Mikel Arteta


Nope that will happen when he is appointed


We are a season or two before we can get the right set of players who can compete on all fronts.

Even with a new manager, it would be a miracle to get a new team clicking straight away.

Guardiola needed a whole season before his team clicked and that was on top of massive investment they could afford to accelerate the process.

We don’t have the financial muscle to accelerate the process like that. We need couple of season and a planned project to get the right set of players and be able to hang onto them.

So with that in mind, I don’t think getting Arteta in now is that controversial of a decision.
If he works out, awesome. That’s the kind of romanticism I like about football. Something out of nothing.

If he doesn’t work out, we will have a manager that is expendable and wasn’t an expensive affair plus we got a good set of players already in system for an experienced manager to finally get them going.


But what is it that makes him so special? We have a handful of other former players in our own staff who have more coaching experience than him. Former players WHO ACTUALLY PLAYED and made some difference to our club. If it’s romanticism you want.

And why this English obsession with holding so many former players in high regard. The majority have proven to be awful managers.


Maybe…might I emphasise on ‘maybe’ again.
Maybe it’s because we want to keep the footballing style that we are usually associated with.
Most of our former players are not really from a background where such a style is expected off them.

Whereas Arteta was trained in Barcelona youth academy, coached by Wenger and is assistant to Guardiola.


His perfect lego hair?


Romanticism and sentiment have no place in top level football. Empty concepts, meritocracy should be king


Reasons for Arteta:

  1. Easy scapegoat for our problems when it all fails. It’s Arteta’s fault, not the board’s.
  2. Takes a coaching only role, ala European approach
  3. Not ruffle any players feathers because he’s their friend
  4. Play a similar possession brand of football that our players are used to traditionally.
  5. Cheap and low demands with transfer market
  6. Nepotism


What a load of bollocks. ^

These are BradyMagic level statements tbh. I’m really surprised to see them coming from you.


Nailed it!


Makes revisionist history statement.

Accuses others of revisionism.

Even if your statement were true, it proves fuck all because the people who didn’t rate him were BradyMagic and the like who couldn’t even figure out what position he was playing, and who voted Flamini as a better option than him. :joy: Everyone who could see what for what all rated Arteta in the period of 11-13. It was obvious his quality and importance to us. Since we don’t have the old board, you could go back and look at articles by gunnerblog, Tim Stillman, etc., he was unanimously rated, because he was, well, very good.

Look back to our teams in 11-13. In 12-13 especially we were as solid as a midfield as we have been in the last ten years, and it’s not much of a risk to say that had little to do with Wenger. I always say 11-13 with Arteta because the physical decline really started to become a problem in 2014. In the first half of the 2013-14 season he still turned in some majestic performances against Liverpool and Dortmund. It was a short period of quality but he was absolutely quality for us and to say otherwise borders on ignorance, honestly.


Think most people will blame the board of this goes tits up tbh

That’s what most pessimist are saying, that they will go for them before arteta. Which is the logical solution.

If this arteta thing fails then I for sure will only abuse Gazidis, Kroenke et al.




Just Gazdis is to blame if arteta goes tits up


Everyone who agrees with me understands football, everyone who doesn’t is clueless.

Please never change AC, you’re so amusing


Don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to say that people who thought that Flamini was a better option than Arteta are clueless :wink:

And anyways, what you’ve said is distinctly different than what I said. What I said was a basic fact: 99% of the people whose opinion I respect rated Arteta then. That’s different than me rating those people’s opinion because they rate Arteta. It’s just a fact of life, though, that people who have a clue will share a rather obvious opinion (ie, Arteta was good in that period).


Arteta and Flamini were both average players, the fact one of them might be less average than the other doesn’t say much. Plus, they couldn’t be further apart in terms of similarity.


Nonsense, to say Flamini > Arteta at that time was as embarrassing as saying Wilshere > Ramsey right now, or worse. You can try to paint over it all you like but it was a ludicrous opinion to hold.


I am not painting anything, I don’t even know who said Flamini was better than Arteta. I am telling you both were fucking shit and I can’t really care who was less shit than the other.


Half the board did.

And to say Arteta was fucking shit then is also a ludicrous opinion to hold, so even if you’re not painting anything you’re stating a ludicrous thing.


I said ‘if it works’


There was a poll on here for Arteta v Flamini and it was something like 50/50.

Flamini did have a bright start to his return though so that may have skewed it but it’s not revisionist to say people didn’t think Arteta was up to it (age/decline were probably a factor too at that stage to be fair).

He and Song complimented each other pretty well. I don’t think Arteta was as effective as that again after Song left.