There’s not much else to say other than that that was a sublime performance by Arsenal. The trophy draught is frustrating, but honestly, when Arsenal plays like they did last night, dominating another club through sheer skill, technique, and teamwork, it just reminds me how lucky I am to root for Arsenal.

Anyway, first things first. I know that technically, mathematically, we haven’t qualified for the knockout stages yet. But the sequence of events that would have to happen to keep us out is EXTREMELY unlikely. I mean, we’re talking about “Jon and Kate’s kids grow up to be normal, emotionally stable adults” unlikely. I mean, we’re talking about “Transformers 2 sweeps the Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Director (Michael Bay), Best Actor (Shia Lebeouf), and Best Actress (Megan Fox)” unlikely. I mean, we’re talking about “Heidi and Spencer get Ph.Ds in molecular biology and work together to cure cancer” unlikely. I mean, we’re talking about “Chelsea failing to win and their fans not immediately blaming the referee” unlikely. Okay, I’ve got a million of them, but you get the idea. It’s unlikely. We ARE through to the knockout stages, and that’s how I’m proceeding.

The question addressed by Homey and others in the comments after last night’s game was whether we should try to win the group or be content with second place. The past few years, Arsene Wenger has seemingly been very content to finish second in the group, so long as we advance–look at the lineup we trotted out against Porto on Matchday 6 last season. That was basically the Carling Cup squad plus Almunia and Gallas.

But last year, the clubs who were in the pool of first-place finishers wasn’t that much different than the pool of second place finishers. Behold the two pools, with their UEFA Ranking coefficient (coming into the 2008-2009 season) in parentheses:

First-place: Roma (16), Panathinaikos (37), Barca(4), Liverpool(3), Manchester United(6), Bayern(11), Porto(17), Juventus(23)

Second-place: Chelsea(1), Inter(9), Sporting(21), Atletico(67), Villareal(13), Lyon(8), Arsenal(5), Real Madrid(10)

Average ranking of first-place teams: 14.625; average ranking of second-place teams: 18, although that’s really just dragged down by Atletico’s bizarrely low ranking. Both groups had 6 teams ranked in the top 20, one club just outside the top 20, and one club substantially lower. In fact, the second-place teams had more top 10-ranked clubs (5) than the first-place group (3). Ask clubs like Roma (who drew Arsenal in the first-round) and Juventus (who drew Chelsea) how much good finishing first did them.

But I do think this year may turn out to be quite a bit different. More so than in past years it seems like there are a number of smaller clubs which may well sneak into the knockout stages: If CSKA Moscow can beat Wolfsburg at home next matchday, they have a very good chance at going through, Romanian side Unirea Urziceni (gesundheit!) has a decent chance to make it, Rubin Kazan and/or Dynamo Kiev both have a better-than-you-think shot at getting out of Group F.

There is no such thing as an “easy” draw in a European knock-out tie (PSV taught us that), but there’s no doubt that some draws are more desirable than others. Sure, if we win our group, there’s a chance we could draw with a Barca, Juventus, or Real Madrid. But if there’s a 1 in 4 or better chance we could draw a club from Eastern Europe not accustomed to playing at this level, it’s worth it.

It’s also worth noting that at this point, it wouldn’t take much for us to win the group. All we have to do is beat Standard Liege at the Emirates. Standard has shown quite a bit more than people thought they would, and will almost certainly host AZ on the last Matchday with a good shot at getting into the Europa League knockout stages. But without discrediting them, the fact is that we should win this match easily. I say we should play most of our first-team against them, take care of business there, and then we can basically just send the Carling Cup team to Greece in December, and make sure our stars are rested and focused on Liverpool the following weekend.

As for the match itself, we were in control from start to finish. van Persie very nearly started the game with a bang in the 3rd minute with a brilliant shot which was just pushed around the post by Romero (and it was all downhill from there for the young Argentine keeper). Then we had a period where we struggled to create real chances, but in the 25th minute, Cesc took a crafty shot from outside the box which wrong-footed Romero, who couldn’t get enough of a hand on it to keep it out. It was bad keeping, but it was a nice shot by Cesc to force Romero into making as top, and he was rewarded. We continued to press until, right before the break, Arshavin put a nice ball forward to Nasri, who beat his man and then put a composed finish past Romero. It was a nice play and a great moment for Nasri, scoring a goal in his first start on the season.

