This Summer's Transfer Saga: Suarez to Arsenal?

Blatter

meriwether wrote: »

Really?

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-last-five-seasons.html

Have a look at the respective wage bills over that period.

Looking at the wage bills shows that he's done an acceptable job, no more.

Paul Tergat

meriwether wrote: »

Really?

http://www.transferleague.co.uk/league-tables/transfer-league-table-last-five-seasons.html

maybe im reading that wrong but is that not since 2003?

meriwether

Paul Tergat wrote: »

maybe im reading that wrong but is that not since 2003?

Id say you're reading that correctly, full spending for the last ten years. A long time.

Its indisputable that Spurs have heavily outspent us since 2003. Ten years.

Over ten years Spurs have outspent Arsenal and finished behind them every year.

meriwether

Blatter wrote: »

Have a look at the respective wage bills over that period.

Can you post the link to them for me please?

I cant find them, as I went off to look for them after you told me to do so. So you might furnish me with them please, as they appear to be in your possession.

AdamD

Blatter wrote: »

Not really.

If you look at the value for money the likes of Juve and Dortmund have gotten, Wenger's spending has been average.

So anything below the 2 outstanding teams in the transfer market in recent years is average? Odd definition.

Zico

Paul Tergat wrote: »

maybe im reading that wrong but is that not since 2003?

Looks like someone with an agenda put those stats together to suit themselves.

Stoke City 3rd?

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

Hidalgo

Zico wrote: »

Looks like someone with an agenda put those stats together to suit themselves.

Stoke City 3rd?

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

When it comes to buying ans selling, Villa from the Martin O'Neill and Stoke have a terrible record, large outlays and then getting rid of the same player for a fraction of what they paid, then big wages on top of that.

Last year Pulis was complaining that Stoke can't compete with Arsenal after Wenger bought Monreal saying that Stoke can't afford to spend that kind of money on a FB. If his dealings in the market were better he could have.

gosplan

Blatter wrote: »

Not really.

If you look at the value for money the likes of Juve and Dortmund have gotten, Wenger's spending has been average.

Behind 2 clubs = average?

gosplan

Woops,

Should have read on there. Point already made.

All in all though Blatter, you're being a bit pig headed about this.

Anyone speaking rationally will tell you that Wenger has been well above average, in fact very good, in the transfer market.

It's how they built a stadium and stayed in the top four on zero spend.

Of course, if you're determined to argue that he's likely to be no better than another manager picked at random (average), then you will be able to find flaws such as failed transfers and high wages.

Really though, you're just coming across as quite foolish following this argument.

Arsenal have finished top 4 every year while spending little money. Not many managers would be able to do that.

meriwether

Zico wrote: »

Looks like someone with an agenda put those stats together to suit themselves.

Stoke City 3rd?

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

The stats are for ten years. The stats are accurate. There is no agenda. Unless you know better? Please post.

Its a reasonably well known fact that Stoke spent loads under Pulis. It appears to be news to you however.

But, post the real facts if you have them.

rarnes1

rarnes1 wrote: »

Arsenal have finished top 4 every year while spending little money. Not many managers would be able to do that.

On transfers, the wage bill shows that they're where they should be.

meriwether

Deleted User wrote: »

On transfers, the wage bill shows that they're where they should be.

Game attendance wise, they are behind where they should be.

And manager salary wise, they are behind where they should be.

And alphabetically, they are behind where they should be.

We an all invent a metric that suits us to portray whetever we want.

But sometimes, one has to stand back, and in this case, only a blithering idiot would argue Wenger hasn't overachieved in maintaining CL football while paying off a new stadium.

A new stadium Liverpool couldn't build, and Spurs haven't started yet.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

On transfers, the wage bill shows that they're where they should be.

So wages and transfers combined is it?

Throw up a link there until we have a look

Reekwind

Guys, can we save this stuff for the 'Wenger out' thread that will inevitably greet the new season? For now I think the only point worth making is that Arsenal are a consistent CL team and Liverpool are not. Hence the appeal to Suarez

Unless someone really thinks that Andre Santos is weighing on Suarez's mind right now?

Blatter

I'll go into more detail later on when I get home but just a bit on Arsenal re: wages.

Rosicky 80k
Arshavin 75k
Gervinho 60k
Chamakh 60k
Santos 60k
Diaby 60k
Denilson 60k
Djourou 50k
Gibbs 50k
Bendtner 50k
Squillaci 50k
Fabianski 50k
Park 50k


Over the last few years, those players have have either been terrible, or have made very limited contributions. On the other hand you have Tottenham that had a wage bill of £90m in 2011-2012, yet somehow managed to match Arsenal quite closely despite their wage bill being £53m more that season. The wage bill gap might have closed since but not by a whole lot and yet Spurs are still very close. Why are they able to do this? Because they didn't make as many mistakes as Wenger.

