Backroom & executive staff

[Guest HTT II]

8 minutes ago, Lenny said:

Bit late to the party but I thought Overmars was a fair bit better than Ljungberg (who was also decent).

He was more exciting, but overall I’d say Ljunberg was the better all-rounder, more effective and the better fit for Arsenal. Overmars kind of did OK at Barca, but didn’t get into the game as much as it was slower, more technical and more on the ball orientated. Deco for example absolutely shone for Barca, Overmars needed the ball to feet, on the wing, to run at, beat and eat up space. At Barca it was ball to feet, now give it back, move, repeat etc. Not his game. 

[Guest HTT II]

8 minutes ago, gjohnson said:

Agree. Out and out wingers are virtually extinct.

When 442 comes back in to fashion (and it will) they might re-appear

I don’t think they will come back at the top level to be honest, not when fullbacks can do that role these days, the better ones anyway. The game has changed so much in the last 20 years it’s unreal. 

[Lenny]

6 minutes ago, HTT II said:

He was more exciting, but overall I’d say Ljunberg was the better all-rounder, more effective and the better fit for Arsenal. Overmars kind of did OK at Barca, but didn’t get into the game as much as it was slower, more technical and more on the ball orientated. Deco for example absolutely shone for Barca, Overmars needed the ball to feet, on the wing, to run at, beat and eat up space. At Barca it was ball to feet, now give it back, move, repeat etc. Not his game. 

 

I just had a look at each of their goals and assists records for Arsenal (as that's 99% the basis of my opinion), and surprised to find that their goal return was similar with both around 1 in 4. Overmars the more productive with assists (1 in 5) vs Ljungberg's 1 in 8. I expected to find a better return from Overmars TBF.

 

Also surprised to find that Ljungberg played more than double the games for Arsenal that Overmars did.

[gjohnson]

17 minutes ago, HTT II said:

I don’t think they will come back at the top level to be honest, not when fullbacks can do that role these days, the better ones anyway. The game has changed so much in the last 20 years it’s unreal. 

It's quite cyclic though....442 was the norm before Mourinho came with the 433/451 blend and everyone adapted around. Now it seems to be between 532/541. 

 

Just takes a slightly different or new idea that works  to spark a change

[Guest HTT II]

5 minutes ago, gjohnson said:

It's quite cyclic though....442 was the norm before Mourinho came with the 433/451 blend and everyone adapted around. Now it seems to be between 532/541. 

 

Just takes a slightly different or new idea that works  to spark a change

Agreed, but today most managers even the dinosaurs try to tailor their lineup/setup/style on a game to game basis, so they may often appear to say be playing with 2 widemen in a midfield four or a flat back four, but it quickly transpires that’s not the case. Today players, all players, have to be more involved, more developed, more on and off the ball savvy even if they are crap, which leaves little room for a then Overmars/Gillspeie and traditional wingers, even the CF is a dying breed. I can’t see it reverting back any time soon. 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by HTT II

[Ikon]

Ljungbergs speciality was to make off the ball runs through the channels, in behind and finish those balls. His starting position was out wide but always drifted inwards and made very good runs. Plus had players to deliver the ball too. 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by Ikon

[Guest HTT II]

21 minutes ago, Lenny said:

 

I just had a look at each of their goals and assists records for Arsenal (as that's 99% the basis of my opinion), and surprised to find that their goal return was similar with both around 1 in 4. Overmars the more productive with assists (1 in 5) vs Ljungberg's 1 in 8. I expected to find a better return from Overmars TBF.

 

Also surprised to find that Ljungberg played more than double the games for Arsenal that Overmars did.

Overmars struggled with hamstring/muscle problems IIRC which is probably down to his rapid pace, straight running stance and bursts of having to go from zero to whatever speed. Owen suffered the same, Dyer too. The sad thing is our academies look for quick, strong running players even today, yet the ball moves quicker than any player and if you move the ball quicker, you don’t have to bust a gut to do something effective. Leaving more energy and recovery time off and on the ball to be, well, more effective. That’s why wingers are obsolete now in a traditional sense, and it makes more sense to have wingbacks attacking like wingers higher up the pitch in-line with a midfield to free up the forwards. Hence 3/5 at the so-called back or two in the midfield or 3 up front. KK was actually quite revolutionary in that he implemented that kind of style in the old second division against hackers and cloggers of teams back in the 92/93.

