Since taking over as Arsenal boss in the mid 90s, Wenger has implemented a policy of frugal investment on players with potential to grow. His relationship with David Dein gave Wenger the freedom to trawl Europe for the finest young talent available. After picking up notable bargains, including the likes of Patrick Veira, Nicolas Anelka and Robert Pires, Wenger's reputation for player development was second to none. Many would argue that even Thierry Henry, bought for in excess of £10 million, was an eventual bargain. Henry had struggled at Juventus as a wide player previously. The common theme here is that, as well as winning trophies and entertaining football fans of all persuasions, Wenger was continually adding value to the club. Not only was he picking up bargains, he was developing them into assets.
At this point, I imagine Arsenal fans roaring at their computer screens, raging that they're not interested in assets, just decent players and trophies. Well, of course they're right. As football fans we follow our teams in the hope that they achieve success, we don't sit at the edge of our seats on a Saturday afternoon, hoping the board posts a pre-tax profit in April. But looking at the bigger picture, we now live in a world where football is big business. The flow of investment from overseas is huge and, with the exception of Chelsea and Manchester City, new football club owners smell cash. They see the purchase of a Premier League club as a way of furthering their own domestic interests. In some cases, they may even be contemplating turning a profit in the future.
Take the situation at Manchester United. The Glazer family take out huge loans to buy a completely profitable and solvent football club they don't really understand. They then secure their huge debts against the asset - the club itself. As a result, a once well run club now has to find huge debt repayments every month, before a single penny can be invested into the club. The Glazer family clearly did not credit the loyal United fans with any intelligence and assumed they would not care about the financial transactions of the club. This may be the case in the soulless world of the NFL where clubs are referred to as franchises, but not in English football. Not in a country where many of the clubs are approaching their 150th year.
Liverpool had similar experiences to Manchester United when they were owned by infamous American duo, Hicks and Gillett. Their names became inseparable over the period of their ownership of Liverpool FC. Like Laurel and Hardy or Cannon and Ball, their handling of this, the country's most successful club, was hilarious in its ineptitude. Again, a once well-run club was suddenly laden with leveraged debt. The debt was then paid for with more debt - even the most financially reclusive of football fans will realise that is not a recipe for long-term success. Although Liverpool are now under different ownership, which seems to want to invest in the team, the club are still playing in a relatively dilapidated stadium with no room for expansion. They are still without a league title since the inception of the Premier League and are now struggling to keep pace with the likes of Arsenal and Manchester United in the commercial sector of football. It is still early days for Liverpool and there will come a time when Liverpool owner John Henry, will demand a return on his investment. These are exciting, yet uncertain times for Liverpool. Dalglish has gambled huge money on Champion's League qualification - what if it isn't delivered?
I'm sure many Arsenal fans will, like fans from all the other 90 full time league football clubs in England, look at Manchester City and Chelsea with great envy. Those clubs are clearly punching above their natural weight in terms of expenditure and possibly even silverware. Chelsea were on the verge of bankruptcy towards the end of the Bates' regime and Manchester City, languishing in football's third tier, were in a dreadful financial state. The Chelsea of the 70s and 80s were anything but an established top flight side and were a member of the infamous, 'yo-yo' club. Given these past problems for both Chelsea and Manchester City, wouldn't it be fair to assume that if their billionaire sugar daddies suddenly pulled the cash plug, both clubs would be in a far less favourable position? When FIFA revealed their plans for financial fair play, due to come into effect next year ,they clearly had both these teams at the forefront of their thinking. It is still far from clear how both clubs will balance their books sufficiently in time for the rule changes.
Meanwhile, Arsenal have continued to compete in the Champions' League. They have continued to fight at the top of the Premier League and continued to play a flowing, attractive brand of football appreciated by all fans. They have done all this with a stringent wage cap. They have pulled it off without buying the game's biggest names and without paying over the odds for the mediocre players their competitors throw cash at. Not only that, Arsene Wenger has developed a knack of cashing in on players that have lost the desire, just at the right time. You only have to think of the likes of Anelka, Veira, Pires, Fabregas, Adebayor and even Henry. They had all lost the desire to play for the club and the decision to sell them was right in every case. Meanwhile, the club has moved into the Premier League's finest stadium, with room for expansion and have paid down much of the club's debt.
For all the skeptical Arsenal fans who are demanding trophies now, think back to the 80s. Alex Ferguson, fighting for his job, allegedly only one game from the sack. Over 25 years of hurt, waiting for the league championship that eluded them season after season. A huge club, playing second fiddle to the likes of Leeds, Liverpool, Spurs and Nottingham Forest. Then, one season changed everything. This is where Arsenal sit now. Football is cyclical and Arsenal fans should be confident that their time will come - and unlike Manchester United, Liverpool and Chelsea, the financial waters won't be clouded by restrictive debt.
What does this all mean? It means Arsenal are a financially strong and vibrant club. They entertain their fans every week and don't have the spectre of debt hanging over their every move. More importantly, it may mean Arsenal are preparing for a huge future. Where will they be in ten years, should the status quo remain? Debt free with a beautiful new stadium and potential to expand. Cash in the bank for signings and the ability to really acquire the world's best talent without risking the club's future. When Arsenal fans complain about their club's lack of ambition, they should cast an eye over at Manchester United and their other main rivals. What will the future hold for them? Those same fans should spare a thought for Newcastle fans, Everton fans, Villa fans - all of whom support big clubs but suffer at the hands of their owners, club debt or real lack of ambition. What does the future hold for the Gunners? Arsenal FC will rise from this comparative lean period richer, more competitive and become possibly the 21st century's European powerhouse.
No comments:
Post a Comment