I read a few months ago that Arsenal had 15+ players on 60k/week or more while Juventus had 3 (Buffon, Chiellini and Pirlo). I'd believe it's not far from the truth (if not bang on) and that in itself tells you everything you need to know.

gosplan

Blatter wrote: »

I'll go into more detail later on when I get home but just a bit on Arsenal re: wages.

Rosicky 80k
Arshavin 75k
Gervinho 60k
Chamakh 60k
Santos 60k
Diaby 60k
Denilson 60k
Djourou 50k
Gibbs 50k
Bendtner 50k
Squillaci 50k
Fabianski 50k
Park 50k


Over the last few years, those players have have either been terrible, or have made very limited contributions. On the other hand you have Tottenham that had a wage bill of £90m in 2011-2012, yet somehow managed to match Arsenal quite closely despite their wage bill being £53m more that season. The wage bill gap might have closed since but not by a whole lot and yet Spurs are still very close. Why are they able to do this? Because they didn't make as many mistakes as Wenger.

I read a few months ago that Arsenal had 15+ players on 60k/week or more while Juventus had 3 (Buffon, Chiellini and Pirlo). I'd believe it's not far from the truth (if not bang on) and that in itself tells you everything you need to know.

Why are you comparing them to a league where people are paid less though? It's nonsensical.

Arsenal have the 4th highest wage bill in the premiership ... And they finish 4th.

Obviously you can point to wastage but that's at any club. I agree with you as regards players generally being overpaid but that's long been the methodology at Arsenal. They get young promising players in by offering them a better wage than other places.

Seriously though. Tottenham came close so Wenger is average?

Blatter

gosplan wrote: »

Why are you comparing them to a league where people are paid less though? It's nonsensical.

Arsenal have the 4th highest wage bill in the premiership ... And they finish 4th.

Obviously you can point to wastage but that's at any club. I agree with you as regards players generally being overpaid but that's long been the methodology at Arsenal. They get young promising

I think the above wastage is fairly extreme, for example I don't think Tottenham or United have had anywhere near that level of wastage over the last few years. Chelsea, City and Liverpool have done, but then again they've all been run poorly to a large extent over the last few years so they're not clubs to be looking up to.

If Wenger had been more efficient with his money (like Spurs) he could have been challenging for the title instead of scrapping for 4th.

AdamD

Blatter wrote: »

I'll go into more detail later on when I get home but just a bit on Arsenal re: wages.

Rosicky 80k
Arshavin 75k
Gervinho 60k
Chamakh 60k
Santos 60k
Diaby 60k
Denilson 60k
Djourou 50k
Gibbs 50k
Bendtner 50k
Squillaci 50k
Fabianski 50k
Park 50k


Over the last few years, those players have have either been terrible, or have made very limited contributions. On the other hand you have Tottenham that had a wage bill of £90m in 2011-2012, yet somehow managed to match Arsenal quite closely despite their wage bill being £53m more that season. The wage bill gap might have closed since but not by a whole lot and yet Spurs are still very close. Why are they able to do this? Because they didn't make as many mistakes as Wenger.

I read a few months ago that Arsenal had 15+ players on 60k/week or more while Juventus had 3 (Buffon, Chiellini and Pirlo). I'd believe it's not far from the truth (if not bang on) and that in itself tells you everything you need to know.

I get your point and its an issue only really being properly addressed this summer which is poor. On the bright side the players I've crossed out are now gone :pac: with Gervinho soon to follow

Gibbs is a good player btw

gosplan

Blatter wrote: »

I think the above wastage is fairly extreme, for example I don't think Tottenham or United have had anywhere near that level of wastage over the last few years. Chelsea, City and Liverpool have done, but then again they've all been run poorly to a large extent over the last few years so they're not clubs to be looking up to.

If Wenger had been more efficient with his money (like Spurs) he could have been challenging for the title instead of scrapping for 4th.

So if Arsenal were more like Spurs, we'd be challenging for the title more.

Nice trolling. Enjoy your weekend.

Blatter

AdamD wrote: »

Gibbs is a good player btw

He is but he's hardly ever fit!

gosplan wrote: »

So if Arsenal were more like Spurs, we'd be challenging for the title more.

Nice trolling. Enjoy your weekend.

I said more efficient like Spurs, not 'more like Spurs'.

If Arsenal had their efficiency with money, it'd stand to reason they'd be ahead of them and challenging for the league.

gosplan

Blatter wrote: »

He is but he's hardly ever fit!