 

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by HTT II

[Awaymag]

can we change the topic title please to 'Arsenal wingers/forwards of yesteryear' please

[Guest HTT II]

5 minutes ago, Ikon said:

Ljungbergs speciality was to make off the ball runs through the channels, in behind and finish those balls. His starting position was out wide but always drifted inwards and made very good runs. Plus had players to deliver the ball too. 

 

 

 

Wenger saw how the game was developing/how he could benefit from that with say Ljunberg over Overmars, they played wide men who were not exactly wingers and that fucked the hell out of teams. That’s why Fergie kind of withdrew from a Giggs/Kanchelskis wide winger type game/style/system even in favour of having Rooney play wide. Rafa did the same with Gerrard who played right midfield a lot.

[Guest HTT II]

Berger was a winger, but was played centrally more too for example. I think in Duff and Robben, Chelsea actually reverted back to the traditional style of wingers, but the genius of Mourinho at that time is they were also wide forwards in a front 3 in transitional play on and off the ball too which wouldn’t have worked without Drogba being the focal point or Gudjohnson the link up man deeper lying. He was kind of the false number 9 before it become a position which enabled, alongside Makalele, Lampard to be the goalscoring midfielder he become. Pioneers of the game the likes of him, Wenger, later on Fergie and certainly KK who was a rookie at the time and his early NUFC side were pressing as hard and as tough back then than LFC do today, from the front  to the back. What Rafa did was to control the midfield to give the defence a protection layer and the attack a bridge, when he was at Liverpool. All fascinating and light years ahead of well, anyone else at the time, no wonder they more or less all succeeded. 

[The Prophet]

Damn, I thought there had been a development.

[Guest HTT II]

I must say, it’s been great just being able and happy to talk general football stuff on N.O which is mostly about other clubs’ managers, players and tactics and stuff, my passion for all things NUFC and footy was all but destroyed by Ashley and has waned, but deep down, something is still there and I won’t lie, it’s fucking good to just be able to write with a degree of passion and interest about football in general again. Long may it continue!

[gjohnson]

9 minutes ago, HTT II said:

I must say, it’s been great just being able and happy to talk general football stuff on N.O which is mostly about other clubs’ managers, players and tactics and stuff, my passion for all things NUFC and footy was all but destroyed by Ashley and has waned, but deep down, something is still there and I won’t lie, it’s fucking good to just be able to write with a degree of passion and interest about football in general again. Long may it continue!

Completely this....might not be the right thread, but actually being able to talk football and be able to appreciate the good things of the game is a welcome change of pace rather than the complete and total ennui of Ashley

[gjohnson]

24 minutes ago, HTT II said:

Berger was a winger, but was played centrally more too for example. I think in Duff and Robben, Chelsea actually reverted back to the traditional style of wingers, but the genius of Mourinho at that time is they were also wide forwards in a front 3 in transitional play on and off the ball too which wouldn’t have worked without Drogba being the focal point or Gudjohnson the link up man deeper lying. He was kind of the false number 9 before it become a position which enabled, alongside Makalele, Lampard to be the goalscoring midfielder he become. Pioneers of the game the likes of him, Wenger, later on Fergie and certainly KK who was a rookie at the time and his early NUFC side were pressing as hard and as tough back then than LFC do today, from the front  to the back. What Rafa did was to control the midfield to give the defence a protection layer and the attack a bridge, when he was at Liverpool. All fascinating and light years ahead of well, anyone else at the time, no wonder they more or less all succeeded. 

Never saw Berger as a proper winger, more a player who would sit on the outside of a 3 now. Didn't have the pace to go on the outside, nor the ability on the ball to know where he was putting a cross before he even got the ball.

 

For context....Robert was a winger who relied on speed to beat a player and do something dangerous. Had the skill and power to do it as we often saw.

Ginola was a winger who had the natural talent and ability to either walk or run down the left side and still be dangerous.

Solano was a winger, but his ability came from intelligence and knowing exactly where to cross or pass a ball three passes before he even got it.

Gillespie was a pure speed merchant who would beat a defender with pace and hoof in to the box. 

[SweMag]

Please stop. Keep it to the subject. Thanks.

[Guest HTT II]

2 hours ago, gjohnson said:

Never saw Berger as a proper winger, more a player who would sit on the outside of a 3 now. Didn't have the pace to go on the outside, nor the ability on the ball to know where he was putting a cross before he even got the ball.

