Summer Transfers 2025 Missed Opportunities and Regrets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mac76

So there's an additional sticking point with Gyokeres apparently, relating to the terms of the add-ons

This is why I've not been premature about it being done, hopefully it's just a bit of posturing by Sporting but ffs Arsenal don't mess this up over some loose change please

---

It’s virtually there, other reports have stated he has completed his medical at Arsenal yesterday

Bayern Munich have had a bid of over 58 million rejected for Luiz Diaz

Maybe they’ll take Trossard from us instead.

Yeah that's nowhere near enough for him. I wouldn't be surprised if we did sell him, but not for that. That makes Nunez's situation interesting as well as we would be incredibly short up front if we sold him, which was surely happening prior to Jota.

We are being increasingly linked with Rodrygo, but even then we'd need at least one other. Isak would be nice, but unlikely and I just can't see it.

We could do with a centre back tbh **I forgot we're seemingly still getting Guehi. We'll need one next summer when Konate goes then

Ornstein is reporting that Liverpool have approached Newcastle for Isak with a 120m deal on the table.

Damn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marc Overmars

Ornstein is reporting that Liverpool have approached Newcastle for Isak with a 120m deal on the table.

Damn.

---

:crying:

Oooo.

I can't see that being enough, but he doesn't tend to float things unless there's something to it.

I still can't see it, but whilst there's hope

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IBK

OK I'm bored, so...

It makes me smile how fans with no inside knowledge at all make judgments about how we approach transfer business in such a black and white fashion based on their perceptions of our needs. I get that we need a striker of course, but making assumptions about the negotiations for Madueke and those for Gyokeres, and slamming the club for their alleged different approach in these is IMHO misguided and unjustified. Firstly, what is key in any negotiation is what Arsenal's valuation of a player is. It has been reported that the club believe they have secured a ‘great deal’ with Chelsea and are excited by the versatility that Madueke possesses. Also, that the structure of the Madueke deal - £48.5 million up front, likely in instalments, with £3.5 million in performance related add-ons’ on top of this - is such that it allows Arsenal to move for Eze.

If you look at Madueke as a cheaper, versatile option with potential to improve in a far healthier environment and with an excellent coach in Arteta than say Rogrigo - that retains the club's ability to move for Eze - the deal starts to look very different.

Then you have the selling club. While many Gooners don't want Arsenal to do business with Chelsea (I couldn't care less who we deal with if we get the player the manager wants), the fact is that we have a good relationship with them, and it is quite possible - particularly given that they were keen on selling him - that they simply didn't go the traditional route of slapping an overvaluation on him and then having to be negotiated down. A quick deal does not necessarily mean that we overpaid, and I emphasise again that Arsenal do not have a track record of overpaying for players - quite the opposite. I'm sorry, but the theory I have seen that we somehow were open to doing Chelsea a favour is ridiculous. We wanted the player, the deal was in line with our valuation, and we landed him.

Turning to Gyokores, the situation is clearly different in that we have a valuation that Sporting has been unwilling to meet. Sporting is a notoriously difficult club to deal with and this, not adopting a different approach to Madueke, is the reason why matters have become protracted.

Then the perceived merits of the 2 players. We lack a striker for sure, but this need was hugely exacerbated last season by the long term injuries to Jesus and Havertz. We are not a team that depends on a 30 goal a season striker - I have argued previously that 15-20 goals would be sufficient to elevate us to where we need to get to. In terms of importance, you could turn things around and argue that of all our injuries last season - that of our best player, Saka, was the most significant reaon why we didn't win silverware. Madueke is clearly being brought in to relieve the burden on Saka, potentially to provide an option on the LW also; to add unpredictablility and pace to our team and to try to mitigate against key injuries next season. There is an argument that this is equally as important as bringing in a striker. To be clear, I make these points not as a debate on the merits of Gyokores or Madueke per se - but to counter your assumption about priorities as regards the needs of this team. Remember, I am not for a moment suggesting that buying a striker is not a top priority. I am simply countering the criticism the club is getting for the Madueke deal.

As for your dismissal of my response to your 'basic maths' point, I am surprised at this because it is so simple. If what we paid for Madueke does not prevent us from signing Eze what exactly is your issue?

---

Interesting views, but there is little you have said that deflates any of the arguments against this deal (and more importantly something you avoid saying).

