and should go. This was after less than a season.

I will happily bet with any Spurs fan, when the stadium open in 2018 (or whenever it will open), Mauricio Pochettino will not be the manager. And I will happily double up by betting that his replacement will no longer still be in charge either.

  1. Daniel Levy has always had a masterplan, and the rest of us are only just starting to see it

This one is hilarious. Arsene Wenger and the Arsenal board had a long term plan that is now only starting to come to fruition. Whilst that plan was rolling on, the press hammered Arsenal and the club for a lack of success over a 10 year period, when we were clearly hamstrung financially.

Meanwhile, over at Spurs, Daniel Levy has overseen just 1 trophy (a League Cup) in the 14 seasons as chairman of Arsenal. And this is a master plan?

The fact is, Levy is often given a free ride by many of his friends in the media. Even Spurs fans over recent years have been highly critical and questioned his ability to drive the club forward.

“Since then he’s transformed it into a real business that turns a profit every year.”

This highlights how Levy and Spurs are held to a different level of scrutiny than Arsenal. Whilst a profit with no trophies is seen as an achievement at Spurs, at Arsenal, as mentioned, were continually criticised for focusing on profit over trophies.

“He’ll pop over to the bank of increased matchday revenue to pick up a cheque before settling up on the beautiful, sandy shores of regular Champions League football.”

Spurs have had Champions League football once in the history of the competition. Arsenal have shown that when building a new stadium, you need to take a couple of steps back. Apparently, that is not the case at Spurs, where they are going to be guaranteed Champions League football as a prize for building the new stadium. It also ignores the fact that Arsenal, Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea and Manchester United will still be generating more yearly income than Spurs, even after the new stadium.

 

In summary, the Telegraph article was a load of bollocks. you do not turn round 20 years of dominance just by building a new stadium and having friendly press right nice fluffy positive articles.

The truth of the matter is a new stadium will strain a club financially. It has taken Arsenal 10 years from moving into the new stadium, to having any sort of success again. If Spurs move into their new stadium in 2018, it will be until at least 2028 that some of the financial constraints are lifted. By which point they would only be back to where they are now. Continually battling to finish 5th.

So Spurs fans reading this, do not get too excited. A new stadium does not make you a big club.

Keenos

Is Wenger’s dithering about to cost us the title?

12 Replies

I had a nightmare last night. That nightmare has scared me stiff, and it could well come true. As I was having my usual dreams of chocolate rivers and ginger bread houses, in my dream world where diabetes and obesity does not exist enable myself to eat what I desire, the TV came on. It was an Arsenal press conference with Arsene Wenger and he said:

“Having bought Petr Cech to the club, we have decide that concludes our transfer activity for this summer. We believe that we have sufficient quality in the current players in our squad, and do not need to spend any more money.”

With that, I woke in a pool of sweats (and sweets, the bowl of jelly beans I took to bed for a midnight snack had tipped over).

Whilst it was just a dream, the real scary reality is that I could picture Arsene Wenger saying this in the real world. And his dithering over strengthening the squad could cost us a shot at the title.

At the end of last season, everyone agreed that we needed to sign at least 3 new players. A keeper, a defensive midfielder, and an attacking player (wide right forward or striker depending on your persuasion). We have the keeper in the bag nice and early. Result.

However, the other two, there is a realistic chance that Wenger’s dithering over the squad could result in us missing out on our main targets and, even worse, missing out on all targets, as Wenger decides to stick rather than twist.

This will be his rationale thinking.

At defensive midfield, we saw the development of Francis Coquelin last season. He was a real break through player, and showed tremendous discipline and ability. And his stats (we all know Wenger loves stats). The tackles, the interceptions, the duels won. They are amongst the best in the Premier League. Compare him to Morgan Schneiderlin. Coquelin outperformed him in nearly every key area last season.

Why buy Schneiderlin when Coquelin out performs him? No need. Let’s allow him to go to Manchester United, whilst we explore other players. Arturo Vidal maybe, or how about Javi Martinez over at Bayern Munich. At worst, that Carvhalo bloke at Portugual. Not the old balding centre back, the centre midfielder.

Worse case scenario though, we still have Coquelin. If they above are too expensive, even though we can afford them, we could stick with Coquelin. After all, we still have Mikel Arteta at back up. Might as well give him an extra year on his contract whilst we are at it. And let’s not forget that Jack Wilshere has done a job there for England.

