In the complex world of football management, the tale of Unai Emery and Mikel Arteta provides a fascinating study in contrasts. Today’s clash between Aston Villa and Arsenal serves as a poignant reminder of how two managers with similar coaching methods can experience vastly different outcomes at the helm of a Premier League giant.

Emery arrived at Arsenal with a wealth of experience and honours to boot. He brought with him a staunch play-the-ball-from-the-back philosophy that would have had even Arsene Wenger watching through his fingers. I lost count of the goals conceded before they could even get out of their area, let alone halfway, ultimately leading to Emery’s departure.

“So then, Mr Mikel, as you know we have been struggling of late. We feel like the tactics are not working, and we are conceding too many goals. What playing style would you adopt should we consider you for this role?” I imagine to be the first question asked at his interview.

“The same,” would be Mikel’s response. Because this is exactly how we still play. So what really is the difference between the two?

When Emery stepped into the shoes of the legendary Arsene Wenger at Arsenal, the expectations were astronomical. The pressure to supersede the iconic Frenchman was a weighty burden. One could argue that Emery’s stumbling block at Arsenal was a confluence of factors. The language barrier, though gradually improving, posed challenges in communicating his vision effectively.

Yet, in my opinion, there is only one major difference. The personnel on the pitch.

Emery’s attempt to implement a playing-out-from-the-back philosophy clashed with the established habits of seasoned players. Trying to teach old dogs new tricks is no small feat, especially when the stakes are as high as they are at a club like Arsenal. The tactical shift was a seismic change that didn’t resonate with the existing squad.

Enter Mikel Arteta. In his managerial debut, Arteta did something that Emery struggled with – he fearlessly wiped the slate clean. The old guard, including the captain and top goalscorer, were casualties of Arteta’s rebuilding project. It was a bold move, and feathers were ruffled. Yet, it was a necessary step in the transformation of Arsenal’s identity.

Arteta, unafraid to make tough decisions, favored young blood over established names. He sought players who could be molded into his vision of dynamic, possession-based football. This willingness to disrupt the status quo set the stage for a cultural shift at the Emirates.

The contrast in approaches between Emery and Arteta raises questions about the delicate balance between tactical philosophy and player adaptation. It’s not just about coaching methods; it’s about how those methods align with the squad at hand. Arteta’s success at Arsenal, post-Emery, serves as a testament to the impact a change in personnel and culture can have on a team’s fortunes. One would argue that Emery wasn’t given the time (18 months) to really make his mark. In Arteta’s first 18 months, the league form was no better. Remarkable then what an FA Cup win can do to your fortunes. Yet of the 12 signings Emery made, only two remain, albeit an amazing duo in Saliba and Martinelli. The old guard were experienced internationals I hear you say. Some of the 12 players are top footballers with great potential. Why can’t they adapt and play football?

Amidst the ongoing narrative, a current debate echoes through the Emirates— the choice between goalkeepers Raya and Ramsdale. The discussion highlights the nuanced decisions managers face, especially when it comes to positions crucial for defensive stability. In the eyes of many, both goalkeepers seem to operate at a similar level, yet the choice is crucial.

This debate harkens back to the decision to part ways with Martinez, now a World Cup winner and arguably Argentina’s hero after Messi and excelling at Aston Villa. His brief spell between the sticks at Arsenal impressed many of the Arsenal faithful and helped the team to an impromptu FA Cup win. Yet Mikel thought it best to bring in new blood in that position too. If you were to ask me who has the better goalkeeper in today’s game, I would lean towards Martinez. It raises questions about the criteria beyond just skill and age. Could it be that Arteta, in reshaping the team, places significant emphasis on the intangible qualities of personality and temperament? The departure of Martinez, a former Arsenal player, suggests that Arteta’s vision extends beyond the pitch, focusing on building a squad not just of talented individuals but of cohesive personalities. No room for egos, and definitely no room for lateness, Mr Aubameyang.

As Emery leads Aston Villa with newfound success, it’s a reminder that sometimes, the right fit is everything. The unique challenges posed by each club require a manager who not only understands the game but can navigate the intricacies of the dressing room. In the ever-evolving landscape of English football, Emery and Arteta stand as compelling case studies. Their paths have diverged, but the lessons from their respective journeys offer invaluable insights into the nuanced art of football management. The game is not just about tactics on the field; it’s about managing personalities, forging a cohesive unit, and finding the delicate balance that unlocks a team’s true potential. One aggrieved influential player can spread his negativity like the flu and cause fractions. Just ask Erik Ten Hag.