I said more efficient like Spurs, not 'more like Spurs'.

If Arsenal had their efficiency with money, it'd stand to reason they'd be ahead of them and challenging for the league.

Erm, we are ahead of them.

But I agree tbh. I've consistently said that Spurs and Levy have done an excellent job with their resources.

A big reason they've closed the gap is that we spend a significant part of each season trying to figure out how to win games once our most important player has departed.

But they've been great and are both punching above their weight financially and setting themselves up for a brighter future.

Still don't get how this makes Wenger average or just satisfactory though?

Liam O

It's gotten a lot harder for Wenger to reach on transfers than it used to. Scouting has gotten hugely more proficient and caught up with him and now he takes higher risks on players when he could take the same amount of risk 10 years ago and nearly be guaranteed at least a good squad player.

He also decided to put a lot of faith in one of his youth classes that was showing a lot of promise and a lot of them didn't work out. He had to because of the aforementioned stadium debt. One of those things, it's a shame that they both overlapped but his transfers last season were very good and this season showing a lot of promise.

speedboatchase

The Mirror claims the next bid will be £42.5m. Another bid that will be rejected. Wenger's readying his "Well, we tried" excuses I'm sure. http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/transfer-news/transfers-luis-suarez-joins-arsenal-2096789

klose

speedboatchase wrote: »

The Mirror claims the next bid will be £42.5m. Another bid that will be rejected. Wenger's readying his "Well, we tried" excuses I'm sure. http://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/transfer-news/transfers-luis-suarez-joins-arsenal-2096789

I dont see the logic in adding 2.5mill more, thats small cash considering they're already in the 40 mill zone

DM_7

klose wrote: »

I dont see the logic in adding 2.5mill more, thats small cash considering they're already in the 40 mill zone

The fact they are in the 40 million zone makes another 2.5 far from small. On the basis that if they take 40 million out of the transfer fund there may not be much left in it.

speedboatchase

DM-ICE wrote: »

The fact they are in the 40 million zone makes another 2.5 far from small. On the basis that if they take 40 million out of the transfer fund there may not be much left in it.

It's small enough to be immediately rejected, which it will be.

Pepe LeFrits

DM-ICE wrote: »

The fact they are in the 40 million zone makes another 2.5 far from small. On the basis that if they take 40 million out of the transfer fund there may not be much left in it.

There'd still be loads of capacity left.

tupac_healy

Somewhat surprised at the title?

Surely Bale to Madrid is going to outlive Suarez to Arsenal? Was even take Bale leaving towards end of las lt season!


I dont think Suarez will be THE saga of the window

JPA

tupac_healy wrote: »

Somewhat surprised at the title?

Surely Bale to Madrid is going to outlive Suarez to Arsenal? Was even take Bale leaving towards end of las lt season!


I dont think Suarez will be THE saga of the window

Suarez to arsenal is more of a talking point than Bale to real which has been on the cards.

tupac_healy

JPA wrote: »

Suarez to arsenal is more of a talking point than Bale to real which has been on the cards.

True, Bale one is a bit protracted in fairness! Not as bad as the Cesc on and off to Barca but it has potential!


Regards Suarez, been banned twice for giving my opinion on that 'man' so going to refrain from commenting at all!!!!!


(But I do hope he leaves the EPL)

Bounty Hunter

tupac_healy wrote: »

Somewhat surprised at the title?

Surely Bale to Madrid is going to outlive Suarez to Arsenal? Was even take Bale leaving towards end of las lt season!


I dont think Suarez will be THE saga of the window

it can be changed :pac:

TimeToShine

tupac_healy wrote: »

Somewhat surprised at the title?

Surely Bale to Madrid is going to outlive Suarez to Arsenal? Was even take Bale leaving towards end of las lt season!


I dont think Suarez will be THE saga of the window

Probably a lot more relevant to users of this forum considering the number of Arsenal and Liverpool supporters there are.

Super-Rush

JPA wrote: »

Suarez to arsenal is more of a talking point than Bale to real which has been on the cards.

Reports now that Spurs turned down an £86 million bid from Real.

That's mad Ted.

They laughed at me when i said Suarez was worth £55/£60 million.

Israeli Superiority

If Bale wants to leave, then Tottenham would be wise to accept it. Personally, I would consider him to be invaluable because I can't see any replacement(s), but if he wants to leave, then that's his Tottenham career over.

super_furry

If Arsenal genuinely want him, they know that they have to pay £50million. Any offer below that and they know it's going to be rejected before they even make it so it's just grandstanding PR from them so they can say - well we tried.

wandatowell

€45m plus a few quid (€5m) in addons, easy peasy

super_furry

wandatowell wrote: »

€45m plus a few quid (€5m) in addons, easy peasy

No really. Liverpool have already rejected a bigger offer than that.

wandatowell

super_furry wrote: »

No really. Liverpool have already rejected a bigger offer than that.