We struck again shortly after the break. It was again down to Arshavin, who put Cesc through on goal beautifully, and Cesc relaxed and finished nicely. Throughout this, AZ created very few chances, the best of which was a nearly point-blank shot in the 56th minute that Almunia did very well to push up off the crossbar. Then, in the 72nd minute, we conjured up a bit of magic–Eduardo back-heeled a wonderful ball forward to Arshavin, who took on his man and put Diaby through on goal in the box, and Diaby finished well.

Then, in the 82nd minute, off a corner kick where we could have had a penalty for a handball in the box, AZ countered, and substitute Lens caught Almunia leaning to score a consolation goal. And that’s how it ended, 4-1 Arsenal.

It was a beautiful performance, and showed what the club is capable of. Nasri looked good in his first start, and gives us another option both up front and in midfield. I also think we may have figured out how to play with a lead, which had been a problem. And that is wholeheartedly embracing the old cliche that a best defense is a good offense. The problem is that Arsenal don’t have the size to defend set pieces or crosses into the box very well, and the players aren’t used to playing conservatively. Based on how we’ve played the past two matches with the lead, I think at this point the best thing the club can do is just keep attacking–if we keep the ball in the other side’s half they can’t score, and the best way to protect a two-goal lead is by scoring a third goal. The corner kick which led to the counter was drawn by Gallas making a run into the box. This was with the club up 4-0, in the 81st minute. And that seems to work much better for us than playing tentatively and staying back, so that’s fine by me.

Anyway, on to the ratings:

Almunia 6.5. Saved one goal through a spectacular save, gave up a soft goal by leaning the wrong way. It all evens out, I suppose. Didn’t really have too much to do.

Eboue 6. Showed what he is capable of by making several marauding runs down the flank and through the middle. Also showed what he is capable of by leaving the right-side exposed several times.

Gibbs 7.Looked comfortable filling in for Clichy, and very nearly grabbed a goal for his troubles. I think he’ll continue to improve as he matures and gets used to playing with the first-team.

Vermaelen 7. Generally untroubled, made a few forward runs, marked his man well.

Gallas 7. Ditto. Was really getting forward a lot, too.

Song 6.5. Solid performance–consistently shielded the back four and won the ball in midfield. He needs to abandon his delusions about making spectacular through balls, though–the few times he tried to put someone through on goal he just gave the ball away. As long as he plays within himself he helps the team a lot.

Diaby 7.5. Grabbed the goal, worked hard, and generally had one of his best games of the season. But I still don’t think he should be starting if everyone else is healthy.

Cesc 8.5. Co-Man of the Match. Worked hard, grabbed two solid goals. Good day for the rudder of the Arsenal. Based on recent form, is he the best midfielder in the world at the moment? 8 goals and 11 assists in 13 games would point the Ouija planchette towards “yes.”

Nasri 7.5 Disappeared for long stretches, but when he did get involved, reminded us what he’s capable of contributing. Beautiful move to get past his man and finish on the goal. He’ll only get better as he gets fit again and shakes off the rust.

Arshavin 8.5. Co-Man of the Match. He hasn’t been playing that well lately, but he bounced back in a big way last night with numerous dangerous runs, and three assists. He seemed to be popping up everywhere, it was a great game. Not to rain on that parade, but does it bother anyone else that he doesn’t actually seem all that happy when Arsenal score? You almost never see him run over to congratulate the scorer as enthusastically as the rest of the team. Hmmmm.

van Persie 7. Didn’t score for what seems like the first time in a while, but was still involved in everything and looked dangerous.

Wenger’s Tie 7 Solid, even underneath his big winter jacket.

Eduardo 7. I still think his loss of pace will keep him from ever being the same player he was before the injury, but he still has a world of skill, as he showed on the backheel that started the move that led up to the 4th goal.

Ramsey 6. Nondescript.

Rosicky 6.5. Looked lively in a brief cameo.

Raspberry Peach Snapple 10. Holy crap. I’ve never really seen this flavor before, so I picked it up to drink while I was watching the match last night, and this must be what heroin is like. You hardly ever see this, but if you see a place that sells them, trust me–buy all of them and horde them. Or just drink them all at once. You won’t regret it.

