Arsenal's early season struggles have brought out the well worn and
often angry portrayals of manager Arsène Wenger's tactical cluelessness,
his transfer ineptitude, his awkward man-management, and his
geriatric stubbornness.
The suspect evidence supporting these
characterizations and the logical fallacy of the Arsenal=Arsène equation
only seem to intensify the appeal of these arguments. It's gotten to
the point that unthinking perceptions are reshaping the Arsenal brand;
as a result, the club is facing a deeper issue than the manager's
performance or the team's lackluster form.
What makes a football brand
In
a largely problematic account of Arsenal's 2013-14 season ("Arsène and
Arsenal: The Quest to Rediscover Past Glories"), Alex Fynn presents a
strong foundation in brand theory. Brands aren't just logos or taglines,
explains Fynn, but are collections and expressions of the rational and
emotional attributes associated with an organization.
These
attributes give brands distinctive personalities, such as Volvo's "Crisp
and Safe" and Apple's "Cool and Innovative," which shape the main
characters in those organizations' stories. The dramatic or comedic pull
of these stories, along with the personalities and values they express,
attract like-minded individuals.
Even more than other sports,
football engenders strong brands, Fynn points out, because the dramatic
impact is so great. One late moment of brilliance or bad fortune can
overturn a result that seemed a foregone conclusion for 89 minutes.
That's unmatched dramatic potential.
The geographic, historical,
and cultural identifications of football clubs also make them sturdy
vessels for brands, and clubs and their supporters can easily identify
themselves in opposition to the "other" created by rivalries.
Elements of the Arsenal brand
Although
Arsenal's brand benefits from clear differentiation with Tottenham,
Chelsea, and Manchester United, the club has reaped its biggest
reputational reward by honing its own personality. I would define this
as "Refined, Successful, and Sensible." (See "The Brand's the Thing" and "Whiffing on Risk" for additional thoughts.)
At the foundation of these personality traits lie the club's historical values:
- A distinctive balance between English football tradition and innovation
- Adherence to standards of conduct that denote "class"
- Consistent success at the highest level of the sport
Arsenal
promises those who have identified with it that it will live out these
values and behave in accordance with its underlying
personality. Breaking that promise could make supporters and sponsors
question their loyalty, with major cultural and financial consequences.
Fissures
Just
three months ago, Arsenal appeared to be reaffirming its
core personality and values, with world-class acquisitions joining the
club soon after an FA Cup triumph. The speed and irrationality of the
shift in perceptions should trouble CEO Ivan Gazidis and other club
executives, because they suggest that a different, much less positive,
brand story is replacing the advantageous one.
Here's how it's
happening: First, the promise of potential success appears to be an
empty one. It's extremely unlikely that the club will win the Premier
League or the Champions League this season. That's the standard of
success the club has established for itself, and it will once again fall
short.
Instead, as Andrew Mangan pointed out on the November 7 Arsecast, we are witnessing a routine of top-four league finishes and exits after the round of 16 of the Champions League.
This
pattern of performance lessens the excitement because it's so
predictable. Add that to the team's inability to win matches against the
top domestic competition, and you'll struggle to find compelling drama.
Second,
the club's image as an innovator is getting weaker. With the same
manager for 18 years, no matter how sincerely he might profess new ideas
or his focus on the future, Arsenal is always going to appear
hidebound. (One reason I think so many supporters were excited about the
appointment of Shad Forsythe as head of athletic performance
enhancement is that it hinted at the club's innovative best.)
The
third brand problem is that the personality trait "Sensible" is being
undermined by a perception that identical weaknesses cause the same
results year in, year out. Facts and reasonable analysis to the
contrary, "defensive frailty" is Arsenal's downfall. It doesn't matter
that the major problem in 2013-14 might well have been a lack of speed
and in 2012-13 a lack of creativity. The story is already written.
The persistence and immediacy of this narrative are strong evidence that Arsenal's brand has shifted.
Impact
If
this analysis is right, a succession of good results won't move the
brand back onto favorable ground. Only a major achievement, a Premier
League title or a Champions League trophy, will be sufficient for that.
Major
sponsors seem comfortable with this scenario. The lucrative deals with
Emirates Airlines for shirt and stadium sponsorship and Puma for playing
gear indicate that those companies continue to see considerable
advantage in aligning with Arsenal. How secondary and regional sponsors
weigh the Arsenal brand will be crucial to higher commercial revenue.
Meanwhile,
supporters have communicated mixed messages about their loyalty to the
brand. The increase in season ticket prices, coming as it did as the
brand was shifting, sparked vocal criticism. What appeared an attempt to
capitalize on the FA Cup success and hope for the future has instead
made longtime match goers question their commitment to an organization
whose brand promises are shaky.
Despite the reaction, the waiting
list for Arsenal season tickets remains long. What proportion of season
ticket holders in years to come will be new? How many ticket holders
will leave their seats empty? And how will those developments affect the
stadium atmosphere, which is part of what any sports organization sells
to sponsors, broadcasters, and fans?
These are potentially much
more troubling questions for the club than are any about the manager's
transfer, team setup, or personnel decisions. They aren't as dramatic or
obvious, but structural questions rarely are.
Each Premier League campaign has its own dynamics. We can search for
patterns, correlations, and precedents, but ultimately every series of
38 matches that begins in August and ends in May takes its own
independent shape. That makes the 10-match milepost an arbitrary
measuring point.
