All things about Gus Poyet - former Brighton and Hove Albion Manager

[Bold Seagull]

I'm not necessarily just talking about spending money but more the whole ethos of the club and the way they get every team to play down to youth levels. Wenger is in fact a good example because he never had the funds whilst they paid off the emirates costs but he was never always in the press bemoaning the lack of money or hitting the ceiling!

As said above, it's been an allusion that Arsenal had no money to spend. The Emirates was largely funded by the profits made from the redevelopment of Highbury, and the hotels, apartments etc. they built around the Emirates. They had a serviceable debt from the initial construction and operating costs, but had cash flow to enable transfer spending. They currently have a cash reserve of £120m, and have an operating profit.

The decision not to spend has been Wengers, so the point about having complete control is a good one, but wrong to assume he's not had the money to spend.

 

[Triggaaar]

He has had the money to spend - he never wants to spend it. He was allegedly almost forced into handing over the money for Ozil as the board wanted to appease the fans with a big signing. Wenger has been given a transfer 'war' chest year on year but simply doesn't want to spend it.

I find that hard to believe. It makes no sense for a manager to not want to buy the best players.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I find that hard to believe. It makes no sense for a manager to not want to buy the best players.

It is hard to believe. I think this is more to do with Wenger's obsession with creating a side based on his footballing philosophy of youth and blend of experience.

Not only is the money evident in their accounts, I know first hand from an acquaintance who works directly with certain Arsenal board members and been told by them that Wenger has had the money available but it's been his choice not to spend it.

Like I said, the Ozil transfer was a panic last minute purchase under pressure from an Emirates crowd turning on the team. Wenger has had the ability for make those types of purchases for a number of years but has publicly stated he doesn't believe they represent value. His hand was forced with Ozil.

 

[The Truth]

It is hard to believe. I think this is more to do with Wenger's obsession with creating a side based on his footballing philosophy of youth and blend of experience.

Not only is the money evident in their accounts, I know first hand from an acquaintance who works directly with certain Arsenal board members and been told by them that Wenger has had the money available but it's been his choice not to spend it.

Like I said, the Ozil transfer was a panic last minute purchase under pressure from an Emirates crowd turning on the team. Wenger has had the ability for make those types of purchases for a number of years but has publicly stated he doesn't believe they represent value. His hand was forced with Ozil.

And again Wenger was correct. Ozil has been the biggest flop signing of the season. No where near worth 50 million. Arsenal and tottenham have been a joke in the transfer market.

 

[Albumen]

But if Liverpool hadn't managed to keep hold of Suarez and lost him to Arsenal, Arsenal probably would have walked the title.

 

[gripper stebson]

Sounds like a broken man!

[yt]HDiuZC_mWZk#t=63[/yt]

 

[Bwian]

But if Liverpool hadn't managed to keep hold of Suarez and lost him to Arsenal, Arsenal probably would have walked the title.

Shows how lucky Liverpool were in appointing Rodgers. Relatively new manager persuades current top striker in the world to stay in preference to joining a club that was clearly looking for the title this season. Of course the huge salary helped but Arsenal would have matched whatever was offered by Liverpool.

 

[WhingForPresident]

But if Liverpool hadn't managed to keep hold of Suarez and lost him to Arsenal, Arsenal probably would have walked the title.

Can't agree with this.

Do you think having Suarez would have prevented them losing 6-0 to Chelsea, 3-0 to Everton, 5-1 to Liverpool (maybe), 6-3 to Man City etc this season? They're lacking a quality striker but their problems lie far deeper than just that.

If Ramsey, Wilshere and Walcott had stayed fit then perhaps they would still be in with a shout, but once again they've come undone by having no depth whatsoever.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Sounds like a broken man!

[yt]HDiuZC_mWZk#t=63[/yt]

He sounded to me pretty relaxed/resigned really, like he'd come to terms with the situation and would be happy to be airlifted out of there by whatever means. Lots of shoulder shrugging. And for all his talk about not believing in luck, he patently does. SAFC have had some absolutely wretched luck since he took over, what with six own goals and however many red cards and suspensions. And now the next two fixtures are almost certainly just about to kick him badly when he's down. Almost felt sorry for the bloke when watching that interview. Almost.

 

[Triggaaar]

Not only is the money evident in their accounts, I know first hand from an acquaintance who works directly with certain Arsenal board members and been told by them that Wenger has had the money available but it's been his choice not to spend it.

That doesn't make it true. We know Arsenal have the money, but if they want to keep it for themselves, they don't want the fans turning on them, so it's no harm to leak suggestions that the money has always been there if he wanted it. Maybe it is true, but I wouldn't be sure.

And again Wenger was correct. Ozil has been the biggest flop signing of the season.

He clearly isn't correct, on the basis that they haven't won anything for years.

If all this time, there has been money for him to spend, and Wenger has chosen not to, the board should be furious with him for failing to bring any success.

 

[The Large One]

Somehow a thread about Martinez's dignity at the Hillsborough Memorial Service turned into a tedious Gus-whining thread.

Someone might want to put that in here as well.

Just wondering if Brighton's worst pub will segue into that as well.

 

[Triggaaar]

Can't agree with this.

Do you think having Suarez would have prevented them losing 6-0 to Chelsea, 3-0 to Everton, 5-1 to Liverpool (maybe), 6-3 to Man City etc this season? They're lacking a quality striker but their problems lie far deeper than just that.

