Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread Summer 2015

batistuta9

cson wrote: »

Serious outlay back then though; that'd have been a significant % of our turnover way back when.

bought out of the 50mil danny fiszman gave the club.

greendom

So Schneiderlin ends up at United. Don't care, as long as we get Vidal !

Ed Winchester

greendom wrote: »

So Schneiderlin ends up at United. Don't care, as long as we get Vidal !

Confirmed?

greendom

Ed Winchester wrote: »

Confirmed?

should have started that sentence with If

Ed Winchester

greendom wrote: »

should have started that sentence with If

Ah! Still hopeful so.

On that note. Are Man Utd still THAT much more attractive than us these days. Obviously they have the name and the history etc. But we are massively attractive to the biggest names now surely. We have our own history, beautiful stadium, the manager, the squad, Champions League, London etc.

gosplan

greendom wrote: »

So Schneiderlin ends up at United. Don't care, as long as we get Vidal !

I don't think Wenger is into Schneiderlin tbh. He's had plenty of time to go for him over the last couple of seasons.

Pudders

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

Can I ask a question...if we signed the DM everyone was on about in January...let's say William Carvalho for arguments sake....um how many would be calling for a second top DM to be signed. My money would be on majority saying Arteta is a fine back up etc etc. why isn't he now? Is it because people aren't convinced by Coquelin?? Before Coquelin's emergence there was no one calling for two new DM's worth 20 million. Dunno if this is an area of priority at all.

A huge priority still in my view.

Flaminin isn't up to it. When he resigned a few years ago as a free it was worth a punt. Everyone loved him because he did something other players weren't doing. Tackling, winning dirty ball etc but in truth he is /was not world class but was an improvement on what we had. He is now passed it I'm afraid. He looked terrible late in the season.
Arteta's injuries mean you at best will get 20 games out of him. He also was overran in the big games.
Coquelin did great and would have no qualms about him but we need someone alongside him.

Other than striker, I think it is the most important position for us to fill.

Pudders

gosplan wrote: »

I don't think Wenger is into Schneiderlin tbh. He's had plenty of time to go for him over the last couple of seasons.

Wenger dithers too much. One of his biggest faults.

CatInABox

https://twitter.com/bbcsport_david/status/614346566606934016


Excellent.

L'prof

Ed Winchester wrote: »

Ah! Still hopeful so.

On that note. Are Man Utd still THAT much more attractive than us these days. Obviously they have the name and the history etc. But we are massively attractive to the biggest names now surely. We have our own history, beautiful stadium, the manager, the squad, Champions League, London etc.

If United are in the CL, then yes they are. In the last 10 years they've won 5 leagues, 3 League Cups and been in 3 CL finals winning 1. I wish it wasn't the case but it'll take a period of massive success to shift that!

bad2dabone

L'prof wrote: »

If United are in the CL, then yes they are. In the last 10 years they've won 5 leagues, 3 League Cups and been in 3 CL finals winning 1. I wish it wasn't the case but it'll take a period of massive success to shift that!

And fair play to them for it.

For some reason I'd still rather play for arsenal...

Although it's looking less and less likely.that wenger will sign me with each passing season

greendom

L'prof wrote: »

If United are in the CL, then yes they are. In the last 10 years they've won 5 leagues, 3 League Cups and been in 3 CL finals winning 1. I wish it wasn't the case but it'll take a period of massive success to shift that!

for sure, but the gap has begun to close post Fergie.

Drexel

Pudders wrote: »

Wenger dithers too much. One of his biggest faults.

You couldn't possibly know this

Pepe LeFrits

It's not dithering if he just doesn't rate him.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/33282159

De-lighted.

Ken Shamrock

Petr Cech making his way to Arsenal

Skylinehead

Ah the famous Arsenal Snail returns :pac:

greendom

Just look how he commands that snail though - quality purchase

gosplan

Pudders wrote: »

Wenger dithers too much. One of his biggest faults.

And one of his biggest assets is he judges a player properly rather than being in a rediculous hurry to sign the next best PL player outside the top four.