Now if you'll allow me to focus on the thing you have not said, which is usually the first comment anyone makes about any transfer, but surprisingly for this particular transfer it's the last ( and TBF, most supporters of this deal have done the same thing of conveniently excluding this talking point).

Are you happy to pay £50m for Madueke, is he worth it? Again, I am asking of your valuationof the player and not AFC, like you keep falling back on. Is he worth £50m and are you happy to make a proper footballing argument that he is.

If the answer is "yes", then supporters of this deal would do better stressing that point....as this is the first transfer I have come across where not one single gooner, in fact not one single Chav, believes he is worth the money we are paying.

Even The Havertz and Pepe deals had people who were glad to stake their reputations that they were worth the money, but not one single person of note has stated this is a good/great deal.

To be clear, your argument so far has only said, it's a good deal because it allows us to rest Saka. Well if that's the case we could have gone all out to get another 20 players that would allow us to do the same thing for less than that, probably even some from the women's team (I'm sorry, I couldn't help it).

So really, lets just go back to the basics, is Madueke worth paying £50m for? If so stress that going forward and we'd enjoy your usually brilliant arguments using stats and other things we might have missed; as it would probably help calm naysayers like me down.

Lets not forget that initially, slightly more fans wanted Sesko than Gyokores (at least he won the Skysports poll) and I am pretty sure the fact that a substantial amount of us and majority of pundits feel that Gyokeres is worth the money we are spending on him has calmed those who disliked the deal and player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marc Overmars

Ornstein is reporting that Liverpool have approached Newcastle for Isak with a 120m deal on the table.

Damn.

---

Well it's been reported that they are serious about Ekitike (Newcastle), so it seems they probably expected this.

Like I said in an earlier post, we might as well not turn up next season, absolutely no need at this rate :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 21_GOONER_SALUTE

Interesting views, but there is little you have said (and more importantly something you avoid saying) that deflates any of the arguments against this deal

Now if you'll allow me to focus on the thing you have not said, which is usually the first comment anyone makes about any transfer, but surprisingly for this particular transfer it's the last ( and TBF, most supporters of this deal have done the same thing of conveniently excluding this talking point).

Are you happy to pay £50m for Madueke, is he worth it? Again, I am asking of your valuationof the player and not AFC, like you keep falling back on. Is he worth £50m and are you happy to make a proper footballing argument that he is.

If the answer is "yes", then you supporters of this deal would do better stressing that point....as this is the first transfer I have come across where not one single gooner, in fact not one single Chav, believes he is worth the money we are paying.

Even The Havertz and Pepe deals had people who were glad to stake their reputations that they were worth the money, but not one single person of note has stated this is a good/great deal.

To be clear, your argument so far has only said, it's a good deal because it allows us to rest Saka. Well if that's the case we could have gone all out to get another 20 players that would allow us to do the same thing for less than that, probably even some from the women's team (I'm sorry, I couldn't help it).

So really, lets just go back to the basics, is Madueke worth paying £50m for? If so stress that going forward and we'd enjoy your usually brilliant arguments using stats and other things we might have missed; as it would probably help calm naysayers like me down.

Lets not forget that initially, slightly more fans wanted Sesko than Gyokores (at least he won the Skysports poll) and I am pretty sure the fact that a substantial amount of us and majority of pundits feel that Gyokeres is worth the money we are spending on him has calmed those who disliked the deal and player.

---

Let me answer for myself

Would I go for the player myself no. If we wanted cover for Saka, it would have been possible to get someone for cheaper than that on the continent.

But then let me ask you a question. Do you think the furore against the signing is justified, given that it is the standard asking price for someone who is whatever else a first team player for a club that got top four football. And given what players like Kudus, Elanga and what Morgan Gibbs release fee clause apparently was.

It’s recognising that a) he could be a decent squad player for us and b) that’s the going rate you pay for a player with premier league experience.

If there’s evidence it has affected our ability to sign Eze or whoever else we might sign in that position then yes it probably isn’t worth it. But nothing has been reported to that effect.

No one’s asking you to be happy with the transfer, I’m not happy with the Gyokeres transfer. But acting like the club has posted a video on social media of Arteta finger banging your mum, as some fans are doing over this. Is genuinely pathetic