New era manager no 2: Who should replace Unai Emery?

RealGunner wrote:ffs

I wonder who the 8 candidates were though?

Moyes
Big Sam
Pardew
Arteta
Emery
Henry
Vieira
Ancelotti

?

Balague mentioned Fonseca and Benitez.

urbaNRoots wrote:

RealGunner wrote:ffs

I wonder who the 8 candidates were though?

Moyes
Big Sam
Pardew
Arteta
Emery
Henry
Vieira
Ancelotti

?

Balague mentioned Fonseca and Benitez.

-Fonseca
-Benitez
-Vieira
-Henry
-Arteta
-one looking like Wenger with a moustache and shades called Guy Incognito
-Emery
-Hasenhüttl

Emery impressed the most

According to Ornstein, Emery blew the Arsenal committee away when he not only brought his analysis (with videos he requested from Arsenal before the interview) for our first team players individually but for our acadamey players aswell.

That is just crazy, you got to admire his enthusiasm for the job.

The guy is an analysis machine. He talked about how he loved doing it in his interview, saying a match was like a movie you can watch over and over.

More and more you can see why Arsenal have chosen him. Hopefully he gets the players on board quickly and we see all this work translate into good performances on the pitch.

It'll take a little while for everything to settle, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was some early season inconsistency. But thinking about what we might get next season is exciting.

Guys, would like to know your grounded opinion on the following aspects regarding Emery:

#1. His strengths (or what he will bring to Arsenal)
#2. His weaknesses (or what might work against him in PL)
#3. What is your expectations in 2018/19
#4. What is your expectations in following two seasons
#5. Typical players he would sign

Such a surreal feeling that he is our manager.

iftikhar wrote:Guys, would like to know your grounded opinion on the following aspects regarding Emery:

#1. His strengths (or what he will bring to Arsenal)
#2. His weaknesses (or what might work against him in PL)
#3. What is your expectations in 2018/19
#4. What is your expectations in following two seasons
#5. Typical players he would sign

#1.meticulousness,attention to details,better tactical preparation for matches,more intensity.giving players more defined roles which we have been missing etc

#2,poor in game management and losing from leading positions,maybe at times too conservative /negative approach and poor /questionable man-management

#3 and #4 finishing top four/winning EL and making us  champions league regulars again

#5 we need Center backs/and GK maybe he wants some combative energetic midfielder(could still depend on Ramsey's situation

Any idea why Arsenal did not try for Maurizio Sarri?

He might have been one of the eight interviewees, who knows.

messixaviesta wrote:Any idea why Arsenal did not try for Maurizio Sarri?

Bad character

First hand account from a player on Emery's style:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/may/26/unai-emery-wanted-to-light-fire-inside-us-arsenal-marco-andreolli?CMP=share_btn_tw

RealGunner wrote:

messixaviesta wrote:Any idea why Arsenal did not try for Maurizio Sarri?

Bad character

Thanks for the reply. I also suspected that. Emery is one of the better behaved coaches around.

This interview with Marti Perarnau is Great
http://www.getfootballnewsfrance.com/2018/unai-emery-what-am-i-missing-making-my-masterpieces-real-masterpieces-and-making-them-my-own/

That's one fantastic interview

The club have confirmed Emery's coaching team:

Assistant Managers: Juan Carlos Carcedo and Steve Bould
First Team Coach: Pablo Villanueva
Director of High Performance: Darren Burgess
Strength and Conditioning Coach: Julen Masach
Goalkeeper Coaches: Javi Garcia and Sal Bibbo
Data/Video Analyst: Victor Manas

Confirmed departures: Neil Banfield, Tony Colbert, Jens Lehmann, Gerry Peyton, Boro Primorac, Colin Lewin, and a couple of physios.

So no surprises bar Lehmann. Didn't think he'd leave and Bould would stay.

Does anyone know anything about those new guys?

Carcedo is Emery's usual no. 2 and likes to scream and shout a lot on the touchline. He's got an aggressive approach to motivating the players.

Garcia is apparently a very highly-rated keeper coach who PSG didn't want to lose.

Don't know anything about Villanueva and Masach.

I guess he kept Bould to have someone who knows a lot about the players little details around. I'm glad he did that.

Plus I always used to think there only was one Assistant coach.

City have two iirc. Arteta and Kidd. Bould is very similar Kidd in this instance, as someone who knows the club and England very well.

Again,the changes Arsenal fans want to see is mentality and tactics, so if the backroom staff is able to make this difference, then Arsenal WILL improve.

why does he look like Matthew Mcconaughey so much

One of the worst, most clueless and hapless bits of punditry I've ever seen, on Eméry's start at Arsenal, from Tony Adams.

It's been 4 games, Adams starts off to say that Eméry will 'need time' only to continue blathering endlessly about tired clishés of 'resilience', touchness, how it's more of the same, he's disappointed etc.

- claims team doesn't have resilience, when in both big games Arsenal had spells of coming back from being with the back against the wall. Came down from 2:0 to 2:2 at Stamford Bridge, with more than enough chances to win.
How is that not resilient?
What's it's not, is consistent.

- claims Eméry brought players in but "we've not seen them.. put them in!"? Guendouzi, Torreira, exactly both midfielders that were bought, have already played in literally every game ffs

- demands that the new coach come in and spend 6 weeks on telling players to run back and track back
what a *bleep* dimwit.  He has no clue what Eméry wants to do and is merely spouting amateurish notions of toughness in defending.
For example, I would be interested how Adams thinks Arsenal can implement high pressing if their players all run back like crazy after losing the ball
Also, IIRC stats show Arsenal players already ran a lot of kilometers in the first games, including the ones they lost

A player from the late 80s/90s era spouting tired cliches? Never heard that before.

I don't bother with these guys anymore because their style of punditry isn't aimed at guys like me. They used to anger me a lot but these days I just accept that their job is to appeal to as broad an audience as possible and dumbing down content is the easiest way to do that.

For me, what separates the good ex-player pundits from the bad ones, besides their level of articulation, is how up-to-date they are with the game. With Adams, even though he still works in football, his thinking is still in the 90s when toughness and running harder were genuine strategies. It was an era where individual battles were more important and if you worked harder than your opposite number, you'd beat him. I don't think he understands that this isn't the case anymore and that manipulation of space has surpassed that in importance. (And that goes a long way towards explaining why his coaching career sucked, which you can read more about in my article for These Football Times https://thesefootballtimes.co/2018/03/27/the-bizarre-coaching-odyssey-of-tony-adams/)

Meanwhile, football media on the whole is designed to draw out those controversial soundbites. The more fundamental problem here isn't that Adams is a pundit, but that he's being asked to judge Emery's Arsenal four games into a season. Any sensible person would know that four games is an insignificant sample size to judge anything and wouldn't bother asking.

Jay

First of all, let me say, thanks for sharing the article. It is always noticeable in every single post of yours that you are a very good writer with lots of worthwile and insightful points to make, and the ability to make them comprehensively, so I'm not surprised to find this quality carrying over to the longer pieces. I feel very glad, and actually kind of privileged, to be able to read these contributions of yours here on a daily basis.

Must admit that I linked this video not because I'm outraged or angered so much as I'm bored during international break, and like you I haven't the greatest of expectation regarding ex-players opinionating anyway.
Still, I too found it especially silly how they get "Mr Arsenal" to deliver a verdict on the new manager's work after such a laughably short period of time, and he doesn't hesitate or hold back.


Have to say as a general point, that I'm pretty shocked at the state of football journalism, whose very worst impulses and drives seem to be in the process of being ever amplified by an ongoing engagement, or confrontation, with social media.
Not that these impulses are anything new of course.
But those questions they asked Mourinho the other day, I don't know what to say. And these are the handful of established journalists at the major newspapers. One should imagine that at least they had the kind of job security to be a bit less hysterical and single-mindedly shit-stirring. Not sure whether it was quite that maddeningly moronic before they got entangled in clickbait, twitter, betting etc

Social media has certainly changed the landscape of football journalism, but at its core I think it's always prioritised the narrative over the facts. Narrative is a very powerful marketing tool that's all the more easier to control now that companies have constant access to people via social media.

In the UK, there are too many publications vying for the same market. The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Mirror, The Telegraph, The Guardian, The Times, The Daily Star, The Express... and that's just the newspapers. There are countless online publications as well. They're scrapping over the same resources trying to attract the same audience. The most successful (the tabloids, typically) are the ones who spin the best narrative and then perpetuate that narrative by asking managers and players loaded questions. If the story is that Mourinho is losing it then you can be sure a lot of these papers will want proof of that. And of course, the narrative around Arsenal for a decade now has been that they're soft, don't defend well, don't work hard enough, weak minded, etc.

But since they're also fighting with online publications, it's not enough to put a funny headline or something anymore. Now you have to convince people to click on your article instead of the 100 other articles on the same subject. Headlines used to be factual, but now they're leaving out more and more information to make people curious.

One trick a publication I used to work for did was disguise news about women's football as news about men's football. They would put out headlines like "Arsenal looking to sign Spanish striker" but the actual piece would be about the women's team signing some Spanish striker nobody's heard of. But it works because it's about an Arsenal transfer and "Spanish striker" is ambiguous enough to make people wonder who it is. Technically, the headline isn't untrue, but it's vague enough to be misleading.

I hated this because it damaged our reputation. We wanted people to come to us for quality features and analysis but nobody thought of us a reliable place for that. Instead, they saw us as yet another content farm, because we pumped out 30 clickbait articles a day. We did that because a top story on News Now (a news aggregation service) could pull in 100,000 views if you baited enough people. News Now was responsible for 70% of the revenue. I ended up leaving because my editor called my writing boring when I couldn't package a story about Wenger buying whiskey in Sweden as anything more than useless fluff. (Then they removed my name from a lot of my better articles and credited them to the site instead. )

The alternatives to this are paywalls and donations. The Times have been behind a paywall for years but they produce good articles, so it's worth it. The Guardian ask for donations because they want to keep producing quality journalism without resorting to petty clickbait. They're my number one source for football journalism these days because they actually have integrity. Their audiences are smaller but they're proving you can be successful with a quality product.

/rant. Need to stop there because I've a lot more to say about the exploitation of young journalists just looking for a chance to be published and "exposure bucks", but that'd turn into an essay