arsenal need a top centre back to accompany vermalen,

a goalkeeper (shay given would be good, but that wont happen),

a patrick viera-esq midfield general to support fabregas who might go back to be a
bench warmer at barcelona anyway

and a quick skillful striker, possibly benzema, but an established 20goal a season
man

oh, and a winger too

get rid of squilachit, fabianksi, almunia, szchesny bench, chamaq was a flop,
bendtners not food enough, song (can possibly stay), diaby, denilson, clichy's not
strong enough in defence

basically, the pretty footballs nice, but nothing will be won with weak players, poor
mentality, no leaders

Arsenal are just about the only one that bucks the trend with prudent management.

But then again, it comes with a price, a lack of trophies. They'll win another
competition in the not too distant future, I'm sure, but they would have probably
won more if they had splashed the cash.

It's a fact of modern football. Money buys success. Be it Manchester United,
Liverpool, Chelsea, Real Madrid, Barcelona, AC Milan, Inter or even Bayern Munich,
they've all spent big cash over the years to get to where they are, and to stay there.

Personally, I would love if an Arab sheikh took over my club, injected half a billion
into the squad and turned it into title challengers in a few years. Because apart from
a league title some time ago, and a league cup at the turn of the century, I haven't
had much to shout about for over 2 decades. Just the regular relegation battle year
after year.

While it would have been nice to see my club win something by building from the
ground up, I just know that it's simply not possible nor practical.

"But by the same token, if your club was taken over by an Arab sheikh with a
bottomless pit of cash, in all likelihood you'll be enjoying the trophies it brings and
singing a very different tune instead."


I'm not sure I would. I mean, I have nothing against billionaires taking over clubs and
spending a lot, but certainly if that happened to Arsenal I wouldn't celebrate trophies
like if we had won it the "normal" way. One of the reasons I support this club is it's
policy of wise and reasonable spending and not firing a manager every 3
months(obvious exaggeration).

In other words, I prefer this sense of security and stability then more trophies. It's yet
to be seen what Stan Kroenke is planning though.

Said it in my first post and I'll say it again.

It's easy for many of us to sit here and condemn clubs like Manchester City for
buying success and how it's wrong and such.

But by the same token, if your club was taken over by an Arab sheikh with a
bottomless pit of cash, in all likelihood you'll be enjoying the trophies it brings and
singing a very different tune instead.

That's only because you got 50mil for an overpriced out-of-form striker.


:)

Can we keep the fact that football is run by money out of this? It's about two teams and
what they've achieved and what can be achieved with or without money.

Engrish football....heh.

I don't like either of them, so my care-o-meter was almost down to 0.


You would expect City to challenge for the EPL with the money they invested. Big
underachievers IMO.

The only loser today was football.

300M pounds in transfer fees alone just to buy yourself an FA Cup. Disgusting.

@Emma, they can have trophies, but that club lost it's soul a long time ago.

Fantastic for both sides really since they are both winners. City get a trophy in like 25+
years and Stoke get european football.