Mikel Arteta: Managerial Royalty

[Makingtrax]

So I guess Lacazette going all out last night, and celebrating so hard when he scored the equaliser, is because he thinks Arteta is just too cute.

Nah, Im going to have to disagree with you on this one Lady_Gooner. Arteta may be getting it wrong on the pitch, but I think its more than just his looks that keeps him around. He has the knowledge and ideas that's needed in the game no doubt, its more about the necessary experience and wisdom required to translate that into actual results.

Yeah, he’s watched the masters like Wenger and Pep at work, for sure. But actually taking the lead role himself is a whole different concept. The dynamics, relationships, and motivation within the group is often not quantifiable. And he may understand what he wants to achieve on the pitch but the players clearly can’t execute that game plan.

 

[samshere]

He watched Pep and Wenger but learnt only from Moyes.

 

[GeorgiaGunner]

Feel for Arteta, Fergie would have us top 10 max. This is a dire squad, and Mikel's performing miracles

Nah Fergie won the league with a bunch of corpses. He’d have us top 4.

 

[Rex Stone]

He watched Pep and Wenger but learnt only from Moyes.

Spent longer with Moyes than either of the other two.

 

[BigPoppaPump]

He watched Pep and Wenger but learnt only from Moyes.

That’s an insult to Moyes, he’s not even half the manager Moyes is.

 

[Alexs]

Arteta has learnt nothing from anyone bar the voices in his head.

 

[RunTheTrap]

That’s an insult to Moyes, he’s not even half the manager Moyes is.

Moyes has certainly improved as a coach imo. People need to move on from his United stint. It sounds taboo but West Ham are one of the most entertaining teams to watch this season along with Liverpool and Brighton. The Hammers play some good stuff and I think Moyes has really improved some of the players. Rice, Cresswell, Antonio, Benrahma, Bowen and Fornals have caught my eye this season.

 

[AbouCuéllar]

You’re full of **** man. Lol.

Well name two reasons why anyone thought he would be a good manager before we hired him?

I’ll give you all the time in the world.

Mate, he was regarded not just by us but by loads of people in football as a huge managerial prospect. The Athletic and all these journos haven't just made some pro-Arteta conspiracy because, well, I have no idea, but rather because that is the reality. Before he succeeded at City and further enhanced his reputation there were a lot of reasons to think he was an interesting managerial prospect, I wrote about some of them when he left for City and (as confirmed by Per) the club felt they were losing a very interesting managerial prospect. When he succeeded at City and gained the respect of a lot more people in that club and in football there were more.

Just as player prospects don't work out sometimes for whatever reason, so can happen and seems to have happened with Arteta. It doesn't make the idea any less sensible in hindsight. It's little different than someone like Reiss Nelson. Were we dumb to give him contract extensions and think he had an important future at the club ahead of him just because of what we know now? No, of course not, based on the information we had available at the times of Reiss' contracts we had every reason to believe he could go on to be a big player...that is just the reality of prospects, they don't always work out, or don't always work out when you think they will.

But this revisionist history and hindsight stuff is just bollocks, tbh. Arteta was an interesting hire and certainly a better one than Em*ry, which was just horrid and the definition of incompetence and had no good reasoning whatsoever. Betting on a big managerial prospect is a big bet like betting on any type of prospect, because it's much more of a bet than choosing someone proven, but given how little interesting options there were at that time, and given the need for a high potential manager at this club (we are not Madrid where we can make hires like Ancelotti, hedging our bets with a mediocre manager, knowing we have a talent advantage) it was an understandable bet, also considering the need for a visionary type at the club given our poor leadership at the top.

 

[OnlyOne]

Mate, he was regarded not just by us but by loads of people in football as a huge managerial prospect. The Athletic and all these journos haven't just made some pro-Arteta conspiracy because, well, I have no idea, but rather because that is the reality. Before he succeeded at City and further enhanced his reputation there were a lot of reasons to think he was an interesting managerial prospect, I wrote about some of them when he left for City and (as confirmed by Per) the club felt they were losing a very interesting managerial prospect. When he succeeded at City and gained the respect of a lot more people in that club and in football there were more.

Just as player prospects don't work out sometimes for whatever reason, so can happen and seems to have happened with Arteta. It doesn't make the idea any less sensible in hindsight. It's little different than someone like Reiss Nelson. Were we dumb to give him contract extensions and think he had an important future at the club ahead of him just because of what we know now? No, of course not, based on the information we had available at the times of Reiss' contracts we had every reason to believe he could go on to be a big player...that is just the reality of prospects, they don't always work out, or don't always work out when you think they will.

But this revisionist history and hindsight stuff is just bollocks, tbh. Arteta was an interesting hire and certainly a better one than Em*ry, which was just horrid and the definition of incompetence and had no good reasoning whatsoever. Betting on a big managerial prospect is a big bet like betting on any type of prospect, because it's much more of a bet than choosing someone proven, but given how little interesting options there were at that time, and given the need for a high potential manager at this club (we are not Madrid where we can make hires like Ancelotti, hedging our bets with a mediocre manager, knowing we have a talent advantage) it was an understandable bet, also considering the need for a visionary type at the club given our poor leadership at the top.

Fair play he might of have had super high potential to be a manager, and everyone saw his ability at City, but when it’s come down to it he’s ****ing sh*te and everyone was clearly wrong.

 

[GDeep™]

That’s an insult to Moyes, he’s not even half the manager Moyes is.

