Arsenal Transfer Rumours And General Chat

Mossy Monk · 02-09-2007 11:27PM

Looking at the tv schedules and I see neither Sky or Setanta will be showing the north London derby. Pricks.

kryogen · 03-09-2007 03:02AM

you will be able to watch it online im sure, ill post a link for you.

http://livefooty.doctor-serv.com

Mossy Monk · 03-09-2007 10:57AM

I know but the picture is generally ****.

gosplan · 03-09-2007 10:57AM

Pepe LeFrits wrote:

Centre-mids: Fabregas (20), Gilberto (30), Denilson (19), Diaby (21), Flamini (23), Song (19), Diarra (21).

I imagine that it's a case of having 7 centre midfields now and maybe 4 that are capable of improving(or are already at) title winning form.

Essentially, a midfield combination of Fabregas and Gilberto is good enough to win the title but none of the others are yet.

Gilberto has maybe two years left in him and Febregas while ruling all may not be at Arsenal in a few years.

I think part of buying loads of youngsters is you don't know how they'll develop. A great 19 year old does not always turn into a complete midfielder at the age of 25. The worrying thing is obviously that they need gametime.

That said, addding yet another does seem like overkill. I think that the Diarra thing is just a great price for a quality player.

You could probably have a great transfer policy of signing players on the cheap after an unsuccssful spell at Chelsea....Parker, Smertin, Kezman, Duff, Crespo, Boulharouz, Johnson, Mutu and so on and so forth.

Pepe LeFrits · 03-09-2007 04:24PM

Anyone know any pubs in Dublin that have satellite and would show the NLD? I'm thinking that place on Parnell Street might be a good shout.

Pepe LeFrits · 03-09-2007 05:15PM

Yeah, Outback (Wool Shed Baa) on Parnell Street has satellite and shows a lot of sport on there (I watched an Arsenal CL game before and they had about 4 games showing concurrently). They update their website (http://www.woolshedbaa.com/wevents.html) weekly with the stuff they're showing in the coming week so that'll be worth checking next week.

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 03-09-2007 05:23PM

I think Pepe has gone crazy, talkin to himself:D

Hobart · 03-09-2007 10:05PM

A quick question for ye Gunners. I was talking to a mate of mine last night in relation to the many signings Wenger has made over the years. We could not come up with one player who cost anywhere near or over £10M. Is there one? Who was the most expensive player Wenger signed?

leninbenjamin · 03-09-2007 10:07PM

Hobart wrote:

A quick question for ye Gunners. I was talking to a mate of mine last night in relation to the many signings Wenger has made over the years. We could not come up with one player who cost anywhere near or over £10M. Is there one? Who was the most expensive player Wenger signed?

Reyes. £12 million i think plus add ons.

Vokes · 03-09-2007 10:07PM

Henry, Wiltord isnt it?

Ah, ok, Reyes it is then.

kryogen · 03-09-2007 10:10PM

yeah Reyes was about 12 million pound sterling, but thats been pretty much it for his big spending, Wiltord was around 9 i think.... he generally snaps them up on the cheap and sells them for nice profit, i.e. Anelka

leninbenjamin · 03-09-2007 10:12PM

SofaKing wrote:

Henry, Wiltord isnt it?

Ah, ok, Reyes it is then.

actually you could be right about Wiltord. i remember Reyes at the time being touted as the most expensive, but i think the add ons were being included, so they were mentioning the possible £17m, not the actual figure. Wikipedia has wiltord as having transferred at £13m

anyway, Henry, Reyes, Wiltord are the only one's i can think of who were above 10million

kryogen · 03-09-2007 10:15PM

i thought it was 17 million euro? and 12 million pounds? meh..... the main point is that no he doesnt ever spend alot of money on players! didnt even know henry was above 10 million!

Hobart · 03-09-2007 10:19PM

Wiltord I honestly forgot about. I thought Henry was cheaper than he was (10.5). Cheers for the answers.

Galvasean · 04-09-2007 12:17AM

As far as I know:
Reyes: £12m (+add ons however not all add ons were reached before he moved on)
Wiltord: £11m
Henry: £9m (possibly less)
Francis Jeffers : £8m (wasted)
Richard Wright: £6m (wasted)

However for every bad transfer don't forget that Fabregas only costed 50k

Royale with Cheese · 04-09-2007 12:27AM

Fabregas was about 2 million wasn't he?

Wenger's best ever deal was buying Anelka for 500k and selling him for 21 million

Fuzzy_Dunlop · 04-09-2007 12:44AM

Galvasean wrote:

However for every bad transfer don't forget that Fabregas only costed 50k

An don't forget Van Persie 2.5 million, Toure 500k(ish?), Clichy free(or so sky sports say, actually thought he cost a little bit at least) etc.

kryogen · 04-09-2007 01:41AM

Royale with Cheese wrote:

Fabregas was about 2 million wasn't he?

Wenger's best ever deal was buying Anelka for 500k and selling him for 21 million

without a doubt the best bit of business hes done financially in the transfer market! i do have a question actually, considering he spends little, that you are a successful team over the last decade and would receive plenty of sponsorship and prize money, and he has made a couple of major profit sales in the transfer market....i hear the wages are well structured too mind...... how come you always hear that you guys have financial issues??

where does the money go?