We’re almost 1/3 of the way through the season, and I think you’d have to be pretty content with things so far. Diaby’s headed own goal against Manchester United and the collapse against West Ham notwithstanding, we’ve made a very bright start to the season. We just need to do a professional job on Saturday away to Wolves, and since at least one of Chelsea or Manchester United will drop points, a win will put us functionally second in the table (remember the game in hand). Not bad.

The other news is that Stan Kroenke bought up a few hundred more shares of Arsenal, taking him right to the brink of the 29.9% takeover threshold. I am completely confused by this whole thing, and can’t tell if he’s content to be a silent investor or he actually wants control of the club. If it’s the latter, both the current board and the Arsenal Supporters’ Trust seems okay with it, so he’s at least convinced them that a takeover by him wouldn’t actually change how the club is run. We shall see.

Four more teams punched their tickets to South Africa yesterday. And it brings the list of players currently affiliated with Arsenal who will likely play in the World Cup at 8:

–Robin van Persie (Netherlands)
–Theo Walcott (England)
–Cesc Fabregas (Spain)
–Nicklas Bendtner (Denmark)
–Emmanuel Eboue (Ivory Coast)
–Carlos Vela (Mexico)
–Philippe Senderos (Switzerland)
–Johan Djourou (Switzerland)

There are others who may sneak onto their national teams (Denilson, Almunia) which have already qualified, and a number of Gunners who play important roles for national teams which still have a chance at qualifying (Clichy, Sagna, Gallas, Nasri, Song, Arshavin). I suspect when it’s all said and done we’ll have about a dozen or so players feature for their national sides in the World Cup.

But enough with the internationals. Arsenal is back, and we actually have five games between now and the end of the month. We have a triple-decker “ham” sandwich of league fixtures against Birmingham, West Ham, and Tottenham, plus a Champions League fixture against AZ and the Carling Cup match-up with Liverpool. Five important matches in 14 days will really show us what we have and dictate what happens the rest of the season, and that kind of fixture congestion can really tax the squad’s depth. Fortunately, the return of Walcott and the imminent return of Nasri (who says he’ll be back for the West Ham game next weekend), give us a few more options for substitutions and rotation.

This will be our first match-up with Birmingham since the Eduardo horror tackle/Gallas hissyfit game which was in many ways the beginning of the end of our title bid in 2007-2008. It’s a game we should expect nothing less than 3 points from, and a good chance to exorcise those demons. But I’ll be back with a full preview tomorrow.

Finally, in what could be big news, Stan Kroenke has again increased his share of ownership in Arsenal, and now owns 28.9% of the club’s shares. If he gets to 29.9%, rules mandate that he formally launch a takeover bid. In the past, he has consistently denied any intention of doing so, and has claimed that he is content to own just less than that and let the current board and management run things as they have in the past. And frankly, he has given us no reason not to take us at his word–unlike that Uzbeki d-bag Usmanov, who was transparently trying to take over the club with David Dein, Kroenke has maintained cordial relations with the board and current club management, and hasn’t criticized the club or Wenger in an obvious attempt to make fans feel like his ownership is the only chance Arsenal has to win trophies. Still, with Kroenke’s substantial stake in the club plus his substantial wealth, the fact is that he could probably take over the ownership of the club with a snap of his fingers, so it bears monitoring.

Arsenal Holdings, PLC just released a summary of the financial results for last season. It all seems to be good news, and it sounds like the club improved in pretty much every financial category over 2007-2008:

–Overall income increased to £313.3 million from £223.0 million the year before, largely due to deep cup runs and increased merchandise sales
–Overall matchday/ticket revenue increased to £100.1 million from £94.6 million the previous season.
–The sale of some of the Highbury apartments contributed £7.8 million to the operating budget.
–Overall operating profit was £35.2 million, up from £25.7 million the season before.

Hmmm. 35.2 million. So, um….why didn’t we get Felipe Melo again? This is all well and good, and I’m glad the club is doing so well financially, but the fact of the matter is none of us are Arsenal fans because the club is well-run or profitable. We root for the club because we want the club to win matches and trophies. On the pitch. We’re not jumping up and down in bars high-fiving each other because the directors are getting higher dividends this season.