Coquelin, Arteta & Wilshere. Why buy anyone? Might as well save the money.

Back in reality, it is a situation that mirror’s the summer of 2013. We needed a new striker. We started off at Steven Jovetic. A good young talent. Not quite the finished article. Then we heard Gonzalo Higuain was available. A proven striker. Available for only a few million more than Jovetic. Drop the interest in Jovetic, let him go to Manchester City, and chase the Madrid striker.

Then we get told about the Suarez release clause. With Napoli showing interest in Higuain, pushing the price up, a deal for Suarez is only a few million more than the new Higuain price. Drop the interest in Higuain, let him go to Napoli, chase Suarez.

Then Liverpool did not honour the release clause, basically telling Arsenal and Suarez to take them to court to enforce it. This was never going to happen. The result? Arsenal lose out on Suarez, allow their other two targets to go to other sides, and end up with Yaya Sanogo.

Back into Wenger’s mind we go.

Upfront we have Olivier Giroud. He proved last season that he is a very good striker. Despite a lean patch at the end of the season. Had he not got injured, he would have got 20 league goals. So who is out there who is better than Olivier Giroud?

Always fancied a bit of Karim Benzema at Real Madrid. He could be available. But Giroud keeps him out of the French national side. It would be hard to keep control of two ego’s, battling out for the same place in the starting 11 for their country, also battling it out for the same place for the club. Won’t be easy to keep them both happy. Not worth the hassle.

Same go’s for Alexandre Lacazette. Good player, scored a lot of goals last year in France. But so did Giroud when we signed him. Why splash the cash on a player who again, is behind Giroud for his country. Would these guys really improve us? Might as well stick with Giroud.

And let’s not forget Danny Welbeck. He has all the physical attributes to be a top striker. Just needs to learn how to finish. And it has always been said that Theo Walcott will be a striker. Maybe this will be the season he finally moves up front. And it is well known that Alexis Sanchez was signed as a striker. That is 4 we have.

Plus Yaya Sanogo (I kid, I Kid).

Looking around Europe, there are not too many strikers. No point spending £20-30m on someone who might improve us, might as well stick with what we have.

And suddenly my fear becomes a reality. The two scenarios above about a defensive midfielder and a striker are realistic.

It might not be as bad as this. We will buy players. But the dithering as he decides what to do could cost us. Whilst he makes up his mind on if Coquelin is good enough, Schneiderlin will be off to Manchester United. that is one less target on the market. And the same will happen upfront with Lacazette. Whilst Wenger dithers and assesses his options, he will go to Liverpool or A.N Other.

Yes, I full well know that it is the 8th of July. That the transfer window has only been officially open for 8 days. That is still has the good part of 8 weeks to go. That the lads are only just back in pre season training. That the season does not start for another month (month today infact). I know this. I know there is nothing to worry about. But even the most hardened Wengeritte would admit that the above scenario is possible. That it could happen.

We will buy the players we need to win the league, I am confident of that. I think Wenger has a plan, and that plan will be executed, and we will win the league next season. But there is a small part of me that is fearful that the dream could become a reality. That after Cech, Wenger could dither, and our title chances would be up in smoke before the season has started.

I am scared.

Keenos

Six set to leave – Does anybody care?

3 Replies

The mornings Arsenal related news is about the club clearing out the closet, looking to let off load up to 6 players.

Players mentioned are Lukas Podolski, Joel Campbell, Carl Jenkinson, David Ospina, Yaya Sanogo and Mathieu Flamini.

In usual circumstance, a club losing 6 players, 3 of which were senior, would present some sort of crisis. Letting 6 go would usually mean having to sign 6. There would be broken crests all over the place.

However, in this bright new world at Arsenal, the cull is actually a positive move, as what we are infact doing is moving on players from the lower end of the squad in terms of quality. Players who are not needed, players who are surplus to requirements.

At this point in time, we could let go all 6 players, sign no one else, and the squad would be no weaker, no lighter, than last season. It would just save us a big load of wages. By my estimation, this could be near £15,000,000 per annum. If all were shifted on, that would mean we could purchase 2/3 top players (including Petr Cech), without seeing our wage bill rise.

