Arsene Wenger: Culprit or Scapegoat?

Oh, how the fortunes of one man change!

Arsene Wenger was once the most admired managers on the face of this planet.

Even voted coach of the decade by the Institute of Football History and Statistics (IFFHS), outscoring illustrious managers such as Sir Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho, Wenger has fallen into a huge disfavor with the fans. 

Known for his astute dealings, player development and strategic build-up of a powerful team, he is now considered a has-been by many fans. 

However, is Wenger really the person to blame? Or are there other factors that need to be taken account, numerous intricacies overshadowed by ulterior motives?

4. Arsene Wenger's Philosophy

Wenger’s philosophy is aligned along the path of developing players and the financial merit of investing shrewdly. 

Arsenal are the epitome of a football club when it comes to financial matters; the financial model is a sound and self-sufficient one.

Despite these trophyless years, Arsenal are second behind Manchester United in revenue despite having built a new stadium.

Therefore, the inevitable question is raised: For all the financial solidity, why is the club not showing any ambition? 

3. Rise of Competing Clubs

The Premier League, until the recent rise of Tottenham, have had four major clubs: Manchester United, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal. Slowly, Manchester City came into the frame after a mega-takeover. 

If you compare Arsenal with Liverpool, Arsenal have been performing constantly better than Liverpool, who, despite investing a lot into the players, have yielded insignificant results.

And while Liverpool are not yet title threats, two of these five clubs, Chelsea and Manchester City, have had huge cash injection. 

While other clubs struggle to produce world-class players, the enormous budget of these franchises simply allows them to purchase quality players. 

For a club like Arsenal, though, it presents a problem.

Arsenal do not have a sugar-daddy, and every investment needs to be shrewd and efficient. 

While Chelsea can afford to have Fernando Torres warming up the benches and Romelu Lukaku not even featuring for them, and Manchester City can afford to buy quality players and even offer them huge salaries for the sake of having rotational players, Arsenal simply cannot.

Not only do clubs like Chelsea and Manchester City have the power to lure players, they also inflate the transfer market tremendously.

As a result, quality buys are hard to come by. As soon as a prodigious talent is discovered, out come the cheque books of these mega-wealthy clubs.

Remember that only this past summer, Arsenal were in hot pursuit of Juan Mata. He was linked heavily with Arsenal, only for Mata to snub them when Chelsea made a £23.5 million offer and gave him the prospect of a much higher salary than Arsenal could afford.

As you see, Arsenal do want to make marquee signings, but they cannot afford to do so.

2. David Dein

If you took a brief lesson in history of the Arsenal Football Club, you will realize that things were not always so bleak.

One needs to turn to David Dein, the vice-chairman of Arsenal between 1983 and 2007.

Dein took an active interest in the transfer market, player negotiations and was also behind the appointment of Arsene Wenger, who was relatively unknown at that time. 

Dein backed Arsene’s wishes in the transfer market and placed a great amount of trust in Wenger.

Before, in Dein’s era, Arsenal made a lot of marquee signings.

Dein was instrumental in signing Ian Wright from Crystal Palace for £2.5 million.

And for the first time, Arsenal laid claim to a truly international superstar when Dein flew to Milan and personally obtained the signature of one Dennis Bergkamp for £7.5 from Inter Milan.

And over the years, Dein was highly involved in signing players like Patrick Vieira, Emmanuel Petit, Marc Overmars, Thierry Henry, Davor Suker, Robert Pires, Sol Campbell, Gilberto, Gael Clichy, Kolo Toure, Cesc Fabregas and Robin Van Persie. 

So, Arsenal invested as the board allowed for it.

However, Arsenal slowly started collapsing.

And wouldn’t you be surprised as to how.

It all began when David Dein left Arsenal in 18 April 2007, citing "irreconcilable differences" between himself and the rest of the board.

Arsene Wenger described David Dein’s departure “as a sad day for the club." Following his departure, Wenger was believed to have asked Dein whether he wished him to resign from the post of manager in support for his friend.

Dein told Wenger that he should not leave Arsenal, as the club would suffer greatly from his loss as manager if he decided to leave.

Arsene Wenger stated

"

It is a huge disappointment because we worked very closely together, David has contributed highly to the success of the club in the last 10 years and even before that as well. Red and white are the colours of his heart.

"

Thierry Henry also claimed that David Dein's departure as vice-chairman had dismayed him and left him in no doubt that it was time to move on

1. Unambitious Board

Peter Hill-Wood, the current chairman of Arsenal, is in stark contrast to Arsene Wenger. While Wenger has stated time and again that not qualifying for the Champions League is a failure, Hill-Wood, on the other hand, epitomizes the board's ambition by stating 

"

From a financial point of view, not qualifying for the Champions League is quite a blow . . . We have been planning for not qualifying every year, so it is not a disaster, but it would be nice if we could. 

"

All that the Arsenal board is concerned with is generating money. 

The majority stockholder, Stan Korenke, has only added Arsenal to his collection of franchises and has been a distant figure.

This is in stark contrast to someone like John Henry who, after acquiring Liverpool, is quite a visible presence at Anfield.

Kroenke has put most of his efforts into Los Angeles Dodgers, which have left Arsenal fans irate, as he is seen to pour money everywhere else than the Emirates. 

A major issue is that the Arsenal board is willing to spend money on transfers, but not on the wages.

The board are willing to pay large transfer fees, but will not make the demands for wages that a typical marquee signing would want. 

Coming back to Juan Mata, it was primarily wages that kept the Spanish maestro from joining the Gunners.  

The clash of opinions is this: The board believes that offering a £90K or £100K is more than enough. Wenger, on the other hand, believes that when other clubs, namely City and Chelsea, are offering so much more in wages, wants to raise the pay scale to £150K. 

The board disagrees.

Conclusion

I still believe that Arsene Wenger is the right man for the job. 

The 7-1 thrashing of Blackburn did showcase to the world that Arsenal are a capable club.

Their intricate passing combined with superb finishing showed off that Arsenal are not indeed a club in decline, but are racing towards the same prestigious spot they held just a few years ago. 

Nevertheless, Arsenal have not yet turned a corner.

For fortunes to change, it is not Wenger that needs to change or replaced; it is the board. 

With Financial Fair Play regulations kicking in, let's hope that the transfer market also deflates towards normal. 

What is your opinion on Wenger and Arsenal's board?