This narrative that the premier league has been very weak this year which is why we

[Maravilloso Marvo]

Yes, the best thing that Arteta has given us back, that was absent in the latter Wenger years, is hope. Hope that we can win the league, hope even that we might come close. Actually winning it is a bonus.

There was nothing worse than being out of the league in January and hoping we make top 4 cause it's trophy blah, blah, blah

Awful years

Arteta has been very open about this. Although he calls it being competitive rather than having hope.

But that is the thing, you can't guarantee success. Afterall, only one team can win the league and there are 5-6 who are theoritically equipped to do so each year. But you can guarantee being competitive. Let's be part of the conversation, and if you do that, invariably, you will win some of the time as well.

[PSRB]

Arteta has been very open about this. Although he calls it being competitive rather than having hope.

But that is the thing, you can't guarantee success. Afterall, only one team can win the league and there are 5-6 who are theoritically equipped to do so each year. But you can guarantee being competitive. Let's be part of the conversation, and if you do that, invariably, you will win some of the time as well.

Lots of very sensible observations in this thread......not very AWIMB at all.

[redgunamo]

Unfancied is a bit strong. We have been Chair of the 'there or thereabouts club' for four years.

To put it another way, we have been the most consistent side in England over the past four years. It was really an issue of getting over the line. Or 'bottle', if you prefer.

The best we can expect is for us to be competitive again next season. And the one after.

In some ways, Arteta actually did his 'job' three years ago. Put us in a title race and got us back in the champions league. That is the club's expectation. Actually winning either of those competitions is a bonus.

Yes, I know this and I've always said it. Winning the league and being better than Manchester City are two different things; the latter is practically impossible, far too much money involved. We'll have to settle for the former

Twenty-two years is a long time but, you must've seen that graphic doing the rounds; it's nowhere near the longest title-drought amongst teams who have actually won it before. We'll be alright.

[redgunamo]

Arteta has been very open about this. Although he calls it being competitive rather than having hope.

But that is the thing, you can't guarantee success. Afterall, only one team can win the league and there are 5-6 who are theoritically equipped to do so each year. But you can guarantee being competitive. Let's be part of the conversation, and if you do that, invariably, you will win some of the time as well.

George used to say something similar. We may not be the best team with the best players playing the best football but there's no excuse not to compete.

[Peter]

Yes, I know this and I've always said it. Winning the league and being better than Manchester City are two different things; the latter is practically impossible, far too much money involved. We'll have to settle for the former

Twenty-two years is a long time but, you must've seen that graphic doing the rounds; it's nowhere near the longest title-drought amongst teams who have actually won it before. We'll be alright.

And you have also said that we have to get everything right in order to win it. And that is why this season was so incredibly important.

We had everything right, and nobody else did. And that made it a title we should win. And as we are not going to get many opportunities like that, we have to take them when they come.

I feel the same about Saturday. It is almost greedy to want the champions league as well but those finals dont come along very often unless you are Real Madrid. We may never get a better chance to win it......

Whatever happens, Arteta is vindicated. As are the owners, by the way..... nice to see them there on Sunday. They do actually deserve a fair bit of credit.

[Maravilloso Marvo]

George used to say something similar. We may not be the best team with the best players playing the best football but there's no excuse not to compete.

Was that not in the context of within each game? Being aggresive and winning your duals? You have to compete to win your duals, Amazon Prime showed us all that.

[Peter]

Yes, I know this and I've always said it. Winning the league and being better than Manchester City are two different things; the latter is practically impossible, far too much money involved. We'll have to settle for the former

Twenty-two years is a long time but, you must've seen that graphic doing the rounds; it's nowhere near the longest title-drought amongst teams who have actually won it before. We'll be alright.

It is our longest drought. Shorter than those of United and Liverpool.

Worth noting that only three men have ever won the league for United. Their achievements are built on the huge success of two men and two eras. Outside of those, they've been pretty ****e....

[Maravilloso Marvo]

It is our longest drought. Shorter than those of United and Liverpool.

Worth noting that only three men have ever won the league for United. Their achievements are built on the huge success of two men and two eras. Outside of those, they've been pretty ****e....

This insight is incredibly interesting P.

I don't know much about us winning the league in 48 and 53. In my mind, you have the Herbert Chapman success in the 30s, then Bertie Mee in 71, then George Graham and Wenger.

Then I appreciate it is probably because of my age, but these last 22 years have literally flown by. So couple that together with my mind thinking that the gaps further back were an eternity and I am left very confused by the concept of time.

Also, very interesting viewpoint on the histories of Man Utd and Liverpool.

[redgunamo]

It is our longest drought. Shorter than those of United and Liverpool.

Worth noting that only three men have ever won the league for United. Their achievements are built on the huge success of two men and two eras. Outside of those, they've been pretty ****e....

Right. I looked it up awhile ago. In our lifetimes, we've come up against four dominant sides. Six of our league rivals have won the European Cup.

We suffer because they are (obviously) not all dominant at the same time. Liverpool take a breather then Manchester United take over. Then Chelsea for a bit then Manchester City. Both of those have had fifty-year title droughts as well, although they are not thought of as such as they were both nowhere in any case.

That's why everyone hates us

[redgunamo]

This insight is incredibly interesting P.

I don't know much about us winning the league in 48 and 53. In my mind, you have the Herbert Chapman success in the 30s, then Bertie Mee in 71, then George Graham and Wenger.

Then I appreciate it is probably because of my age, but these last 22 years have literally flown by. So couple that together with my mind thinking that the gaps further back were an eternity and I am left very confused by the concept of time.

Also, very interesting viewpoint on the histories of Man Utd and Liverpool.

Back in the day, there was no law saying you had to win the league every season. So you could win the title and still consider yourselves a title-winning club ten or twenty years later.

Then the greed set in and we've never really responded to that. Maybe until now.