Some of the players leaving could consider themselves unlucky. Well, one of them can anyway. David Ospina.

Bought last year as someone to put pressure of Wojciech Szczesny, Ospina took the number 1 jersey from the big Pole after his smoking display against Southampton. His departure from Arsenal is due to circumstances beyond his control.

I am sure last year, when Ospina was signed, it was not as a short term replacement for Lukasz Fabianski. At just 26, he would have had a long career at Arsenal as a number 2. However, Szczesny’s poor form led us to search for a new number 1, and when  someone with the ability and experience as Cech came on the market, we moved.

That left Arsenal in the position of having 3 international goal keepers who all wanted to be number 1. And the decision has been made that Ospina is that one.

Ospina can consider himself as unlucky, but with Szczesny 2 years his junior, more naturally gifted, more made for the Premier League and, perhaps more importantly, home grown, Ospina is the one out. Szczesny will be given the opportunity to work under Cech, learn from him, and with age on his side, become number 1 once more when Cech retires. But for now, it is good bye to Ospina.

Next on the list who might feel a bit unlucky is Carl Jenkinson. Personally, I do not think we will sell him. He has shown himself to be Premier League class during his spell at West Ham and performances for England. I have always believed that he has the ability to at least be 2nd choice right back for Arsenal. His recent performances show he could be 1st choice.

Arsenal are in a situation where we have 3 very good right backs. Debuchy is the experience, Bellerin the young talented upstart, Jenkinson somewhere in the middle.

There has been talk of Jenkinson leaving for c £10m. I think more likely is that he leaves on loan (with Arsenal receiving £1-2m loan fee). That then leaves Debuchy, who is returning from injury, to battle with Bellerin for the season. Depending on progress, a decision will be made next season. If Debuchy is the outstanding right back, he will continue in the position and Jenkinson will be sold.  If Bellerin continues his develop over last season, and keeps Debuchy out of the 1st team, Debuchy will become surplus to requirements – and probably unhappy playing 2nd fiddle. That will result in Debuchy leaving and Jenkinson coming back to battle with Bellerin. It also creates a situation where 3 of our 4 full backs (including Gibbs), are all home grown (yes GC, I know Bellerin is not from North London, but he will still be considered as home grown).

The other 4 leaving, Podolski, Campbell, Sanogo and Flamini, are just no longer good enough for Arsenal.

The less Podolski played, the better he got in the fans eyes. Fans remembering individual performances like Fulham rather than the many lackluster performances where he contributed nothing. His performances at Inter Milan where he scored 1 league goal (the only league goal he scored last season) showed that whilst he was a fan favorite due to his social media activities, on the pitch he simply failed to perform.

There will still be many in some quarters who will support him. Say he was misused. Say he should stay. But compare his performances to Alexis Sanchez. One is a world class performer, the other, at £135,000 a week (approx) is an expensive bench warmer. Sell Podolski, reinvest the wages, and move forward. There are better players out there.

Joel Campbell is another who, like Podolski, got better the less he played. A half decent World Cup led his stock to be high last summer. I believe we should have sold him then. We didn’t, and it resulted in one of the funniest scenarios this season (or at least became funny) where Campbell was shouted at the Stoke City game “get out whilst you can Joel.” Joel did get out. Loaned out to Villarreal. He did not do much. Arsenal won the FA Cup and dramatically improved in the New Year. Now it is not Joel’s choice to ‘get out’, he will be forced out. Another player who, 5/6 years ago would have got a chance, but with this new Arsenal, we now buy established stars, not try and make them.

Yaya Sanogo was always a shot to nothing. A talented lad who had a horrendous injury record. He cost us nothing. Just wages. Contributed nothing. And will probably be let go for nothing. It’s worthwhile taking these risks, as they might pay off. This one did not.

Finally we come to Flamini. He is just past it. Now behind Francis Coquelin and Mikel Arteta, and with a new defensive midfielder in the pipeline, he is just not up to it anymore. He is simply not good enough for this new Arsenal moving forward. We no longer have to make do with a player who simply ‘does a job’. He did a job for his 1st season back, last season he did not do a job, next season his only job might be, if he stays, Mesut Ozil’s friend.

The players leaving highlight a good sign for Arsenal. We are no longer a club that needs mediocre players. The futures bright. The futures Arsenal.

Keenos