I think he's probably right. After 27 games they were 3 points ahead of Liverpool. With Suarez they'd probably have been well ahead of the field, and wouldn't have collapsed as they have.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

Somehow a thread about Martinez's dignity at the Hillsborough Memorial Service turned into a tedious Gus-whining thread.

Someone might want to put that in here as well.

Just wondering if Brighton's worst pub will segue into that as well.

All threads end in 2 ways ;

A Poyet Binfest
Someone banging on about Real Ale and moaning about Fizzy lager

God help us if Poyet ever slags off Harveys

 

[Bold Seagull]

If all this time, there has been money for him to spend, and Wenger has chosen not to, the board should be furious with him for failing to bring any success.

It's how the board measure success. Financially Wenger has been brilliant. Not only is his net transfer record over the last 10 years a staggeringly low £17.3m, he has delivered Champions League football in each of those seasons and kept a full stadium with a young team playing attractive exciting football.

The lack of silverware is a furious subject for the fans, but for the board, I expect they feel he has more than delivered a sustainable working model for the club.

In context, that lack of silverware and operating the team so as the club is in profit, for the same period Chelsea's net spend is £557.6m, Man City £507.6m, Man Utd £205.1m, Liverpool £198m, Spurs £98.1m. For Wenger to be delivering top 4 year on year (maybe not this season...) at a net spend below Fulham, you get your answer as to why the board aren't furious.

 

[Pavilionaire]

And again Wenger was correct. Ozil has been the biggest flop signing of the season. No where near worth 50 million. Arsenal and tottenham have been a joke in the transfer market.

I'd put Lamela well ahead of Ozil in the flop stakes.

 

[Bwian]

Somehow a thread about Martinez's dignity at the Hillsborough Memorial Service turned into a tedious Gus-whining thread.

Someone might want to put that in here as well.

Just wondering if Brighton's worst pub will segue into that as well.

Look on the bright side - it gives you more opportunities to be sanctimonious if it does.

 

[Triggaaar]

It's how the board measure success.

Yes I agree. And if they measure success as making a profit, getting a full stadium, and getting in the champions league, then why would they want to spend loads of money? That wouldn't make sense, as it would make them less successful (according to how they measure success).

Not only is his net transfer record over the last 10 years a staggeringly low £17.3m, he has delivered Champions League football in each of those seasons and kept a full stadium with a young team playing attractive exciting football.

Well I guess Man U and Chelsea fans will feel they've been playing more attractive football, as they've got the results without exactly playing hoof ball.

In context, that lack of silverware and operating the team so as the club is in profit, for the same period Chelsea's net spend is £557.6m, Man City £507.6m, Man Utd £205.1m

There's no point in using newcomers Chelsea (new in Wengers time) and Man City to compare spending, and Man U make a profit, so I expect those figures are misleading.

For Wenger to be delivering top 4 year on year (maybe not this season...) at a net spend below Fulham, you get your answer as to why the board aren't furious.

More likely that the board aren't furious because Wenger has done what they wanted - do well enough and allow them to make a profit. That points against the idea that they've been offering him money to spend all along. Why would they be doing that, unless they wanted silverware?

 

[sydney]

It's how the board measure success. Financially Wenger has been brilliant. Not only is his net transfer record over the last 10 years a staggeringly low £17.3m, he has delivered Champions League football in each of those seasons and kept a full stadium with a young team playing attractive exciting football.

The lack of silverware is a furious subject for the fans, but for the board, I expect they feel he has more than delivered a sustainable working model for the club.

In context, that lack of silverware and operating the team so as the club is in profit, for the same period Chelsea's net spend is £557.6m, Man City £507.6m, Man Utd £205.1m, Liverpool £198m, Spurs £98.1m. For Wenger to be delivering top 4 year on year (maybe not this season...) at a net spend below Fulham, you get your answer as to why the board aren't furious.

bloody hell,that is far too sensible for this site...are you lost...

 

[Pavilionaire]

Can I just say that putting "everything Gus-related" on one thread is sh1t.

Sunderland are embroiled in a relegation scrap, they're playing City, United and Chelsea so influence what's going on at the top of the table. Just when the Gus stuff is getting interesting, and there are real talking points emerging on a daily basis it has been decided from on high to create a 'dustbin thread'. Personally, I am interested to see how our current and two-time Player Of The Year and Former Manager are getting on, seeing as they were the two people on and off the pitch that were going to lead us to the Prem less than 1 year ago.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes I agree. And if they measure success as making a profit, getting a full stadium, and getting in the champions league, then why would they want to spend loads of money? That wouldn't make sense, as it would make them less successful (according to how they measure success).

Well I guess Man U and Chelsea fans will feel they've been playing more attractive football, as they've got the results without exactly playing hoof ball.

There's no point in using newcomers Chelsea (new in Wengers time) and Man City to compare spending, and Man U make a profit, so I expect those figures are misleading.

More likely that the board aren't furious because Wenger has done what they wanted - do well enough and allow them to make a profit. That points against the idea that they've been offering him money to spend all along. Why would they be doing that, unless they wanted silverware?

No no no. You can't use your pedantry here. I was answering your assertion that they would be 'furious' with him - all I've said is why the board aren't furious, I haven't said they were delighted with him.

You have skewed my answer to suit your opinion. Of course they would love to have success mounted on top of his running of their club and to do that they have offered him all the finances he needs to compete in the transfer market, and to bring silverware on top of the success and stability he has created.

Wenger is within this debate because he has complete control of transfer matters at Arsenal. They haven't spent because of his decisions, not because the money isn't available, it has been.