Even so, it is a point, a round number a little
more than a quarter of the way through the season. Arsenal has played
more than half the teams in the league, so it's illustrative if not
definitive to look at developments thus far.
The message from the overall numbers
A
fair expectation at the start of any sporting campaign is for a team to
make progress on its previous season. That was a reasonable objective
for Arsenal as it set out on its 2014-15 Premier League effort,
particularly because the FA Cup triumph, world-class summer signings,
and a full season's acclimatization for star playmaker Mesut Özil seemed
to have the club on a positive trajectory. (See my preseason
assessment, "The Arsenal: Forward, Upward, or on Some Generally Positive Trajectory.")
In
a broad-brush analysis, the first 10 matches don't show movement
upward. The 2013-14 squad produced 25 points in its first 10 matches,
while the 2014-15 version has tallied just 17.
The opposition has
been tougher this season, with the competition having averaged 12.7
points from the first 10 matches, compared with 10.9 points in 2013-14.
The median figures, which discount the outliers, tell a slightly
different story, 11 points vs. 10.5, indicating that the schedule has
been only a bit more difficult.
The results from comparable
fixtures between the two campaigns aren't as promising, either. Only the
draw at Everton marked an improvement on last season's performances,
while home draws against Tottenham and Hull City and the away draw
against newly promoted Leicester City leave Arsenal five points off its
returns from parallel matches in 2013-14.
As a result, over the
remaining 28 matches, Arsenal will have to match its wins of 2013-14 and
pick up points from draws or losses--such as West Bromwich Albion away,
Stoke away, and Aston Villa at home--to reach at least 79 points again.
The positives from relative numbers
Because
each season is distinctive, though, Arsenal may not have to amass 79
points to achieve a higher final position in the league table. It all
depends on the competition.
At this point, the top of the league
is not as congested as it was in 2013-14. Chelsea leads the way with 26
points, and four other clubs have 17 points or more. In 2013-14,
Arsenal's 25 points topped the table after 10 matches, while seven
others had at least 17 points. That more tightly packed group of early
leaders produced the most accomplished top four in points terms in
Premier League history.
Let's look at 2010-11, the last season to
follow a World Cup, for a different example. That year, Manchester
United won the league with 80 points; Arsenal finished fourth with just
68 points, two fewer than both Chelsea and Manchester City. Tottenham
were fifth at 62.
The start of that season bears some similarity
to the first 10 matches of the current campaign. At the same point, just
four teams stood at 17 points or higher, Arsenal among them with 20,
putting them in second place. (All standings from tables on premierleague.com.)
Telling statistics
In that competitive setting, one set of in-game statistical measures stands out.
According to whoscored.com,
Arsenal has taken the second highest number of shots per game (17.3)
through the first ten matches and the third highest shots on goal per
game (5.6). However, it's only sixth in goals scored, with 18.
That
is, Arsenal has scored on just 10 percent of its shots. Meanwhile, its
opponents have produced 11 goals from 74 shots, or 15 percent.
This
discrepancy points toward the most prominent statistical difference in
Arsenal's offense between 2013-14 overall and this season so far, the
number of shots it has taken outside the penalty area. That average
figure increased from 5.0 last season to 8.4 in the first ten matches of
2014-15, the highest in the league by 13 percent. None of those shots
has gone in.
Indeed, manager Arsène Wenger's own assessment, shared on Arsenal Player
before Arsenal faced Burnley in the 10th match of the season,
emphasized the point. "On the efficiency front, we can do better," he
said, "because if you look at the chances we have created and we have
given away, I think we have created many chances, and our finishing was
not at the expected level. And we gave very few chances away, but the
chances we have given away are of quality, and that's what you want to
do better."
If the manager can convey his seriousness about better
efficiency to the players, we may see fewer of the ineffective shots
from distance going forward.
The qualitative story
Statistics
can help us understand performance trends, but fans' interest has more
to do with qualitative judgments. In essence, we're assessing if the
club is producing entertainment value: Is the team performing
attractively as a whole, and are players delivering individually?
The
answer to the first question has to be "not yet." With a few
exceptions, such as the first 20 minutes against Manchester City and the
last 20 against Burnley, the team's performances have left something to
be desired.
I'm not inclined to identify a cause or causes because that would produce simplistic and misleading analysis.
What
can be said is that injuries to several important players, defenders
Mathieu Debuchy and Laurent Koscielny, captain Mikel Arteta, center
forward Oliver Giroud, as well as Özil, haven't helped. Tactical
shifting may have played a role, too, although I hesitate to conclude
that an established approach would have improved the attractiveness or
the results.
As for the second question, Alexis has been the
standout performer, netting seven goals in his first 10 league matches.
Other high-profile summer acquisitions, striker Danny Welbeck and
defender Calum Chambers, have also had more solid performances than poor
ones. The quality of the new boys overall has therefore been a plus.
Most
returning players haven't quite met the standards they set last season,
but more telling is the sense that the whole is less than the sum of
the parts at the moment.
All the components might add up
eventually; that would boost the enjoyment and entertainment we
supporters receive. It would also solidify a place closer to the top of
the table, even if the raw numbers fall short of last season's. That's
something to hold onto amidst legitimate current concerns.