It’s not that simple, of course. The club does still have quite a bit of debt from both building the Emirates and developing the old Highbury property. And if and when that debt is paid off, the club is going to be a real cash cow, and hopefully at that point there will be more money going into the club’s on field product. The club is saying all the right things–Chairman Peter Hill-Wood says:

This is excellent news although I should perhaps stress that making and reporting profits is not in itself the primary objective for the directors. First and foremost we are supporters of this great football club and, as such, our main goal will always be the achievement of success for Arsenal on the field. The Group’s profitability is important because it is a by-product of running the Club as a solvent and successful business, which in turn allows us to maximise the level of investment in the playing staff and in the future development of the Club.

Wenger echoed a similar sentiment:

I am encouraged by the fact that the financial results are good because on my side I try to contribute to that. I am quite proud that I work in a company that is in a strong financial situation. I have always worked in clubs which make money and I would not feel that I do my job well if we lost money at the end of the season. However the sporting side is always the most important thing. To be completely happy you have to do well on the sporting side but never, no matter what happens, can it be accepted from any manager that to do that you put your club in trouble.

I guess I see their point, and I don’t necessarily disagree. It just seems like a club in Arsenal’s position can do one of two things–either (1) keep the profit within the club (I’m assuming it’s staying in the club, and not going straight into the shareholders’ pockets, which may not be a sound assumption) to guard against a rainy day when some debts get called in or the club fails to make the group stages and loses a lot of revenue; or (2) put the money back into the club, by say, buying Felipe Melo and Marouane Chamakh, and try to reach even greater heights–after all, if Arsenal were to win the league or Champions League (or even, to a much lesser extent, the FA Cup), it would greatly increase attention and marketing revenue.

The club has clearly chosen to be risk-averse and go with option (1). And I can’t say that it’s wrong. But of course, from a fan’s perspective, it is deeply unsatisfying to have a team on the precipice of great things, the money to improve the team in a way that could potentially put it over the top, and yet the team sits on its pile of money, arms folded, and still says with a straight face that the on-field product is the most important things. Sigh. I guess Biggie (R.I.P.) was right…

First off, Manchester United’s win yesterday puts them a mere point from the title. While our match-up on Saturday won’t mean much to us in terms of league position, it would sure be nice to delay the celebration another week and avoid the indignity of having to watch them celebrate while we’re still on the pitch.

Also, Rosicky is apparently back in training. Which is good news. I suppose. The Czech midfield maestro would have helped us a lot this season, and if he returns to health could be very important to our plans for next season. Frankly, though, what’s the point of him returning to training a week and a half before the season ends? He definitely won’t play, so wouldn’t it just be better to give him 2 more months of rest and rehab, and hope he comes back completely healthy in July? If he manages to reinjure himself in the next week or so, that’s going to be maddening.

There’s also a bunch of transfer rumors floating around. Apparently Carlo Ancelotti is set to announce his departure from AC Milan this week, setting up the widely rumored takeover at Stamford Bridge next season. And supposedly he’s not enamored with Didier Drogba, and wants to sell the diver and replace him with Adebayor. So basically if one unfounded rumored thing happens, and then another unfounded rumored thing happens, then there is an unfounded rumor that Adebayor could go to Chelsea. Not that I’d necessarily mind all that much, but this just seems like media making things up to me.

Xabi Alonso is apparently not coming to Arsenal. I wasn’t aware that this rumor was even out there. This seems like one of those cases of someone denying a rumor that doesn’t exist to possibly start the rumor. Does that ever work? Just in case, I am not involved in a sexual relationship with Anne Hathaway.

In more serious news, we have offered a trial with a look to a permanent move with 16 year-old Argentine goalkeeper Damian Martinez. He is the first-team goalkeeper for Argentina’s Under-17s, so could be pretty decent. Obviously he wouldn’t be a key member of the team for some time, but could see a lot of action in the youth team. This would give us 5 goalies, which seems like quite a bit–if he comes on permanently, it wouldn’t surprise me if Vito Mannone or Wojciech Szczesny were sent elsewhere.

In more interesting news, Arsene Wenger is set to meet with Arsenal shareholders today. The media is setting this up as a “grilling” and making it out to be like Wenger is really going to have to answer a lot of tough questions about the future of the team. I’m not buying it. Why? Because these are SHAREHOLDERS, not fans. Look, it’s not that they don’t want the team to succeed, but this is a business investment for them. And right now, the team is very profitable–the new stadium brings in a ton of cash, the team keeps qualifying for the Champions League and getting the attendant media revenue, and Wenger does this without spending a ton of money in the transfer window. I can’t imagine the shareholders aren’t pretty happy with him. Still, though, the idea of being able to grill Wenger is pretty tantalizing. What would you ask him? Some proposed questions here, some of which are pretty good. If I had my chance, I think the 5 questions I’d ask would be:

1. Do you just have one grey suit and red tie, or do you just have a whole closet full of identical grey suits and red ties?
2. Alex Ferguson–he’s really a huge tool, right? He seems like a huge tool.
3. What really happened with Bendtner’s pants-down incident?
4. Does Arshavin sleep in a race car bed?
5. Abou Diaby: What incriminating photos or information does he have on you, and is it really worth pretending that he’s going to be a good player someday?