Ken Shamrock

gosplan wrote: »

And one of his biggest assets is he judges a player properly rather than being in a rediculous hurry to sign the next best PL player outside the top four.

I think there is a perfect inbetween, he's let the ball drop on a few players and he's also avoided splashing out on a few one season wonders.

gosplan

L'prof wrote: »

If United are in the CL, then yes they are. In the last 10 years they've won 5 leagues, 3 League Cups and been in 3 CL finals winning 1. I wish it wasn't the case but it'll take a period of massive success to shift that!

None of that really matters though.

They spend about 40% more than us on wages.

Ken Shamrock

gosplan wrote: »

None of that really matters though.

They spend about 40% more than us on wages.

A baffling thing to say

What relevance does the net spend on wages being a lot higher than ours have in regard to being an attractive club? Other than being attractive?

irelandrover

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

A baffling thing to say

What relevance does the net spend on wages being a lot higher than ours have in regard to being an attractive club? Other than being attractive?

They pay more, so are more attractive to players. I thought that was obvious to be honest.

What relevance does the previous 10 years under one of the most successful managers in history have to do with how attractive a club is?

As a player now, I'd find Arsenal a more attractive club. And its a mixture of everything. Van Gaal doesn't appear to be a good manager to work under and has fallen out with a lot of players. The club looks to be going through a transition. Arsenal are a settled team, who seem loyal to their players, and are based in London. And they also look teh more likely to challenge for teh title next year.

And before you say that i'm biased towards Arsenal, I'm a Blackburn fan.

gosplan

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

A baffling thing to say

What relevance does the net spend on wages being a lot higher than ours have in regard to being an attractive club? Other than being attractive?

What are you asking here? Other than being attractive, how does paying players more make them attractive?

I don't understand.

Ken Shamrock

irelandrover wrote: »

They pay more, so are more attractive to players. I thought that was obvious to be honest.

What relevance does the previous 10 years under one of the most successful managers in history have to do with how attractive a club is?

As a player now, I'd find Arsenal a more attractive club. And its a mixture of everything. Van Gaal doesn't appear to be a good manager to work under and has fallen out with a lot of players. The club looks to be going through a transition. Arsenal are a settled team, who seem loyal to their players, and are based in London. And they also look teh more likely to challenge for teh title next year.

And before you say that i'm biased towards Arsenal, I'm a Blackburn fan.

Is that not what I just said in the above post no???

What relevance does a clubs history have to how attractive they are? A lot! Most players playing football now grew up when Manchester United were one of the most dominating sides in football, they are known by everyone, they are a huge club with a huge following and seemingly an endless supply of funds, they pay huge wages and are in the CL with a more realistic chance of getting anywhere than we are If history is anything to go by.

For a club going through a transition they still managed to have a decent season last year no? I'm not saying United are a more attractive club than us, I was baffled at Gosplan saying their history doesn't matter and said that surely the fact they have a higher wage bill just makes them more attractive but If you want to take that as me saying Man U are a more attractive club than Arsenal and I don't understand that a team who pay high wages are attractive then fair enough?

It makes no odds to me or this conversation who you support?

Ken Shamrock

gosplan wrote: »

What are you asking here? Other than being attractive, how does paying players more make them attractive?

I don't understand.

I was asking what the relevance of your statement was?

gosplan

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

I was asking what the relevance of your statement was?

History matters to fans.

Money matters to players.

Look how hard it is for Liverpool to sign top players and look at their history.

Look at how attractive Chelsea and City made themselves so quickly.

Di Maria and Falcao didn't give a **** about the Fergie years. Not being in the CL didn't matter. Te club is prepared to spend big money. That's what tells players they'll be both rich and successful.

gosplan

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

I'm not saying United are a more attractive club than us, I was baffled at Gosplan saying their history doesn't matter and said that surely the fact they have a higher wage bill just makes them more attractive but If you want to take that as me saying Man U are a more attractive club than Arsenal and I don't understand that a team who pay high wages are attractive then fair enough?

It makes no odds to me or this conversation who you support?

Argh. What are you even saying here?

I'm saying Utd's finances are what define them as an attractive club, not their trophy cabinet.

That's all.

I'm not sure if you're agreeing, disagreeing or saying it's an irrelevant point.

Soups123

gosplan wrote: »

History matters to fans.

Money matters to players.

Look how hard it is for Liverpool to sign top players and look at their history.

Look at how attractive Chelsea and City made themselves so quickly.

Di Maria and Falcao didn't give a **** about the Fergie years. Not being in the CL didn't matter. Te club is prepared to spend big money. That's what tells players they'll be both rich and successful.

Thats way to simplistic. Money is not all that matters.

Do think if WestHam or Stoke offered the same money to Di Maria or Falcao they would go there?

Money is important put players will look to club status and future direction to a point, Man City and Chelsea signed players because they had money and were going to sign more players of that quality to gain success.

I dont think history plays a huge part but its not all about money

gosplan

Soups123 wrote: »

Thats way to simplistic. Money is not all that matters.

Do think if WestHam or Stoke offered the same money to Di Maria or Falcao they would go there?

Money is important put players will look to club status and future direction to a point, Man City and Chelsea signed players because they had money and were going to sign more players of that quality to gain success.

I dont think history plays a huge part but its not all about money

That's why I added that the club needs to be prepared to spend big money.

Making one player rich isn't enough. You have to show that you're going to keep spending and buy an continually upgrade a successful team.

If West Ham could manage that, then players would sign for them, just like Chelses and City.

gosplan

Look to be honest, I think clubs like Chelsea, City and PSG and the ease with which they started signing world class talent kind of proves my point tbh.

Makelele left Real because they weren't paying him enough ... For Chelsea.


I got into this because someone asked the Utd vrs Arsenal question in terms of attractiveness to prospective players.

My initial point is that Utd would just offer the player more and that would be that.

Roaster

Getting back to the midfielder discussion, I have a feeling AW won't buy and will promote Belik into the squad. I hope I'm wrong as I think it's very high expectation on a 17 year old, especially if Coq gets injured. Reason I say this is because he had him training with the first team from the moment we signed him.

Ken Shamrock

gosplan wrote: »

History matters to fans.

Money matters to players.

Look how hard it is for Liverpool to sign top players and look at their history.

Look at how attractive Chelsea and City made themselves so quickly.

Di Maria and Falcao didn't give a **** about the Fergie years. Not being in the CL didn't matter. Te club is prepared to spend big money. That's what tells players they'll be both rich and successful.

See soups reply.

gosplan wrote: »

Argh. What are you even saying here?

I'm saying Utd's finances are what define them as an attractive club, not their trophy cabinet.

That's all.

I'm not sure if you're agreeing, disagreeing or saying it's an irrelevant point.

Haha now I'm very confused as well, I though you were saying "United's history doesn't matter" we are the more attractive club "sure they spend 40% more on wages than we do".

Which made no sense to me why you'd put them two sentences together. I agree with you that Uniteds money is more attractive but I though you were saying the opposite.

Spanish Johnny

Pudders wrote: »

A huge priority still in my view.

Flaminin isn't up to it. When he resigned a few years ago as a free it was worth a punt. Everyone loved him because he did something other players weren't doing. Tackling, winning dirty ball etc but in truth he is /was not world class but was an improvement on what we had. He is now passed it I'm afraid. He looked terrible late in the season.
Arteta's injuries mean you at best will get 20 games out of him. He also was overran in the big games.
Coquelin did great and would have no qualms about him but we need someone alongside him.

Other than striker, I think it is the most important position for us to fill.

Agree completely on Flamini. but if Arteta does even play 20 games then ud expect Coquelin to play 35 anyway. Where does anyone else fit in now is my question?

if he has Coquelin has our main DM and Arteta as back up then he can play Ramsey/Cazorla/Wilshere/Rosicky/Ox in the middle too as a ppartner.Again I am just curious where do people see the room for the likes of Schneiderlin?

Or who gives way? We can all say Arteta fair enough but he recently signed a 1 year extension so lets be realistic....Arteta id staying and he is the club captain.

