For some reason, Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal is constantly hounded by the English media, more so than other teams. The media accuses the team of having all style, no substance, having no experience, no title credentials and not enough quality. Many of the players are always rumored to be on the leave and the media, ever since Vieira left, has declared the club in crisis mode (how many times in recent memory have pundits agreed Arsenal will fall out of the top four?). Wenger’s team cannot win 1-0 without being questioned (Chelsea and Manchester on the other hand show their “champion’s spirit” by winning a lucky 1-0) and at one point has even been blamed for England’s poor Euro qualification.
Perhaps the reason for this inexplicable hatred toward Arsenal stems from the fact that the team, right down to the manager, is run like a business.
Yes. Football, soccer, calcio, futbol—whatever it’s called, it’s a business. Surprise.
And because it is run like one, unlike Chelsea, Manchester and Liverpool (Gillett and Hicks are actually trying to run LFC like a business, but are failing), expectations are unreasonably high. Yet considering Arsenal’s history and prestige, an average AFC fan should and will harbor lofty ambitions for the club.
Almost all clubs, especially in the Premiership, have substantial debt. Manchester United spends millions (I’m talking £50 million+) annually paying the interest of their debt, which is partially their owner’s fault. Liverpool too, is not economically sound, especially after its American takeover. Chelsea, of course, has Abromavich, who had spent almost $1bn, back when the dollar-pound ratio was around 2:1. I don’t think he’s broken even yet—and after recently losing £3bn from the recession and drop in oil prices, his ‘investments’ don’t look sound. And if he ever pulled out, Chelsea might have to pull a Leeds (kind of).
Arsenal too is in debt, having constructed a £400m stadium in 2006. But unlike the aforementioned teams, Arsenal has strictly limited its budget in order to maintain a manageable debt and have some liquid assets. Let’s crunch some numbers.
This is the Arsenal first team and their approximate costs:
Almunia: £500,000
Sagna: £7.0m
Gallas: -£5.0m (Arsenal made a profit buying Gallas; Cole, who went the other way was free—an academy product)
Toure: £150,000
Clichy: £250,000
Rosicky: £7.0m
Fabregas: Free
Denilson: £3.5m
Nasri: £12.0m
Van Persie: £2.75m
Adebayor: £3.0m
Now the bench:
Fabianski: £2.0m
Djourou: Free
Silvestre: £750,000
Eboue: £1.5m
Diaby: £2.0m
Walcott: £12.0m (Walcott’s original price is £5.0m, rising to £12.0m depending on appearances/caps—I doubt Arsenal have paid the full £12.0m yet)
Eduardo: £7.5m
The entire squad, 18 players, is approximately £55.0m. Now, let’s put that into perspective.
Manchester United spent approximately £57.0m on Berbatov and Rooney.
Liverpool spent approximately £56.0m on Keane, Kuyt and Torres.
Chelsea is absurd.
Now, this isn’t the entire story. Arsenal has a very strict wage structure. Ashley Cole left because Arsene wouldn’t give him £5,000 extra pounds per week (I believe he was offered £50,000 or £55,000 per week at Arsenal). Flamini left Arsenal for AC Milan over about £170,000/yr (for a football player this is four sports cars instead of five... boo hoo)—his contract at Arsenal was worth about £4.9m/yr, while his new Milan contract is worth about £5.05m/yr. Basically, Arsenal lost two key players, and presumably others (possibly Hleb) because Wenger’s strict financial policy and wage cap. In contrast, Manchester United pays Wes Brown £55,000-£60,000/wk to sit on the bench, and Chelsea’s wage is larger than that of the Yankees’ (Chelsea has a couple less players). I’m not sure about Liverpool to be honest.
This method, as results show, is somewhat flawed, considering Arsenal’s league position and how much a player like Flamini could have helped. Yet, at the same time, doing so is economically safe and helps with overall team morale—i.e. imagine if the starting right-back is paid £20,000/wk, but his left-back counterpart earns a new contract, worth £35,000/wk. Not only does this cause some bit of tension between players, but in terms of administration, the next time the right-back negotiates his contract, he will demand at the very least £35,000/wk (probably more).
Regardless, Flamini probably deserved the extra pay-raise (and Pires deserved the 2-year contract back in 2006). But it’s hard to call Wenger’s system defective. It hasn’t brought the short-term results—that’s more the stadium’s fault—but Arsenal is much more financially secure than other three big four teams. Granted, most Arsenal supporters, including myself, believe Wenger should spend this transfer window. But while we blame Wenger’s stubbornness (which he is), I do think most people overlook the fact that even the Premier League is affected by the global recession (the pound especially).
There must be a point though, in the context of this season, that Wenger realizes he must spend. The Champions League brings a lot of revenue, and missing out on that would be a big hit.
I hope Wenger breaks the bank and buys Jeremy Toulalan. But we know that’s not gonna happen.
