To all Arsenal fans and others, Wenger is the one who made the history for the club. Without him, Arsenal is nothing. Look at Man U without Fergi. Even Mou is struggling.

I need someone to state why you think that he is a bad manager. He continues to add more great players for the team.

P.S. I'm not trolling.

barca and real can barely beat atletico when atletico play their best, there's no way arsenal could win against them.....especially not during simeone's era

Arsenal can beat any team in the world in one leg match, and I'm not joking. But when it comes to 2-legged matches we collapse either in first or the second.

Next time read what I say before you go accusing me of things I never said. Where have I said Arsenal are the best team in the world? Where have I said our only problems are mentally? Here. I'll repeat what I said in bold and make it bigger for you to understand

I tell you, if we play like that every week, we would be hands down the best team in europe.

Now do you understand? Read what I say before you call my words illogical. It's obviously shown highlighting makes no impact for you.

And by the way, Bayern never did much amazing other than Alaba's goal. We let them boss us around, so no, that's not a reality check, it's a case of conceding cheap goals. I call losing 4 0 to Barca at home without Messi a reality check.

Arsenal can beat any team in the world in one leg match

Given the importance of one leg match , I am sure any other team in the world will give their all to win it . Anyone can loose on leg match but when big title like CL is at stake , I doubt Arsenal can have enough muscle to beat any team in the world .. Your record against top teams is poor !

I doubt my opinion is too welcome in a conversation about Arsenal, but I think there are several misconceptions being made here.

Wenger is not the reason Arsenal are losing. I see Arsenal's current situation as being very similar to the position United was in 2010-2013 when the Glazers essentially starved the club of big-money transfers. Obviously, Fergie's managerial merit allowed United to still succeed during that period, but Wenger isn't as good as Fergie - which isn't his fault, no one is.

That being said, Arsenal spent 90M in the summer. But it was WHO they spent it on. They spent 35m on both Xhaka and Mustafi, which weren't awful transfers, but they aren't going to win a title. Perez and Holding look decent, but they also aren't going to win a title. Let's look at what happened with the other contenders:

United: Pogba, Ibra, Mhiki, Bailly. All of those appear to be excellent transfers at this point in time.
Chelsea: Kante, David Luiz, Marcus Alonso. All three of those players are starters in Chelsea's rock of a defense.
City: Bravo, Stones, Sane, Nolitio, Gundo. Most of these have been underwhelming and/or flops so far, which is why City isn't challenging for a title.
Liverpool: Sane, Matip, Wjinaldum, Karius. All of those players have been integral starters with the exception of Karius.
Spurs: Spent in a pretty retarded manner, but their starting 11 apparently has enough merit.

Chelsea did not spend 90M. Liverpool didn't spend 90M. Neither did Spurs. They just made good decisions. City overspent on players who atm are sucking, and United overspent on players we knew we needed. Spurs won just by not losing anyone important, since they were literally the only top team that had a functioning 11 at the start of the summer. That being said, Arsenal and Spurs have a great similarity in that both clubs believe in their 11. I believe it can get top 4, I don't believe it can win a title. I think that in this day and age, being ok with your starting 11 doesn't win you league titles anymore. Even Bayern/Barca/Madrid reload every season, chucking the junk and looking for the gems. Arsenal doesn't toss its junk. Ever.

The main reason for that is a simple one, it costs more to replace a not-good-enough player than it does to just keep him. Ramsey, Wilshere, Walcott, Giroud, Welbeck, Chamberlin, Elneny, Gabriel, etc - they're just not good enough to win a title. Wenger's good, but he ain't that good. And I don't blame him at all for that.

I doubt my opinion is too welcome in a conversation about Arsenal, but I think there are several misconceptions being made here.

Don't worry about it.

Wenger is not the reason Arsenal are losing. I see Arsenal's current situation as being very similar to the position United was in 2010-2013 when the Glazers essentially starved the club of big-money transfers. Obviously, Fergie's managerial merit allowed United to still succeed during that period, but Wenger isn't as good as Fergie - which isn't his fault, no one is.

It partially is, as shown as last season. Well, United weren't massive spenders in the first place. I think the most they've spent is around that 30 million mark on Ferdinand if I'm correct. I'm aware of inflation, but I doubt they would spent much more now. Fair enough, but when you see a team like Leicester win the league with 81 points, when previously teams used to win with 90 points, it's not like Wenger is critical free.

That being said, Arsenal spent 90M in the summer. But it was WHO they spent it on. They spent 35m on both Xhaka and Mustafi, which weren't awful transfers, but they aren't going to win a title. Perez and Holding look decent, but they also aren't going to win a title. Let's look at what happened with the other contenders:

Exactly. We even spent money on this guy called Asano, who was apparently a 'hot prospect', but I doubt he will come good. Our board, owner and manager are all to blame. Wenger had previously stated after last season's transfer window that our team is good enough to win the league. We finished fourth that season, but after making a goalkeeper signing, I don't suddenly see how we are contenders.