Moyes is one of the best managers in PL history. Excellent at Everton, excellent at West Ham. Top 10 in PL history.

 

[scytheavatar]

Mate, he was regarded not just by us but by loads of people in football as a huge managerial prospect. The Athletic and all these journos haven't just made some pro-Arteta conspiracy because, well, I have no idea, but rather because that is the reality. Before he succeeded at City and further enhanced his reputation there were a lot of reasons to think he was an interesting managerial prospect, I wrote about some of them when he left for City and (as confirmed by Per) the club felt they were losing a very interesting managerial prospect. When he succeeded at City and gained the respect of a lot more people in that club and in football there were more.

Just as player prospects don't work out sometimes for whatever reason, so can happen and seems to have happened with Arteta. It doesn't make the idea any less sensible in hindsight. It's little different than someone like Reiss Nelson. Were we dumb to give him contract extensions and think he had an important future at the club ahead of him just because of what we know now? No, of course not, based on the information we had available at the times of Reiss' contracts we had every reason to believe he could go on to be a big player...that is just the reality of prospects, they don't always work out, or don't always work out when you think they will.

But this revisionist history and hindsight stuff is just bollocks, tbh. Arteta was an interesting hire and certainly a better one than Em*ry, which was just horrid and the definition of incompetence and had no good reasoning whatsoever. Betting on a big managerial prospect is a big bet like betting on any type of prospect, because it's much more of a bet than choosing someone proven, but given how little interesting options there were at that time, and given the need for a high potential manager at this club (we are not Madrid where we can make hires like Ancelotti, hedging our bets with a mediocre manager, knowing we have a talent advantage) it was an understandable bet, also considering the need for a visionary type at the club given our poor leadership at the top.

What's a visionary type? What has Arteta done to make people think he is a visionary type? Cause the fact that he was hiding behind Guardiola and thinking he can learn anything from Guardiola is already evidence he is not a "visionary". If he is one he would have been fighting to coach a team like Crystal Palace and showing he can get them playing in a way that would defeat Guardiolaball one day. How many managers can you think of that ended up succeeding in a big club with just experience as an assistant? Even Guardiola and Zidane had years of experience as youth coach before taking over the jobs.

 

[shoot for the top]

Mate, he was regarded not just by us but by loads of people in football as a huge managerial prospect. The Athletic and all these journos haven't just made some pro-Arteta conspiracy because, well, I have no idea, but rather because that is the reality. Before he succeeded at City and further enhanced his reputation there were a lot of reasons to think he was an interesting managerial prospect, I wrote about some of them when he left for City and (as confirmed by Per) the club felt they were losing a very interesting managerial prospect. When he succeeded at City and gained the respect of a lot more people in that club and in football there were more.

Just as player prospects don't work out sometimes for whatever reason, so can happen and seems to have happened with Arteta. It doesn't make the idea any less sensible in hindsight. It's little different than someone like Reiss Nelson. Were we dumb to give him contract extensions and think he had an important future at the club ahead of him just because of what we know now? No, of course not, based on the information we had available at the times of Reiss' contracts we had every reason to believe he could go on to be a big player...that is just the reality of prospects, they don't always work out, or don't always work out when you think they will.

But this revisionist history and hindsight stuff is just bollocks, tbh. Arteta was an interesting hire and certainly a better one than Em*ry, which was just horrid and the definition of incompetence and had no good reasoning whatsoever. Betting on a big managerial prospect is a big bet like betting on any type of prospect, because it's much more of a bet than choosing someone proven, but given how little interesting options there were at that time, and given the need for a high potential manager at this club (we are not Madrid where we can make hires like Ancelotti, hedging our bets with a mediocre manager, knowing we have a talent advantage) it was an understandable bet, also considering the need for a visionary type at the club given our poor leadership at the top.

He's doing worst than Emery. He has a worst win rate than Emery and he spent 200 mil.

 

[IstraBalagina]

Unless your City, Chelsea, United you’ll always be 3 or more players short. The job of a manager with a team investing 5th is to get those players playing above themselves like Arsène did.

How exactly Arsène did that? He finished 5th and 6th in his last two seasons.

 

[Garrincha]

Mate, he was regarded not just by us but by loads of people in football as a huge managerial prospect. The Athletic and all these journos haven't just made some pro-Arteta conspiracy because, well, I have no idea, but rather because that is the reality.

Never really seen the hype outside the Arsenal bubble & a few key Spanish journos.

Its not even 'the Athletic' but the Arsenal group within the Athletic all the pushing same narrative... its like a fox in the hen house when a non Arsenal guy joins.

 

[AbouCuéllar]

Fair play he might of have had super high potential to be a manager, and everyone saw his ability at City, but when it’s come down to it he’s ****ing sh*te and everyone was clearly wrong.

Exactly. It's that simple. But let's not rewrite history. That's all I'm asking.

 

[Alexs]

Since showing he's not ready for this job, regardless of whether he one day will be, he's been here another year, loaned or sold some very good players, spent over £100m, plays ghastly football and we're lucky to be 12th.

 

[Paperino]

Exactly. It's that simple. But let's not rewrite history. That's all I'm asking.

Still want 10 names that isnt his mates, dude.

 

[Trilly]

Man is still here, wallah this is a nightmare.

 

[OnlyOne]

Man is still here, wallah this is a nightmare.

So depressing man.

 

[Paperino]

He wont get sacked until we are dangerously close to the relegation zone. His only job is to keep us in the Premier League.