Really?

~Rebel~

wandatowell wrote: »

Really?

45 million euros is 38 million pounds. 40 million (and one) pounds has already been rejected.

In euros, i'd expect the deal to need to be closer to 60m.

meriwether

meriwether wrote: »

Game attendance wise, they are behind where they should be.

And manager salary wise, they are behind where they should be.

And alphabetically, they are behind where they should be.

We an all invent a metric that suits us to portray whetever we want.

But sometimes, one has to stand back, and in this case, only a blithering idiot would argue Wenger hasn't overachieved in maintaining CL football while paying off a new stadium.

A new stadium Liverpool couldn't build, and Spurs haven't started yet.

What metric should we go by? You like to use transfer fees, I think wages are more representative.

rarnes1 wrote: »

So wages and transfers combined is it?

Throw up a link there until we have a look

Look around :pac: Transfer fees, we've done alright, wages, we've done pretty badly. In terms of percentages of turnover and all the rest it's fine, compared to the teams around us we haven't done anything notable for more than a half a dozen years.

Blatter wrote: »

I'll go into more detail later on when I get home but just a bit on Arsenal re: wages.

Rosicky 80k
Arshavin 75k
Gervinho 60k
Chamakh 60k
Santos 60k
Diaby 60k
Denilson 60k
Djourou 50k
Gibbs 50k
Bendtner 50k
Squillaci 50k
Fabianski 50k
Park 50k


Over the last few years, those players have have either been terrible, or have made very limited contributions. On the other hand you have Tottenham that had a wage bill of £90m in 2011-2012, yet somehow managed to match Arsenal quite closely despite their wage bill being £53m more that season. The wage bill gap might have closed since but not by a whole lot and yet Spurs are still very close. Why are they able to do this? Because they didn't make as many mistakes as Wenger.

I read a few months ago that Arsenal had 15+ players on 60k/week or more while Juventus had 3 (Buffon, Chiellini and Pirlo). I'd believe it's not far from the truth (if not bang on) and that in itself tells you everything you need to know.

I will fight you if you diss Rosicky again.

COYVB

Blatter wrote: »

I read a few months ago that Arsenal had 15+ players on 60k/week or more while Juventus had 3 (Buffon, Chiellini and Pirlo). I'd believe it's not far from the truth (if not bang on) and that in itself tells you everything you need to know.

That players in England are insanely overpaid?

DARK-KNIGHT

Super-Rush wrote: »

Reports now that Spurs turned down an £86 million bid from Real.

That's mad Ted.

They laughed at me when i said Suarez was worth £55/£60 million.

55/60 million pounds?? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seriously are you kidding? There's little or no interest in him apart from arsenal which says a lot. If Liverpool have any sense take that 40 million and be glad of it

Nuri Sahin

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

55/60 million pounds?? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seriously are you kidding? There's little or no interest in him apart from arsenal which says a lot. If Liverpool have any sense take that 40 million and be glad of it

Rasta, your fellow Man U supporter was fairly spot on in the other thread.

DARK-KNIGHT

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

55/60 million pounds?? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Seriously are you kidding? There's little or no interest in him apart from arsenal which says a lot. If Liverpool have any sense take that 40 million and be glad of it

How do you know clubs aren't interested in him? Genuine question

CSF

rarnes1 wrote: »

How do you know clubs aren't interested in him? Genuine question

Late July and not a bid in sight makes it seem unlikely.

CSF

CSF wrote: »

Late July and not a bid in sight makes it seem unlikely.

Just because a bid hasn't been made doesn't mean clubs aren't interested Not every club is stupid enough to show their hand.

Clubs that are smart will wait imo, ie Madrid. They'll come in with a bid mid to late August and take him to Spain.

CSF

rarnes1 wrote: »

Just because a bid hasn't been made doesn't mean clubs aren't interested Not every club is stupid enough to show their hand.

Clubs that are smart will wait imo, ie Madrid. They'll come in with a bid mid to late August and take him to Spain.

You could say that about anyone though. Without the slightest indication of interest, it is reasonable to assume that there is none until such indication arises. I mean, we knew Real were interested in Bale before a bid was made.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

It's not really in Liverpool's interest either to be waiting too long for these bids to materialise so that they can replace adequately without doing a mad dash like Arsenal had to two years ago.