Feel free to leave your questions in the comments section. United preview coming tomorrow.

Anyway, on to actual Arsenal stuff. Arsenal chairman Peter Hill-Wood has said Arsene Wenger’s job is not in jeopardy, and that, while Wenger’s contract is up after next season, all he has to do is say the word to get an extension. Nothing surprising, but definitely good news that we’re willing to stay the course with Wenger. Bigger news, I think, is that Hill-Wood said that he would back Wenger in the transfer market this summer and that he would have money to spend, although he declined to say how much. Wenger had previously said that he was forced to rely on his young players this year because of financial limitations.

Deja vu, right? I swear at this point they’re just recycling this exact same story year after year. Every year management claims Wenger has money to spend, and every year money doesn’t get spent. It seems to me that there are two possible explanations here:

1. The Arsenal board are giving Wenger money to spend, but he’s choosing not to spend it, and is now lying to cover up his own folly over the summer.
2. The Arsenal board is lying, they actually are imposing pretty serious limitations on Wenger’s spending, and he’s having to build a team on the cheap.

We can’t really know, obviously, but I’m inclined to go with option # 2. It’s no secret that the club had to borrow a substantial amount of money to pay for the new stadium, and while we still have the 6th highest revenue of any club, paying off the stadium debt eats up a lot of that. Furthermore, I think the club sunk a lot of resources into the Highbury Stadium development project, redeveloping the old stadium into an upscale condominium complex, which of course went online just as the real estate market and global economy went down the crapper. Furthermore, as I’ve said many times, unlike United, Liverpool, and Chelsea (and Manchester City, Newcastle, and others) we don’t have a single sugar daddy owner who can pour his own cash into the club b/c it’s his personal hobby. The owners of the club are shareholders, and like any corporate venture, if the company makes money, they make money; if the company loses money, they have to pay it off. It makes a huge difference financially, and I think the club is run with an eye towards the bottom line. If the board isn’t out to just make a profit, I think they’re definitely concerned with at least breaking even.

I guess I just couldn’t fathom why Wenger would out and out refuse to spend money that was made available to him. I know he believes in bringing along young talent instead of bringing in veterans, but so what? You can buy young talent with money, too. You can’t convince me that the Arsenal board said, “Here, Arsene, take this £30 million and go spend it.” And he looked around at all the young talent in the world and couldn’t find a single 20 year-old that he’d like to have and said, “no thanks, you keep the money.” It just doesn’t sound plausible to me.

I think the stats bear this out–look at our main transfers from last year:

Sales:
Hleb: £11.9million
Gilberto: undisclosed (rumored to be around £2 million)
Diarra: £5.5 million (+ another £5 million when Portsmouth sold him to Real Madrid in January)

Total: £19 million

Buys:
Nasri: £12.7 million
Ramsey: £4.8
Bischoff: not disclosed
Silvestre: £750,000

Total: £18.25 million plus Bischoff, which I can’t imagine was all that much given his injury history and the fact that he hadn’t really played much at all for Werder Bremen

So there you basically have a break-even, transfer-wise. I think this is more or less the directive given to Wenger, that he needs to raise a buck to spend a buck. Of course, there was the Arshavin thing in January, where Arsenal spent £15 million without selling anyone. First, I would point out that we did receive the sell-on money for Diarra, which made the actual outlay on Arshavin £10 million. Second, I think at that point the club was faring so badly that the board was looking at the very real possibility that we would miss out on the Champions League next year, which between gate receipts and media revenue brings in around £40 million per year. I think they had a sit-down with Wenger and came to the conclusion that it was worth spending £10 million at that point to make sure they got back to the group stages in 2010-2011 (which isn’t guaranteed even if we finish 4th).