 

For context....Robert was a winger who relied on speed to beat a player and do something dangerous. Had the skill and power to do it as we often saw.

Ginola was a winger who had the natural talent and ability to either walk or run down the left side and still be dangerous.

Solano was a winger, but his ability came from intelligence and knowing exactly where to cross or pass a ball three passes before he even got it.

Gillespie was a pure speed merchant who would beat a defender with pace and hoof in to the box. 

He was originally signed as a winger, and converted more to a central attacking midfielder but also operated on the flanks. Ginola was a weird one, he had the physique, running ability, pace, two footedness and style to easily play the Ronaldo role as of late which he could have done, and did so a few times for us, he just wasn’t the best finisher and liked to be out wide more than not.
 

Solano could have played central midfield easily, he was that clever. Robert was an out and out winger yet wasn’t blessed with all out pace, he had a great left foot though, an eye for a cross and knew when to put the ball in just at the right time.

 

Gillespie was pure speed as you say and it used to infuriate me when he would just hook the ball in having beat his man, it worked perfectly against Barcelona, but nowhere near enough for him to become say like Overmars, one of the best of his era. Highly frustrating.

 

Sellars was like Nobby, he could have played central, such an intelligent and underrated player. One of my faves. Fox was more like Gillespie, but with a higher work ethic, and less pace. 

[Dr Venkman]

3 hours ago, Ikon said:

Ljungbergs speciality was to make off the ball runs through the channels, in behind and finish those balls. His starting position was out wide but always drifted inwards and made very good runs. Plus had players to deliver the ball too. 

 

 

 

Pards would refer to that as 'out to in', little industry term he uses.

[Ikon]

https://twitter.com/TheEuropeanLad/status/1454352370243092488

[kingxlnc]

There was an article on the Athletic about commercial revenue. In the comments, there were the usual ignorant comments so I put a quick point about where Newcastle were pre-Ashley. It’s amazing how the narrative is all centred around Ashley being a good business man etc. I just thought I’d share my comments and subsequent replies here too as there’s so much nonsense out there it gets annoying! 
 

my original comment:
 

In 1999, based on commercial revenue until the end of the 1997-1998 season, Newcastle’s revenues were actually in the top 5 clubs in the world, second only to Manchester United in England. The Keegan era had really given the club such a strong foundation which they squandered big time. Ashley’s reign literally set them back decades, football moved on whilst NUFC was stuck in the dark ages, so much for Ashley being a top business man. The club and the region have so much potential, I wonder if they will ever get back to such heights again, but I’m glad they’ve now at least got the opportunity to. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/543805.stm

[kingxlnc]

Just now, kingxlnc said:

There was an article on the Athletic about commercial revenue. In the comments, there were the usual ignorant comments so I put a quick point about where Newcastle were pre-Ashley. It’s amazing how the narrative is all centred around Ashley being a good business man etc. I just thought I’d share my comments and subsequent replies here too as there’s so much nonsense out there it gets annoying! 
 

my original comment:
 

In 1999, based on commercial revenue until the end of the 1997-1998 season, Newcastle’s revenues were actually in the top 5 clubs in the world, second only to Manchester United in England. The Keegan era had really given the club such a strong foundation which they squandered big time. Ashley’s reign literally set them back decades, football moved on whilst NUFC was stuck in the dark ages, so much for Ashley being a top business man. The club and the region have so much potential, I wonder if they will ever get back to such heights again, but I’m glad they’ve now at least got the opportunity to. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/543805.stm

He bought it without due dilligence, ended up having to put an extra £100m into the club to start with. HiS era coincided with the golden age of the Premier League in terms of investments and profile. Newcastle already had a decent profile, it wasn’t like he was buying Bournemouth or Huddersfield. NUFC could have been sold for a billion had he not mismanaged it to kingdom come. He lost the club over a decade worth of commercial revenue by having his toxic sports direct continually benefit from sponsorship for FREE. Damningly the commercial revenue of the club went DOWN during his time, I don’t even know how that was possible. It was ahead of Tottenham before he took over. He continued to antagonise the chief customers and make the same mistakes over and over. He didn’t put the right management and executive team in place to take care and grow his investment. He got relegated twice all with a club that had been constantly in Europe before he arrived. Nothing about anything he did screams good business man to me. People are short sighted and think oh but he ran the club at a profit. If you’re looking to exit, and get the maximum amount back from your investment you want to add as much value as possible, yet he chose to take value continually. Here’s the real numbers, he bought the club for £134m, put an extra £100m in to it in interest free loans. That’s 234m. 14 years later all you get is £300m for one of the UK’s most historic institutions? £70m is all he’s gained in terms of resale value? That’s probably all inflation anyway, in 2007 pricing and therefore he has probably lost money on everything.