United: Pogba, Ibra, Mhiki, Bailly. All of those appear to be excellent transfers at this point in time.
Chelsea: Kante, David Luiz, Marcus Alonso. All three of those players are starters in Chelsea's rock of a defense.
City: Bravo, Stones, Sane, Nolitio, Gundo. Most of these have been underwhelming and/or flops so far, which is why City isn't challenging for a title.
Liverpool: Sane, Matip, Wjinaldum, Karius. All of those players have been integral starters with the exception of Karius.
Spurs: Spent in a pretty retarded manner, but their starting 11 apparently has enough merit.

Well, Chelsea never had the perfect transfer window. They bought Batshuayi, and I don't think he's started a game. For over thirty million, you expect more. Other than that, agreed.

Chelsea did not spend 90M. Liverpool didn't spend 90M. Neither did Spurs. They just made good decisions. City overspent on players who atm are sucking, and United overspent on players we knew we needed. Spurs won just by not losing anyone important, since they were literally the only top team that had a functioning 11 at the start of the summer. That being said, Arsenal and Spurs have a great similarity in that both clubs believe in their 11. I believe it can get top 4, I don't believe it can win a title. I think that in this day and age, being ok with your starting 11 doesn't win you league titles anymore. Even Bayern/Barca/Madrid reload every season, chucking the junk and looking for the gems. Arsenal doesn't toss its junk. Ever.

Chelsea spent more that 90M. But then again, getting rid of too junk will screw you over, especially when injuries are overloaded. The other problem is the owner we have. He is using Arsenal to buy a new stadium in America. Yes, it's what I just said. I have always said we must we ruthless. Now, a few additions here and there, better mentality, better decisions and we're good to go. Then again, every other team is constantly improving, so that's why it's harder than everyone thinks. Just look at the mess Chelsea were in last season, all those problems fixed, and now they look like title contenders.

The main reason for that is a simple one, it costs more to replace a not-good-enough player than it does to just keep him. Ramsey, Wilshere, Walcott, Giroud, Welbeck, Chamberlin, Elneny, Gabriel, etc - they're just not good enough to win a title. Wenger's good, but he ain't that good. And I don't blame him at all for that.

These players are good for top 4, but not league. Wenger doesn't leave unless he fails top 4, and that doesn't happen. Unfortunately, Wenger does not show any fight for this to change. There's more of the story inside, and I feel that the downgrade he has given us is also partially his fault. I understand everything to do with the stadium, but I don't think anyone player over 28 got a good contract. Arsenal are at a rebirth, but I feel Wenger must go.

I hope you understand better now why I want Wenger to leave. I understand all the risks, but trust me, life is about risks. As long as we use our heads to get a good manager to replace Wenger, I'm all for it. I just don't want someone like for example, Howe. He's good but he hasn't managed at a big club and is young, which is a massive disadvantage.

I call losing 4 0 to Barca at home without Messi a reality check.

Aha, but perhaps winning the Champions League made up for it, no? Besides, we tied them 1-1 at the Camp Nou as our most recent result, and half our starters were missing. The only reality check is that Arsenal have not made the CL final since 2006... but then again, that was their only final appearance during Wenger's tenure.

Next time read what I say before you go accusing me of things I never said. Where have I said Arsenal are the best team in the world?

But I didn't accuse you of saying that. Perhaps I'm not the one who must learn how to read.

Where have I said our only problems are mentally?

You're right, you didn't. I typed my response wrong. I intended to write "mostly mental?" but typed out "only mental?" instead. My bad. Regardless, it doesn't make my point any less valid.

Here. I'll repeat what I said in bold and make it bigger for you to understand

I tell you, if we play like that every week, we would be hands down the best team in europe.

Well, good thing I had my glasses on. I almost didn't see it the first time. It seemed too ludicrous to believe.

That's a very simplistic way to put it, as the reason Arsenal aren't much of a good team is because they can't put in consistent performances. That's a fact. It's also why United, Bilbao, Lazio, etc. aren't much of a good team either. It's like saying "If Giroud can score two goals every game, he'd be the best striker in the world". Understand now?

Fair enough. Accused probably wasn't what i meant, but no worries.

If Giroud could do scorpion kicks once every other game than Messi and Ronaldo will start nervously smoking watching the greatest striker reborn :)

@Marcus2011 People doesn't understand, if Giroud would have been brought into Barca system, he would have been the best player in the world. A real shame Barca decided to go with Suarez for their main striker. How foolish can you get.

Edit: Just to make sure people doesn't call me crazy, this a joke, for fun sake. Love Giroud, but yeah, not the best player in the world. :P

Spurs: Spent in a pretty retarded manner, but their starting 11 apparently has enough merit.

Well, I wouldn't call Wanyama anything other than a brilliant buy (the only player to have started every league game), and while Sissoko hasn't been amazing, he's been solid enough in rotation. Janssen hasn't made much of an impact, but then again he didn't cost much, and we spent most of our money on upgrading the contracts of our current stars. Literally about 6 or 7 of our star players signed new contracts THIS season, between September and December.