Joeyjoejoe43 · 04-09-2007 05:14AM

The new Emirates stadium has eaten up a lot of the cash, plus I dont think Wenger goes in for over-priced players in the same way the other teams do, he prefers to buy potential and his eye for potential is unrivaled by any manager in the world IMHO. I reckon even if he had say 100 million pounds to spend, he'd be hard pressed to spend it all, he's too shrewd... Best ever Arsenal manager, lets hope we can hold onto him..

Pepe LeFrits · 04-09-2007 07:26AM

Hleb was 10m too... well, technically it was something like 9.99975m, so for betting purposes...

gosplan · 04-09-2007 08:40AM

kryogen wrote:

without a doubt the best bit of business hes done financially in the transfer market! i do have a question actually, considering he spends little, that you are a successful team over the last decade and would receive plenty of sponsorship and prize money, and he has made a couple of major profit sales in the transfer market....i hear the wages are well structured too mind...... how come you always hear that you guys have financial issues??

where does the money go?

To my knowledge Arsenal are only just in the red, and that's with building a new stadium.

Very astute comments from Wenger a few days ago about the financial bottom line in clubs. Arsenal, for me, (along with being the world's greatest ever football team) are the best run club in business terms. There are a lot of clubs that are surviving on massive handouts from chairmen or are deeply deeply in debt. Neither one of these is a solid foundation for success.

Man U are in a situation where they have to get Ferguesons replacement right first time. A couple of years off the top and out of the CL and they'd be in deep deep sh*t.

Chelsea pretty much are Abramovich now. He's got enough money where he can afford to make a loss for ever and not worry but it's all pretty much down to him.

Galvasean · 04-09-2007 10:43AM

Royale with Cheese wrote:

Fabregas was about 2 million wasn't he?

Nope, they just need to buy out his youth contract at Barcelona. Only costed about 50 grand

Gangsta · 04-09-2007 12:20PM

I agree with most of what you say gosplan but in fairness, Chelsea have a plan where they will eventually breakeven. By 2010 or something like that isn't it?

gosplan · 04-09-2007 12:58PM

Gangsta wrote:

I agree with most of what you say gosplan but in fairness, Chelsea have a plan where they will eventually breakeven. By 2010 or something like that isn't it?

Yeah but it depends on a lot of things.

Mainly having a good youth system(nothing there yet) and somehow lowering wages dramatically while staying competitive.

There's nothing like a good plan though(see sig)

Noelie · 04-09-2007 01:00PM

Gangsta wrote:

I agree with most of what you say gosplan but in fairness, Chelsea have a plan where they will eventually breakeven. By 2010 or something like that isn't it?

Well they claim that they will cover their costs every year. But that's kind of cheating as they just write off any debt from before that point and then say our income is higher than out goings.

No other club can just ask daddy for 500million to get a team together and then claim to be breaking even after a set date.

Royale with Cheese · 04-09-2007 01:08PM

Exactly. If Chelsea were a normal club they'd have to pay that £500m+ back at some stage and that's never going to happen. They can talk about breaking even in the future but they'll never turn a £500m+ profit in the next 200 years.

Galvasean · 04-09-2007 01:19PM

I still remember Mourinho's taunt at Wenger after the Carling Cup final:
"I wish i had five years to build a team without winning any championships"
:rolleyes: Yes and I bet Wenger wouldn't mind unlimited transfer funds too.

PDN · 04-09-2007 01:29PM

Galvasean wrote:

I still remember Mourinho's taunt at Wenger after the Carling Cup final:
"I wish i had five years to build a team without winning any championships"
:rolleyes: Yes and I bet Wenger wouldn't mind unlimited transfer funds too.

Did you hear the interview on Skynews this morning where Wenger said he didn't want a lot of money for transfers? I think he prefers the challenge of picking out youngsters who have the potential to be world beaters.

I would hate Arsenal to get a rich sugar daddy like Abramovich & start throwing hundreds of millions around.

AnCapaillMor · 04-09-2007 01:39PM

Gangsta wrote:

I agree with most of what you say gosplan but in fairness, Chelsea have a plan where they will eventually breakeven. By 2010 or something like that isn't it?

Like the others said, break even by 2010, basically not make a loss come in 2010. It'll take a hell of alot longer to repay the 500M+, they would have accrued if it were'nt for roman.

About wenger, i'd like to a few more home players, i.e. english, altho apparently the youth team is 90% english and looks very promising.

PDN · 04-09-2007 01:52PM

AnCapaillMor wrote:

About wenger, i'd like to a few more home players, i.e. english, altho apparently the youth team is 90% english and looks very promising.

The thing is that a 'promising' young English (or Irish) player is unlikely to be good enough to play for Arsenal. That's why the likes of Stokes & Bentley have to eventually go elsewhere to become Premiership players (although Hoyte & Walcott may prove me wrong!).

Arsenal Transfer Rumours And General Chat

Comments