So I think the objective facts support the idea that the board wants the club not to lose money. And let me make this very clear–I am NOT saying that’s a bad thing, or that they’re greedy, or anything like that. They’ve put a lot of money into the club, and if they don’t expect a big profit, they definitely can’t be expected to lose money. This doesn’t mean they don’t care about football, or the club, or anything like that. Frankly, for the most part, their interests probably dovetail in a lot of respects–making the Champions League is profitable, and good for the club. Winning trophies and finishing high in the league is profitable and good for the club. It just bears pointing out that while everyone likes to say “Stop being so cheap, voyeur!,” etc., I think he’s in a very, very different situation than are Ferguson, Rafa, and [name of whoever's managing Chelsea this week]. Hopefully we’ll see a day when we get enough of the stadium debt paid off and finish the Highbury redevelopment project when the club will be able to spend a little more revenue on the pitch. But until then, I still think Wenger’s going to have to roughly break even on his transfers, which makes it difficult to make any sudden, dramatic improvements to the squad. So I guess I’m not really buying Hill-Wood’s claim that they’ll give Wenger a bunch of money to spend–I think it’s just PR to avoid the fan backlash that would happen if he came out and said, “well, we’re not losing money on this thing, so Wenger’s got to raise his own money.”

The other big board room news was that American Stan Kroenke, a real estate developer who married a Wal-Mart heiress. He has more money than you or me. He owns a number of American sports teams (NFL’s St. Louis Rams, NBA’s Denver Nuggets, NHL’s Colorado Avalanche, and MLS’s Colorado Rapids), and owns a substantial share in Arsenal. He’s been buying up shares the last couple of years, and has been one of the club’s directors since June. On May 1, he bought some more shares, increasing his stake in the club to 28.3%, making him the largest shareholder of the club. If he gets to 30%, I believe he has to formally launch a takeover bid. However, he has agreed not to buy more than 29.99% of the club’s shares until at least September 2009.

I think there’s a decent chance he could acquire a majority stake in the club over the next couple of years, which would have a big impact on the club. The directors, who control 45% of the club and of which he is one, have a lock-down agreement that they can’t sell their shares without first offering it to someone else on the board until 2012. This was specifically designed to counter Alisher Usmanov and David Dein’s move to take over the club last summer–but since they don’t have a seat on the board, they would have to go outside of the club to buy up enough shares to take control.

I don’t know how I feel about it, but I’m going to choose to see it in a positive light. He’s been a good owner and good businessman over here, and, at the very least, would be far less unsavory than Usmanov. American owners in the EPL have a mixed, but on the whole, good, track record. Manchester United has obviously been very successful under the Glazers, Randy Lerner has done a model job at Aston Villa, and despite all the fans’ bitching, Liverpool hasn’t done too bad since Hicks & Gillett took over.

If he gets control and decides to spend a little money on the club, increasing the transfer budget, that wouldn’t be a bad thing, would it? Maybe we’d lose our moral high ground, but I’d trade righteousness for trophies any day. And he also owns his own television station here in the states that broadcast the games of all his teams–I don’t think he’d be able to get out of the packaged Setanta and Fox Soccer deals, but it is possible we’d start to see more Arsenal-specific media content over here. Nothing can destroy a franchise quite like a bad owner, but he’s got a pretty good track record of being a good sports owner and a sensible guy, so if we’re going to have a single owner calling the shots at Arsenal, I guess I’d just as soon it be him. He’s also got the support of the Arsenal Supporters Trust, who have no agenda but the club’s well-being, and which I think carries quite a bit of weight.

First up is the announcement that Stan Kroenke is joining the board at Arsenal. This is a basic attempt at thwarting a takeover by oligarch Alishar Usmanov, who many Arsenal fans have taken a particular disliking to. While not going there, the appointment of Kroenke is a real about face for the board, who once remarked that the board did not want “his sort” to join them. However, he’s there as a safety net against Usmanov, and he’ll serve this function:

Kroenke has agreed not to increase his stake beyond 29.9% of Arsenal’s share capital in the next year unless a takeover bid is launched by Usmanov or another party, in which case he could do so with the consent of the board.

If Usmanov moves in, Kroenke buys. That’s how I see it. Obviously, the board trusts the American billionaire over the Russian. It won’t be until next year that this will matter, as the board has signed an agreement not to sell any shares in the club until April 2009. Stay tuned for more.

