On August 21, 2006, when Arsenal played their first Premier League game in their brand new stadium, excitement had spread through the Arsenal fan base.  Though players and fans alike knew Arsenal Stadium at Highbury would be missed, the Gunners would now be playing in a 60,000 seat stadium.  The Emirates Stadium would rival the other “Big” clubs arenas in Europe.  The game that day ended in a 1-1 draw (thanks to a late Gilberto Silva goal, I miss him).  A fitting opening to the stadium, compared to the Gunner’s fortunes since.

I don’t need to tell any Arsenal fan that the last time the team won any type of silverware was the 2005 F.A. Cup.  This has been a frustrating string of campaigns for Arsenal, certainly the most frustrating under Manager Arsene Wenger.  If you’re like me, you thought a move to a bigger stadium would lead to more revenue, and thus the club would be able to add more quality to the squad through that revenue.  Also, everyone likes shiny new things (you know you do!), so to be able to attend Arsenal matches at a brand new stadium would be great for fans.  This would truly be a win-win scenario.  What a nice dream, but so far, not the case.

The Squad Remains the Same

Since the move to Ashburton Grove, Arsenal has broken their club record for a transfer fee when they signed Andrey Arshavin from Zenit St. Petersburg at the end of January 2009.  The club paid a reported £16.5 million for the Russian, though the club of course claimed to have (as they always do) paid an “undisclosed fee” and signed a “long-term” deal.  Arshavin, though some times maligned by fans for his effort, has been a good player for Arsenal (28 goals and 33 assists in 106 appearances).  In the current market, Arshavin has been a good value.  The problem is, that’s what the market currently is, and Arsenal isn’t keeping up with it.  This is the market where Jordan Henderson will cost you in the ballpark of £20 million.

I thought the new stadium would make it possible to seal those high-dollar deals that the other English powers seem to complete every season.   Need a defender?  No problem, who do we want?  Done deal.  But, alas, Arsenal could not even complete a deal with Fulham for goalkeeper Mark Schwarzer last summer, knowing that their goalkeeping situation was in shambles.  This year, it’s more of the same, still no sign of a new centre-half, when the squad is in desperate need of one.

Once again Arsenal is offering £10 million for Phil Jagielka, when Everton have clearly stated they value him at £15 million.  So we wait, and the season draws closer.  Now, with less than seven days until the start of the new campaign, any new signing will not have the type of prep with the team that Ashley Young will have with Manchester United or Jordan Henderson with Liverpool.  A crime considering that the month of August looms as what could be Arsenal’s most telling month this season.

I’m left to question if we are left waiting from these signings because the club is reluctant to spend because they are paying for a new stadium.  Sure, the board and Ivan Gazidis have said there is money to spend, and Mr. Wenger has stated Arsenal will be active in the transfer market.  But so far, it’s all talk.  Is the plan that they really fear spending the money on players, so they low-ball other teams in the hopes they’ll say no, and the club can tell the fans:  “Hey, we tried for Jagielka and Cahill, but it didn’t work out.  But, we were able to hold onto Sebastien Squillaci.”

Dear Lord.

I’m no conspiracy theorist, so I’m not here to say this is happening.  But they haven’t proved to me it isn’t happening either.  If the club is so enamored with Southampton’s Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, then they need to realize that his price tag is higher because he’s English.  This is the new norm.  If you want to be a big club, you have to spend.  I have to point out I’m not advocating for Oxlade-Chamberlain, a player with potential but who is not proven.  I’d rather the team adds more experience.  But this is another example of this back and forth negotiating that leads nowhere.  I just cannot believe that Arsene Wenger is this bad of a negotiator.  Something else has to be going on.

Does it have something to do with the £390 million stadium and £470 million total project cost (without a public subsidy) the club just placed at Ashburton Grove?

David Dein Leaves the Club

David Dein served as Vice-Chairman of Arsenal F.C. from 1983 until 2007, leaving that role near the end of Arsenal’s first season playing at the Emirates Stadium.  Dein was responsible for bringing Arsene Wenger to Arsenal in 1996 and also was instrumental in turning Highbury into an all seat stadium.  Dein’s influence is all over Arsenal.

During his tenure he was responsible for helping to recruit Thierry Henry, Cesc Fabregas, Patrick Vieira, Emmanuel Petit, Marc Overmars, Davor Suker, Robert Pires, Sol Campbell, Gilberto Silva, Gael Clichy, Kolo Toure, and Robin Van Persie to the club (to name a few).  Dein and Wenger worked well together and were close friends.

Dein left the club citing his differences with the current board of directors.  Having just built a £390 million complex for the team to play in, Dein looked ahead and knew the club would need more revenue to pay off this huge bit of debt, while not letting it affect the team’s play.  Dein found someone who was interested in buying shares and investing some of their wealth in the club.  In response, other shareholders signed a pact that they would not sell any of their shares for one year.  After that, David Dein, with 24 years of service to Arsenal, resigned.

It is rumored that at the time of his resignation, Wenger actually asked Dein if he wanted him to resign as well in support.  Dein told him no, and Arsene remained manager.

There is no quantitative way to say that Dein’s departure has hurt Arsenal in the transfer market.  But what seems to be fact is the move to the Emirates Stadium led to Dein’s departure, and with his departure the end of a successful partnership between himself and Wenger.  Who knows how many times Wenger wanted to buy a player, and his friend Dein made sure he had the funds made available?  Maybe it was Dein who was the great negotiator.  We can’t know that.  But I know this:  Arsenal have not won a trophy since he left the club in April 2007.

Players Wanting Out

Since the move, there has been steady stream of Arsenal players wanting to leave the club for greener pastures (or so they thought they were anyway).  Most recently, French midfielder Samir Nasri has had his eye on a move to Manchester United, Manchester City, or Inter Milan.  Emmanuel Adebayor, now one of the most hated men in North London, was once a 30 goal scorer for Arsenal.  That is, until he heard other clubs were interested.  He was out the door as soon as he could be.  Alex Hleb left friends Cesc Fabregas and Tomas Rosicky to head to Barcelona to sit on the bench (I mean really, did he honestly think he’d get a game with the midfielders already there?).  Frenchman Mathieu Flamini turned down a new contract to join to AC Milan.  Kolo Toure wanted paid more so he went to Manchester City with Adebayor and the other bought and paid for all-stars.

Can Arsenal afford to pay world-class players the type of salaries it takes to keep them?  Are players afraid to be locked up in long-term deals with the Gunners because they think the team lacks ambition, due to the lack of “big” signings?  Fair questions, I feel, in light of recent events.  Cesc Fabregas’ situation I chalk up to his love for Barcelona.  I don’t honestly believe there is an amount of money that would keep Cesc from going back to the Catalan team.  I also truly believe he loves Arsenal and Arsene Wenger.  So on that front; I give the club a pass.  But there is no reason why Nasri should want to leave Arsenal if the club is, as it claims to me, a big club with great ambition.  The team should have extended the contract with Nasri last season, and then reinforced the team.

This led me to the following thought:  If I were Samir Nasri, and you looked around and saw I was employed by a club that boasts Manuel Almunia and Sebastien Squillaci (at this stage of his career) in its squad, would I think I was at a big club, on the cusp of winning trophies?

Now don’t start yelling at me, I think Nasri’s behavior is unacceptable and this football mercenary culture is very unsavory in my eyes.  But these are the times we are in, and sometimes if requires a look in the mirror.  At the very least, a question as to why these things are happening and so frequently.  If the club doesn’t want to spend then why don’t they sell Nasri for £22 million and re-invest that money?

Is there a tug-of-war between the board and our manager when it comes to these financial decisions? Perhaps more than we know.

Ownership Changes Hands

American businessman and Stan Kroenke is now the majority shareholder of Arsenal FC.  Kroenke is no stranger to owning sports teams, as he wholly or partly owns American sports teams:  Colorado Avalanche (hockey), Colorado Rapids (football), Denver Nuggets (basketball) and the St. Louis Rams (American football).  Kroenke made his fortune as a developer and is married to Ann Walton, daughter of Wal-Mart co-founder Bud Walton.  Mr. Kroenke is estimated to be worth 2.6 billion dollars (American).

Hey Stan, you think you could help up out with a little extra cash so we can go ahead and sign Phil Jagielka or Gary Cahill?  No?  Well thanks for trying to control our team anyway!

Kroenke first began buying shares in April 2007, strangely enough around the time Mr. Dein left the club.  Kroenke now owns 62.89 percent of the clubs shares, but so far has shown no interest in spending his cash in order to bolster the club’s squad (I had been hoping for a more Roman Abramovich approach, well maybe not quite on that level, but something).

It is feasible that a club going through some ownership change and board changes may not be in the buying market.  If that’s the case, this is a problem.  If not for this £390 million stadium, would all this be going on?

Home Pitch Advantage

Though it isn’t quantifiable, there is just a different feeling watching a game at the Emirates Stadium than there was at Highbury.  The new stadium certainly doesn’t feel like a “fortress” and though teams that the Gunners should beat will often put 10 men behind the ball, hoping for a draw, the top and mid-level teams do not seemed phased by playing at the Emirates.

With only five seasons complete in the Emirates era, it would be foolish to compare records with Highbury and expect to get any factual evidence numerically as whether the Emirates helps Arsenal win.  However, the pitch at the Emirates is bigger than the old pitch at Highbury.  Certainly a smaller pitch benefits a possession team with quick passing, able to use small spaces.  A bigger pitch favors a team who would prefer “Route 1” football.  That’s not to say Arsenal would have won the league last year if they’d have stayed at Highbury, but every little bit helps, and we are who we are.

Atmosphere, above all else determines home pitch advantage, and a great atmosphere is a great goal to strive for.  However, it doesn’t necessarily lead to titles.  Like, for example, The Reebok Stadium could be filled every game with the greatest Bolton fans that ever lived.  It would be a great atmosphere and would help Bolton.  But when Stuart Holden wins your Player of the Year Award, you still aren’t winning the league, no matter what the atmosphere is.

The Emirates seems quiet at times (some times for good reason).  The intimate feeling that Highbury had is gone, now literally demolished.  Sure, the stadium rivals the best in Europe.  But what was lost in the move?

Highbury could only seat 38,419 ticket holders, compared to 60,361 (reported) at the Emirates.  Certainly the stadium should be louder with just over 20,000 more Gooners there to support the team.  Not always the case, I’m afraid.

Season ticket prices have risen at the Emirates Stadium.  Good in one way, more revenue for the club.  Bad in that it is pricing people out of being able to go to the stadium.

Here’s hoping the day doesn’t come when the stadium isn’t full (or at least 95 percent full).

The Future

It’s probably way too early to really have a factual debate about whether or not the move has been good for Arsenal.  Only in the coming years will we know what dividends the Stadium will pay.  I have to believe that it will turn out to be a good move, with higher revenue and seats filled with fans.

In the short-term, I’m not so sure.  Did the team mortgage a 10 year period to have a great stadium in the future?  Maybe.  Is that necessarily a bad thing?  Maybe not.  One thing is for certain, the lack of trophies has left me to ask these questions.  Here’s hoping that 2011-12 brings some silverware, and some peace for Arsenal fans.  Then we can stop overanalyzing and looking for reasons why we aren’t winning.

Latest: