Arsenal Is Bigger Because Of Wenger

By Daniel Cowan
In Arsenal
Oct 20th, 2015
2 Comments

There has been some buzz on Twitter in the last few days over Arsenal’s status as a big club and how it has been affected, if at all, by the manager. Some have gone as far as to suggest Arsenal were not a big club prior to the arrival of Arsène Wenger, others have denounced this as ridiculous and claim Arsenal have always been a big club and that it is indeed the achievements of the legendary Herbert Chapman that not only defined us as a big club but continues to be the measuring stick for modern achievements.

I find elements of both arguments to be equally ludicrous. Arsenal were certainly a big club before Wenger arrived, that can never be in doubt, and Herbert Chapman did define this club but I don’t think it is right to suggest he is the point of comparison for Wenger as far as the media is concerned. Media attention on Arsenal, the proclivity for broken cannons in newspapers, the obsession with our ticket prices when it’s clear we offer comparative value to other clubs in the league, the constant reminders of when we last won the title, stems from the standard set by Wenger in his early years and the subsequent performance of other, more successful, managers like Mourinho, Guardiola, Ancelotti and Ferguson, and at a microcosmic game to game level (quite laughably in some cases) Monk, Bilic, Simeone, Klopp, Coyle, Rodgers and Laudrup – there’s a distinct Swansea vibe there.

Individual fans may choose to compare Wenger to our greatest ever manager but the suggestion was actually that it’s the media who consciously and subconsciously do it. I’ve never once heard a journalist or pundit directly compare Wenger to Chapman, or his players to Chapman’s players. I hear pundits saying we lack a “Vieira type” or a “goalscorer like Henry” not “a forward like Drake”. It’s natural to compare with a more recent era. Historians will cringe at this but sadly for them that’s just the way it is.

So, is Arsenal a bigger club because of Wenger? I think that is incredibly hard to quantify and also quite subjective. Certainly I believe that we have a much more recognisable and respected brand of football. We also have some incredible achievements under Wenger’s management, but are we any bigger? The stadium is bigger, the wage bill is bigger, the facilities are bigger and better. Everything is bigger in the modern game to a degree so it seems that it would logically follow that our status is bigger. I don’t see it quite that way.

Were Arsenal a bigger club under Graham than Howe or Neill? Again, it’s arguable and subjective. Winning the league for the first time in 18 years was massive and to do it the way it was done and culminating in the victory against the opposition we faced and their standing at the time was even more incredible. Undoubtedly we were a bigger threat and thus a bigger draw under Graham but a “bigger club”?

Did Graham leave Arsenal a bigger club than when he found it? I think most would say yes. Were they as big as at his highest point? Probably not. It’s the same with Wenger. Are they a bigger club than when he became manager? Probably. Are they as big as when he led them to an unbeaten season or the Champions League final with a record setting defensive display? I think most would say not.

What makes a club big isn’t universally agreed upon. Most supporters would agree on total success and relative size of the fan base but any considerations beyond that are blurred and shift with the cycles of power.

The further away from your last success you are, depending on the scale of it, the more likely it is your status has shrunk. Liverpool hasn’t won a title in 25 years but few people would suggest they aren’t a big club. Arguably they are bigger than Arsenal but their lack of recent success makes that a difficult argument to swallow. Aston Villa, Everton and even Sunderland have more titles than Chelsea and Manchester City but would you call them bigger clubs?

We call the matches against our rivals the “big games” and dismiss victories against Villa and Sunderland as expected yet historically they are bigger clubs so we’re not exactly consistent in our definition of what a big club is.

Fluctuations in a club’s “big” status is normal. Teams have cycles and clubs have highs and lows. Finishing behind Spurs in 1995 was probably our lowest low of the past 30 years. Lows like losing the Champions League final, crumbling against Birmingham (twice), losing the UEFA Cup Final and scraping fourth for X many years are relative highs compared to finishing 12th.

It is arguable that the highs we have had under Wenger are the best we’ve ever had and the lows would have been highs under 60% of our other permanent managers. Does this make us a bigger club because of Wenger? That’s for you to say.