In other Arsenal-business news, club pre-tax profits jumped up to £37m thanks to the Emirates Stadium, I would say. The money is there for Arsene, it would appear. I would be surprised if no one is bought in the next transfer window.

All in all, these business transactions only affect the club so much. There are still matches to be played and competitions to be decided on the pitch. I wonder if the likes of Theo Walcott or Cesc Fabregas care who is in charge of the club? I would guess not really – although depending on whether or not a new owner forced the resignation of Wenger. A complete preview of tomorrow’s match will follow later.

Thank you,

Abby

So when Stan Kroenke first started getting involved with Arsenal it struck me as a very odd coincidence. Of all the sports billionaires in the US, it’s the one that owns most of the Denver teams that wants to buy/invest into my beloved club. Nothing ever comes out of Denver, and suddenly it wants my English club?

In the very beginning, my father told me that if Stan Kroenke wanted to buy Arsenal, he’d end up doing it. And while recent quotes have him still protesting he won’t, it does seem likely that, in the future, Stan Kroenke will own Arsenal Football Club. He will be taking a place on the Arsenal board, which makes him privy to the “lockdown” agreement that the rest of the board members agreed to, and his joining is a flashing neon sign that he’s favored by the current ownership. Being a “foreigner” myself I’m not as against non-English ownership as many, but there’s a lot of convincing to be done that it’s a good thing.

Being as I haven’t lived in Denver for many years, I’m no expert on Stan Kroenke, but as I lived there for a long time and still have roots there, I know something. And since my mom was in town last weekend, I talked to her a bit about Kroenke.

My mother is a passionate, irreverent sports fan. I like to think that I learned how to be a fan from her, and I certainly learned a lot of important lessons- like how your team will sell your favorite player, that they’re going to probably lose more trophies than they’ll win, and you never, ever change your team. While she mostly still supports the New York teams she grew up with, she’s adopted one Colorado thing- the Denver Nuggets, the basketball team owned by Stan Kroenke.

She didn’t have much to say about him. No one does. She certainly didn’t think he’s an idiot, and thinks that he’s mostly done a good job with them. However, she did have one thing to say that set her off on quite the rant- he won’t fire the coach. She can’t figure out why, with all the money that’s being spent on players and the stars that they have, how their record has been what it is. Coaches get fired for far less, and yet, he’s still there. Kroenke won’t do anything.

Now, here’s where I get into speculation about things I know very little about. Please, if there are people who still live in Colorado (and actually pay attention to the non-football sports, which is something I’ve never done) and know better, set me straight.

The trend in Kroenke teams seems to be that he doesn’t interfere a lot, for better or for worse, in the sporting side. What he does do is raise the profile of teams. The Nuggets now compared to the Nuggets from when I left Denver are completely different- they have players I’ve heard of (including my mother’s beloved Carmelo Anthony, who won a title for the Syracuse Orangemen and therefore will forever have godlike status in my house), a stylish logo and uniforms, and are no longer the laughing stock of the city. The Rapids, his football team (so you can’t say ‘why isn’t he investing in the sport in America?’), have a new stadium, a different stylish logo, and a link with Arsenal. Every time I go home Kroenke-owned teams seem to be everywhere- even the lacrosse team had banners up.

What does that mean for Arsenal? Well, the one thing that Arsenal has is stability in management. In Arsene Wenger they have a long-term manager who, knock on wood, isn’t going anywhere for quite some time. He’s also a manager who doesn’t like to be messed with, who likes to have ultimate control. Kroenke, for better or for worse, seems unlikely to interfere. If the Denver teams are anything to go by, he will give money for players- both the Avalanche and the Nuggets get funded well. Judging by the few things said, Kroenke’s focus will likely be on the unromantic branding aspects- raising the profile of the club in non-English markets, the sort of thing that Manchester United has become so successful at. We’re a big club, but as recent transfer wrangling has shown, there is probably room for us to be bigger (if we want to go in that often-obnoxious direction).

Now, don’t take this to mean I don’t have any reservations about a Kroenke takeover. I definitely have them. Especially when it comes to commitment- he already owns nearly every team in Denver and half of St. Louis’ NFL team. How much can he really spend- and commit to- a team far away from his base that will require lots of time and money. Arsenal are a bigger commitment then the Denver teams- can he make the step up?

On the other hand, if our options are Kroenke and Usmanov, I’ll take Kroenke.

Thoughts?