Cazorla was immense along side Coquelin last season in the middle...Ramsey the natural long term option ud think and Wilshere suited to that role as well. Ozil untouchable in the position further forward.

gosplan

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

See soups reply.



Haha now I'm very confused as well, I though you were saying "United's history doesn't matter" we are the more attractive club "sure they spend 40% more on wages than we do".

Which made no sense to me why you'd put them two sentences together. I agree with you that Uniteds money is more attractive but I though you were saying the opposite.

Ah OK, cheers.

gosplan

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

Agree completely on Flamini. but if Arteta does even play 20 games then ud expect Coquelin to play 35 anyway. Where does anyone else fit in now is my question?

if he has Coquelin has our main DM and Arteta as back up then he can play Ramsey/Cazorla/Wilshere/Rosicky/Ox in the middle too as a ppartner.Again I am just curious where do people see the room for the likes of Schneiderlin?

Or who gives way? We can all say Arteta fair enough but he recently signed a 1 year extension so lets be realistic....Arteta id staying and he is the club captain.

Cazorla was immense along side Coquelin last season in the middle...Ramsey the natural long term option ud think and Wilshere suited to that role as well. Ozil untouchable in the position further forward.

Is Flamini out of contract or one more year.

I think a new CMF signing like Vidal/Bender/Schneiderlin should be top priority either way.

Otherwise we are placing all our hopes on getting an entire season out of a 24 year old DMF who's played half a season at the required standard.

Ken Shamrock

gosplan wrote: »

Is Flamini out of contract or one more year.

I think a new CMF signing like Vidal/Bender/Schneiderlin should be top priority either way.

Otherwise we are placing all our hopes on getting an entire season out of a 24 year old DMF who's played half a season at the required standard.

Exactly, If people are expecting Coq and Arteta to be able to rotate between the games that suit their style without picking up injuries or suspensions they are deluded. DMF has been a top priority for so many years now.

Just because Coq has emerged and had a great season doesn't change that. As much as I love the guy.

Spanish Johnny

gosplan wrote: »

Is Flamini out of contract or one more year.

I think a new CMF signing like Vidal/Bender/Schneiderlin should be top priority either way.

Otherwise we are placing all our hopes on getting an entire season out of a 24 year old DMF who's played half a season at the required standard.

so ideally people see Coquelin as a number 2 and who ever comes in will be expected to perform to a higher level than he has over the past 6 months.

surely a Vidal and to a lesser extent Schneiderlin are not ideal DMs in the Coq mould that has proved so effective for us though? realistically one of those signings is more competition for Ramsey/Wilshere/Cazorla, particularly Vidal who is no DM.

gosplan

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

so ideally people see Coquelin as a number 2 and who ever comes in will be expected to perform to a higher level than he has over the past 6 months.

surely a Vidal and to a lesser extent Schneiderlin are not ideal DMs in the Coq mould that has proved so effective for us though? realistically one of those signings is more competition for Ramsey/Wilshere/Cazorla, particularly Vidal who is no DM.

No I'd see Coq as number 1. He's been rediculously good tbh.

We just have no decent backup to him.

I'd buy a young physical player who can play CMF or perhaps DMF for a spell.

emergingstar

Would love Vidal

carltonleon

gosplan wrote: »

No I'd see Coq as number 1. He's been rediculously good tbh.

We just have no decent backup to him.

I'd buy a young physical player who can play CMF or perhaps DMF for a spell.

Someone like Carvalho, for instance

Ken Shamrock

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

so ideally people see Coquelin as a number 2 and who ever comes in will be expected to perform to a higher level than he has over the past 6 months.

surely a Vidal and to a lesser extent Schneiderlin are not ideal DMs in the Coq mould that has proved so effective for us though? realistically one of those signings is more competition for Ramsey/Wilshere/Cazorla, particularly Vidal who is no DM.

For me, It doesn't have to be as black and white as he's going to be our number one and he's going to be no.2 We have a stacked midfield, With Coq,Arteta,Flamini,Ramsey,Wilshere,Cazorla,Ox,Ozil,Rosicky all fighting for a starting spot.