I believe Wenger provided us our zenith and whilst things haven’t been great I respect that he has kept us a million miles away from the club’s nadir. His nadir with us would be a huge success to a hell of a lot of clubs who consider themselves “big”. That cannot be underestimated.

Are we a bigger club now than when Wenger took over? I think we are. How much of that is down to the manager I cannot say as not every manager has had to deal with the same tools and situations, good and bad, that he has. Are we as “big” as we once were at his highest point? I don’t think so. Since the Invincibles era we’ve undoubtedly lost some of our stock but that is football. Manchester United are the biggest club in the land but if they don’t win a title in the next 5 seasons then they’ll probably lose that mantel to another club.

Are we as big a club as we were under Chapman? I can’t say as I’m not 100 years old but I’d guess not because the game has changed and there are more “big clubs” now than there were back then.

Will we still be considered a big club in 50 years time? That all depends on the results I’m afraid but for now we are a big club and have remained consistently so for the last 30 years and at least 70 years of our 129 year existence.

Thanks for reading! Please comment on this post, subscribe by email, share with friends and follow me on twitter (@thedanielcowan). Please check out the official NLIR Facebook page http://facebook.com/northlondonisredblog for news, views, freebies and more. 

Don’t forget to tune into the funniest Arsenal podcast around “Goonersphere Podcast

Advertise your business here! Click here for details .

About "" - 509 Posts

I am a South London born Gooner now living in Leigh-On-Sea, Essex. I'm a husband, daddy, podcaster, trainer enthusiast and aspiring author. My work is my passion and for that I will always be grateful. Here is where I write my thoughts and views on Arsenal Football Club, the greatest team the world has ever seen.

2 Responses to “Arsenal Is Bigger Because Of Wenger”

  1. brdgunner says:

    I think we are bigger club now and that Wenger is responsible. Not alone, the board also played a big part, but still Wenger is instrumental in us now being a bigger club.

    The reason for the bigger stadium, better facilitates etc. is to put us in line with the big clubs in Europe. The fact we did that without having ever won the CL made it more difficult to have the impact on the team we would have liked. Plus the unusual situation the league is in (city and chavs) made us and more importantly Wenger benefiting from his work very difficult.

    I believe that without Wenger we would now be in the second tier of English clubs and third in Europe. As it stands I see us a top tier of English and second in Europe. For the record I believe Wenger has held on to our top tier English club record while growing our reputation in Europe and around the world.

    The reason I say we would be second tier in England is that we are an ever-present in the top four. Liverpool for example aren’t. Without Arsene during our most difficult period (the stadium move) we would have not made every top four and thus would have shared income and players-in with Liverpool. Creating a sub group within the top four.

    That’s what I see and believe is Wengers biggest contribution to Arsenal. Ensuring we stayed in the top tier of English clubs at a time when the top tier was blown apart by investment never seen before.

    I genuinely believe Arsenal without Arsene is Liverpool. And we can all agree, we are now ahead of them. Even though historically we are still behind.

  2. Zwi says:

    Hi Daniel. Good post as always, and I agree with most of what you say, especially the bit about using Herbert Chapman as a measure (a bit silly in my opinion). I just think the whole discussion/argument is a bit misdirected.

    The pertinent question should not be whether the club was big before AW came, but rather is it a bigger club today than it was when he joined? If yes, has he made a significant contribution towards the realisation of that growth? As you say, it’s not quantifiable, but we would be foolish to deny that a man who’s been a constant at a club for 19 years has had little to do with its growth and successes since he joined.

    Anyone who denies Wenger’s contribution should be asked if they’d say the same about Alex Ferguson at Man United i.e. that Ferguson had little to do with Man United’s status today. I can see people saying no, and arguments going the way of “but he won so much at that club compared to Wenger.” Then what I would ask is whether a manager who has been the most successful in the club’s history cannot be said to have contributed significantly to that club’s status? Because that’s what Wenger is for Arsenal.

Leave a Reply to brdgunner Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

facebook comments: