Mistakes have set Arteta’s Arsenal back as they seek to emulate Klopp’s Liverpool

Arsenal are in a rebuilding phase. We’ve heard that plenty of times now. Words like ‘rebuilding’, ‘project’, ‘transition’ and ‘process’ have been used frequently since Mikel Arteta and Edu Gaspar arrived at the club in 2019.

The idea is that we, as Arsenal fans, should be patient even if the squad is not challenging for top honours in the short term, because building a competitive, successful outfit for the long term takes time and is worth the wait.

How then, can we gauge the status of this project and discern if the club is indeed moving in the right direction?

Well, one method is to make a direct comparison with a club that underwent a transformation of their own, rebuilding an ailing squad and eventually winning the biggest prizes in football – Liverpool.

More specifically, Liverpool under Jurgen Klopp. The German head coach took over at Anfield under remarkably similar circumstances to those Arteta found at the Emirates Stadium when he was appointed.

Steadying the ship

Klopp and Arteta were both hired mid-season, amidst a crisis. The former joined Liverpool in October 2015, while the latter was hired by Arsenal in December 2019.

Their first transfer windows at their respective clubs show a clear reluctance to go into the market with so little time to plan.

Liverpool’s January window of 2016 saw Steven Caulker arrive on loan, while Marko Grujic was signed and loaned straight back to Red Star Belgrade.

Arsenal’s corresponding winter window of 2020 is remarkably similar, with only Pablo Mari and Cedric Soares joining on temporary deals. Neither club sanctioned any significant outgoings.

The two managers arrived too late to save their clubs’ Premier League campaigns, finishing eighth with 60 and 56 points, respectively.

However, they both found some success in cup competitions, with Klopp leading Liverpool to the finals of the Europa League and the League Cup, whilst Arteta won the FA Cup.

The first full season

The next summer, the pair clearly felt they had had enough time to assess their respective squads and reinforcements were brought in.

Again, there is a striking similarity to the pieces of the puzzle the two coaches looked to recruit.

Permanent deals were struck for a starting-quality central midfielder (Georgino Wijnaldum/Thomas Partey), a starting-quality centre-back (Joel Matip/Gabriel Magalhaes), a back-up centre-back (Ragnar Klavan/Pablo Mari) and a reserve goalkeeper (Alexander Manninger/Runar Alex Runarsson). Arsenal also signed Cedric on a free transfer.

It was also the summer in which both clubs promoted a talented youngster from their academy who would go on to become an important player in the first team. A certain Trent Alexander-Arnold made his Liverpool debut in 2016/17, while Emile Smith Rowe, fresh from a successful loan spell at Huddersfield Town, had his breakout season and became a regular starter for Arsenal in 2020/21.

However, not all their signings worked out the same way. Liverpool plucked Sadio Mane from Southampton and the Senegalese blossomed into a world-class winger on Merseyside. Arsenal, however, signed Willian on a free transfer from Chelsea and the Brazilian was, well, not world-class. 

Instead of being Arsenal’s equivalent of Mane, Willian’s signing ended up being closer to the equivalent of Loris Karius, who also joined Liverpool in that window. Both weren’t good enough but ended up playing enough minutes to cost their sides. 

The second major difference was not to do with incomings, but outgoings. That summer, Liverpool sold Christian Benteke, Jordon Ibe, Joe Allen, Martin Skrtel, Luis Alberto and Brad Smith while releasing Mario Balotelli and Kolo Toure.

Arsenal, meanwhile, sold only Emiliano Martinez and released Henrikh Mkhitaryan. This meant that the Gunners were stuck with a number of players that had no long-term future at the club and were clearly sub-par, but were either playing anyway – e.g. Shkodran Mustafi – or being frozen out and taking up room on the wage bill – e.g. Mesut Ozil. The result was a disastrous start to the campaign, securing just 14 points from their opening 14 Premier League fixtures.

In the subsequent January window, no new faces were needed at Anfield and the only deal done was to sell Tiago Ilori. Arsenal, however, were forced to rectify their mistakes and brought in Martin Odegaard and Mat Ryan on loan whilst releasing Sokratis Papastathopoulos, Mesut Ozil and Shkodran Mustafi.

The Gunners’ errors proved costly. While Liverpool went on to secure fourth in the Premier League with 76 points in 16/17, Arsenal – despite improving in the league after Christmas – slumped to another eighth-placed finish with just 61 points last term, also being knocked out of the Europa League at the semi-final stage.

A big next step

This summer, Arsenal’s acquisitions once again bear some similarity to those of Liverpool’s in 2017, with, for example, Takehiro Tomiyasu or Nuno Tavares comparable to Andy Robertson – low-cost full-backs that did not generate a great deal of excitement from fans at the time. Albert Sambi Lokonga’s purchase also does not feel so different to the arrival of Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain at Anfield (despite the disparity in price) – both young, exciting midfield players. Even the Reds signing a young Dominic Solanke can be compared to the promotion of Folarin Balogun from Hale End to the first team – although Arsenal fans will hope the striker fares better than his Liverpool counterpart.

Liverpool recruited further firepower, however, adding Mohamed Salah to Mane, while Odegaard remained the Gunners’ only offensive signing, choosing instead to bolster goalkeeper and central defence with Aaron Ramsdale and Ben White, respectively.

Furthermore, the Reds once again sold players that had been deemed surplus to requirements, with Mamadou Sakho, Lucas Leiva, Kevin Stewart and Andre Wisdom all earning the club transfer fees. Once again, Arsenal struggled in this capacity, with only Joe Willock sold, while Willian left on a free. It is worth mentioning the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the market as a mitigating factor but, still, other clubs have done better than the Gunners in this department under the same circumstances.

The Gunners have already been knocked off-course. It is unrealistic to expect this side to be at the level Klopp’s Liverpool showed in 2017/18, finishing fourth despite reaching the Champions League final.

Without European competition, Arsenal’s upcoming season and stage of development are more akin to Liverpool in their 16/17 campaign, when they too were able to focus primarily on the Premier League.

This can be a useful marker for framing the expectations Arteta’s Arsenal should be held to this term. Points tallies can sometimes be a better approximation of a side’s quality than league position – Liverpool’s fourth-placed finishes on 76 and 75 points in 16/17 and 17/18, for example, would have secured them second last term.

Last season’s top four – Manchester City, Manchester United, Liverpool and Chelsea – are clearly further along in their processes than Arsenal and the Gunners are unlikely to finish in a Champions League spot this season.

However, in order to judge whether or not Arteta is moving the team in the right direction, a significant step forward must be made. Breaking the 70-point barrier in the league feels like a good benchmark to aim for. Should the Spaniard fail to achieve this, it is likely that the coming season will indicate that a new head coach is required at the Emirates. If Arteta manages it, however, then perhaps the Gunners are on the right course after all, even if they end up arriving a little late.