However, there's essentially only 1 worthy DM in their, and Is not proven consistently at the top level (1 good season). The pivot combinations from that group are also not very effective defensively.

So adding a world class CMF, preferably a DM, possibly a box to box E.G. Vidal, greatly strengthens our options in numerous ways.

ronjo

emergingstar wrote: »

Would love Vidal

I think he would be great....... Could play alongside Coquelin or instead of in certain games.

Spanish Johnny

ronjo wrote: »

I think he would be great....... Could play alongside Coquelin or instead of in certain games.

Don't think Vidal has the discipline though to be our most defensive midfielder. be equivalent of having Ramsey in the same role. too box to box orientated. we would be back to our old failings and get slaughtered with a counter attack.

I think we do need someone that has the same destroyer type instincts as Coq as the back up. for me it doesn't have to be world class. a Wanyama type figure as 2nd choice and something different to the rest of our midfielders would do much more for our squad and title chances than adding a player to fight with Wilshere, Ramsey and co.

Ken Shamrock

Spanish Johnny wrote: »

Don't think Vidal has the discipline though to be our most defensive midfielder. be equivalent of having Ramsey in the same role. too box to box orientated. we would be back to our old failings and get slaughtered with a counter attack.

I think we do need someone that has the same destroyer type instincts as Coq as the back up. for me it doesn't have to be world class. a Wanyama type figure as 2nd choice and something different to the rest of our midfielders would do much more for our squad and title chances than adding a player to fight with Wilshere, Ramsey and co.

Or when one person goes forward the other stays back, instead of having every midfielder forward and mertesacker on the attack. :pac: There is nothing wrong with playing a pivot, It has worked in many many top teams, you just need two players with the discipline and awareness to play it properly.

Ramsey and Wilshire never clicked. I'd be confident that someone like Vidal could make It work. Worst case scenario is Vidal plays ahead of Ramsey or Coq, I'd be fine with that. Don't see how Wanyama would add anything to our squad.

salmocab

I know its early doors but I would like to see a bit more movement transfer wise, Liverpool I think are doing a good job so far in fairness to them. It would be nice to wrap up Cech and get moving on another target as it seems we can only concentrate on one transfer at a time. I think the plan will be if he could get the midfielder that everyone is talking about then he might take his time over a striker and be ready with cash late in the window if something comes up like the Ozil deal. I also have a suspicion that a real left winger might come in. For the DM someone like Carvalho might be ideal as apparently he can also cover CH which would leave us with good strength there along with Mert Kos Gabriel and Chambers.

tayto lover

I said ages ago that Wenger will not buy a DM and i'm sticking to that.
Even though we do need one imo.
Just wait untill Coq is out for a month or two and it will have become obvious.
Arteta will be ok against a few teams but the big boys will walk through us with him there.

Quazzie

Why do we need a DM when we have Coq and Arteta? We also have Flamini to back up those two. That's 3 players for one position.

smilerf

Well lads haven't posted on this forum in long time due to various reasons.

My view on the dm situation I'd be happy with Imbula for 15 Million

We definitely need a top class striker. Like many here I think Giroud is a very good forward but top class striker no.
Lacazette or Benzema would be unreal

Spanish Johnny

Bob.Carcass wrote: »

Or when one person goes forward the other stays back, instead of having every midfielder forward and mertesacker on the attack. :pac: There is nothing wrong with playing a pivot, It has worked in many many top teams, you just need two players with the discipline and awareness to play it properly.

Ramsey and Wilshire never clicked. I'd be confident that someone like Vidal could make It work. Worst case scenario is Vidal plays ahead of Ramsey or Coq, I'd be fine with that. Don't see how Wanyama would add anything to our squad.

A Wanyama type player does what Coq does basically. breaks it up and knows his role. has the discipline to stay where he belongs and has no notions up the field.

Ramsey is neglectful of his duties even when played ahead of Coquelin. Ramsey as our deepest lying midfielder would be suicide.

Alfred Borden

Arteta played 452 minutes in the league last year. I dont think thats someone we should pitch our hopes on imo