How is that spending retardedly? I don't understand this point. Is the point that others spent hugely? Well, sure. I mean, United and Liverpool (and Chelsea) HAD to spend hugely, since all 3 of them came outside the Top 4, and only one of them even secured EL football.

We're not that rich, remember? And besides, we already had a fantastic starting XI, which was better than all of theirs.

Spurs won just by not losing anyone important, since they were literally the only top team that had a functioning 11 at the start of the summer.

What? We had Dembele banned for our first 5 games, we lost Kane for two months, Alderweireld for a month, and have been without Lamela since, like, Week 4. We're currently without Vertonghen (2 months and counting) and Rose as well. The real blessing is that we didn't have an injury to Alli.

And yet we're still 2nd, even after losing to Liverpool. At least until City play on Monday. And still level on points with Arsenal. And that's with European football; something two of the Top 4 don't need to worry about. Looks like the squad isn't so thin after all.

As for Arsenal, and their relations with Wenger, I do think that maybe the Prof has run out of things to teach anyone. He did exceptionally well to build the machine that Arsenal have become, but now someone with fresh ideas needs to come in and make use of that machine.

Of course, as a Spurs fan, part of me hopes they keep him... O:)

Only team I fear in EPL is Spurs .. the rest are ok .. and good news is we don't have to play Spurs again ..

Lodatz whenever someone mentions Spurs:

My point was, if you look at Chelsea, United, and most of Liverpool's 2016 signings, every single one of them is playing an important starting role and has been integral to the team this season. Spurs spent a pretty hefty amount of money and aside from Wanyama, it hasn't been those players that have been helping Spurs to where they are now. 60M total, and only 10M of it (in the form of Wanyama) is actually doing Spurs a solid right now. I don't consider having 80% of the money you spent not translating into anything a successful window. But, I also said...

Spurs won just by not losing anyone important, since they were literally the only top team that had a functioning 11 at the start of the summer.

Spurs don't really have any major positions of need - that I'm aware of. Yeah RM is meh, but Sissoko was brought into try and fix that. There was nothing like Klopp/Mourinho/Conte/Pep squad overhaul because it wasn't necessary. That was a compliment, but figures you'd ignore that...

Lodatz whenever someone mentions Spurs:

Well, only when you say things in a back-hand manner. Like this:

Spurs spent a pretty hefty amount of money and aside from Wanyama, it hasn't been those players that have been helping Spurs to where they are now. 60M total, and only 10M of it (in the form of Wanyama) is actually doing Spurs a solid right now.

Wanyama was 11m, but actually Janssen and Sissoko have been extremely helpful in rotation, like I already mentioned. We didn't need too much to alter our first XI, so we spent on back-ups instead.

I don't consider having 80% of the money you spent not translating into anything a successful window.

Well first that would have to be the case, which it isn't. Which is the reason why I spoke up to contradict you. Don't take it so personally. :)

That was a compliment, but figures you'd ignore that...

Then why did you say that they spent in a retarded fashion? That doesn't sound like a compliment.

Anyway, Happy Valentines!

SunFlash

Of course, as a Spurs fan, part of me hopes they keep him... O:)

Pretty much explains why I want him to leave.

Lodatz

Wanyama was 11m, but actually Janssen and Sissoko have been extremely helpful in rotation, like I already mentioned. We didn't need too much to alter our first XI, so we spent on back-ups instead.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Janssen has 3 goals, all penalties. Considering the amount of minutes he's played, he should really do better. When you compare it to someone like Lucas Perez, it's actually pretty bad, and we both know that. Sissoko could play a role, so I won't comment on him just yet.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Janssen has 3 goals, all penalties. Considering the amount of minutes he's played, he should really do better.

Well, probably so, but one thing I know from watching Spurs, which others might not know, is how much work he's been doing providing key passes and hold-up play. He's not managed to hit the ground running in terms of goals, but he did score 3 goals in 4 appearances in the Cups, which is mostly where he was being used since Kane came back from injury, and aside from our terrible CL campaign, most of the times Janssen played we have won the game.

He's still only 22. We'll see how he develops.

@Lodatz For my part, Janssen doesn't seem terribly bad or good. He propably need a bit more playing time to really make an impact in my opinion.

Yeah, I'll agree he needs more playing time, but when it comes to back up, we saw how towards the end of last season the Tottenham players collapsed. We'll see how he develops, but at this moment of time, he isn't worth the buy.

Yeah, I'll agree he needs more playing time, but when it comes to back up, we saw how towards the end of last season the Tottenham players collapsed.

Well sure, but that was only after the title race was lost. I blame that on youth and inexperience. The mentality to finish the job wasn't in place yet. Hopefully (for us) this year we'll not make that same mistake.

Anyhow, I guess we're going to have to endure a tight NLD in April.

Eeh, I don't feel too good. Then again, it's a really long time, so hopefully we improve.