[kingxlnc]

A good way of tracking all this accounting for inflation is to look at the price of gold historically versus today. 234M in 2007 is equivalent to 387,359 gold oz. In 2021, 305M is equivalent to 241,337 gold oz. That means, it has lost 146,021 gold oz of value over that period. 1 oz is approx £1300 today. You do the math. That’s another £190M on top. The club should have gone for closer to 500m to be a like for like in terms of the club value at the time he bought it. Or, for arguments sake let’s forget the 100m in loans, and we go with the original £134m he paid, versus the £305m it sold for. Using the same calculation it shows that he made a profit of 19,516 oz, or £25M. He bought the club at an amazing time, the time the iPhone came out and the era of apps, streaming, broadband and immense demand for broadcasting rights, literally a license to print money, especially with fans as passionate as Newcastle’s . So after all that, his best case scenario is that he made £25 million profit on a PL club, 14years later at a time of immense riches, and that is also by luck of selling it to the richest owners where money is no object. So please, no one should ever think the guy is a good business man. Don’t get me started on his ethics and Sports Direct controversies…

[et tu brute]

30 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

He bought it without due dilligence, ended up having to put an extra £100m into the club to start with. HiS era coincided with the golden age of the Premier League in terms of investments and profile. Newcastle already had a decent profile, it wasn’t like he was buying Bournemouth or Huddersfield. NUFC could have been sold for a billion had he not mismanaged it to kingdom come. He lost the club over a decade worth of commercial revenue by having his toxic sports direct continually benefit from sponsorship for FREE. Damningly the commercial revenue of the club went DOWN during his time, I don’t even know how that was possible. It was ahead of Tottenham before he took over. He continued to antagonise the chief customers and make the same mistakes over and over. He didn’t put the right management and executive team in place to take care and grow his investment. He got relegated twice all with a club that had been constantly in Europe before he arrived. Nothing about anything he did screams good business man to me. People are short sighted and think oh but he ran the club at a profit. If you’re looking to exit, and get the maximum amount back from your investment you want to add as much value as possible, yet he chose to take value continually. Here’s the real numbers, he bought the club for £134m, put an extra £100m in to it in interest free loans. That’s 234m. 14 years later all you get is £300m for one of the UK’s most historic institutions? £70m is all he’s gained in terms of resale value? That’s probably all inflation anyway, in 2007 pricing and therefore he has probably lost money on everything.

 

He got 14 yeal of sponsorship which usually costs an absolute fortune for fuck all. He hasn't done too badly out of it at all.

[manorpark]

46 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

There was an article on the Athletic about commercial revenue. In the comments, there were the usual ignorant comments so I put a quick point about where Newcastle were pre-Ashley. It’s amazing how the narrative is all centred around Ashley being a good business man etc. I just thought I’d share my comments and subsequent replies here too as there’s so much nonsense out there it gets annoying! 
 

my original comment:
 

In 1999, based on commercial revenue until the end of the 1997-1998 season, Newcastle’s revenues were actually in the top 5 clubs in the world, second only to Manchester United in England. The Keegan era had really given the club such a strong foundation which they squandered big time. Ashley’s reign literally set them back decades, football moved on whilst NUFC was stuck in the dark ages, so much for Ashley being a top business man. The club and the region have so much potential, I wonder if they will ever get back to such heights again, but I’m glad they’ve now at least got the opportunity to. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/543805.stm

 

I have posted this article a lot on here in the past, and on various other forums worldwide . . . 

[Cronky]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001140s

 

Profile of Staveley on Radio 4. About 15 minutes

[Manxst]

https://tbrfootball.com/report-newcastle-to-step-up-dof-search-but-it-wont-be-marc-overmars/
 

Rangnick, Campos or Mitchell according to the Times- Overmars won’t be appointed.