Arsenal should be following Chelsea’s blueprint for success

Should the Arsenal board take an Abramovich approach?

So, with the inconsistencies of managers holding down a job nowadays, it is clear to see that we won’t as Arsenal fans ever get to see another long term Arsene Wenger reign, those days are long gone!

But as Arsenal fans, we deserve only the best manager to move our club forward, but, and I say this lightly, it is not always the managers fault. Then again, if the manager is responsible for picking the team that goes out week in week out, and if he is responsible for putting across instructions and tactics that don’t work out, then surely he should be the first to go out the door right?

I am not saying I want Arteta to be sacked, but turn your minds back to the awful run we went on where we failed to win in what, seven games, and yet Arteta was still Arsenal manager the morning after and even to this day. Look at Chelsea who went on a bit of a poor run, yet are still in the FA Cup, the Champions League and were higher than Arsenal in the league at the point of dismissal. What did they do? They said goodbye to Frank Lampard and brought in a replacement. Yet Arteta, who had an even worse run and had been dumped out of the FA Cup a year after winning it, was still backed by the board and is still Arsenal manager.

As much as I loved and still do love Arsene Wenger and always will, it was clearly a downside of the club, backing a manager that failed to bring in a trophy in nine years, and then when the going got tough they got rid of him after 22 years at the helm. Whereas Chelsea, have sacked more managers over the years then I have had hot dinners, and barring the last few years have been successful both domestically and in Europe.

So, for the Arsenal board, why not take note on how to run your club, invest financially, and if things are going wrong, change it quick, otherwise this club will be at risk of relegation sooner rather than later! Gooners?

Shenel Osman

Tags Abramovich Arteta Lampard


  1. There is just one little (BIG) problem with that illusion called Finances or lack off in our case. Abromavich is always willing to back his managers fully in the transfer windows and he expects success. Kroenke isnt willing to splash out like that and that my friend is our difference

  2. chelsea has no blueprint we can follow. liverpool or utd are in the frame ‘self-sustaining model’ we are trying to achieve

  3. I’d like to say crap. We’re nothing like Chelsea for a start we don’t have an owner willing to spend lots in backing the manager. Also we’re rebuilding which takes time. Mainly though we just don’t jump when things aren’t going right.

  4. No true thought in this hasty article. Not to allow a manager time to build is not sensible at all, but foolish. To compare MA to AW, who was here for ages while the team was regressing steadily each year, is a false comparison. Compare like with like if you want a true compoarison. To do otherwise, as Shenel does here, is juvenile thinking.

    It has not even OCCURRED to the unthinking Shenel that Chelsea have a massive spender to back ALL his new managers, while we have Scrooge Kroenke. No mention of this KEY point at all. You can see WHY I say it is an unthinking article.

  5. Was Arteta brought in just like Frank Lampard to get shot of the deadwood and then bring in a top manager, and when will Arsenal ever learn got shot of Ozil £350 000 a week and then put Auba on it what are they thinking a player of his age

  6. Let ma finish this season. No point ask him to go as no manager can improve this team of average players. If MA is good, we will get top 6. If he is sub-standard, he has to go. Top 4 is the KPI for Arsene, he was asked to go after 2 seasons out of top 4. Arsenal’s board is more lenient to MA, the standard may be lower to top 6. He should be out if Arsenal finish out of top 6.

  7. There’s simply no way we would ever adopt such an approach considering the financial constraints of our business model…in order to do so you would need to have some serious financial flexibility due to the potential player turnover this situation usually requires…don’t get me wrong, I would have loved this approach about 10 years ago, or even 5, as we would have almost assuredly lured a Pep or a Klopp to North London, then provided them with the necessary financial latitude to properly revamp our once stagnant organization…the fact is there will likely never be more 20 year managerial terms moving forward and although, in theory, I like the potential organizational stability that comes with these long-term arrangements, we can’t forget just how damaging that approach can be should someone stay far too long

  8. The short answer to your question is yes. And here I will assume our billionaire owner will get rid of the self-sustaining model and contribute personally to investments into new players.
    What I like most about the Chelsea model, is that player recruitment decisions are taken at the executive level, above the manger, and there is greater urgency to sell players when their value in high without impacting the balance of the team. Although the rate of manager turnover is high very, the model creates a winning culture and more trophies over time. Isn’t that what we want as a club? Do we have the patience to wait 3/4 years for a rebuild especially in this social media era? I think the answer is clear.

Comments are closed

Top Blog Sponsors
JustArsenal Top Ten UK Blogs