Even in the football world I wouldn't give a 20 year old that kind of money. He certainly has the potential to be worth (well, in the football world) that but not yet, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cripps
Printable View
Even in the football world I wouldn't give a 20 year old that kind of money. He certainly has the potential to be worth (well, in the football world) that but not yet, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cripps
a club that offered djourou a 3 year bumper contract at 60k a week.
only at this club.
remember that.
then wonder why walcott is annoyed he's on less.
but you cant go comparing 10 years ago to now. football has changed and evolved. i agree that it is absolutely ridiculous football has ended up like this, but people cant berate the board for being backwards then on the other hand have a go at them for offering english talent like wilshere top money. its the going rate because as i said, he can get it elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
modern football is a load of shit.
Exactly and thats the problemQuote:
Originally Posted by Letters
We are paying thousands a week which turns in to millions over the years to players who havent produced. What if god forbids Jack gets another injury? 85k a week for someone who isnt playing? And that isnt even my biggest worry.
My big worry is if he does fulfill his potential and the time comes to renew his contract, he will want double of what hes getting now which as we know, we wont pay so hes gone when hes around 25 and we are back to square one.
Im not wumming. If people cant think, it annoys me. Unless of course they are that stupid so forgive me if I've given you undue benefit of doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Think. The market is not what it was even 5 years ago. This is about Theo in comparison to Jack. And there is no comparison really. You would need eyes and a bit of a brain to know this.Quote:
So after one season we're saying JW has earned to earn around the same amount it took players like Henry, RVP, Cesc some years to get to? It's not just goals and assists, if he could keep our play flowing like how Cesc could when he was much younger than Jack then I'd see your point. He's looking lost in the middle right now and hasn't controlled the tempo of a game.
You pay players on the basis of what they will do, not what they have. You look at the past and you see Jack was phenomenal in his debut season being the stand out players among stars in the Arsenal-Barca games. You note it wasn't an anomaly. You then see if he will fully recover from his injury. He looks sharper by the game and he's playing consistently well in the same manor he did. Players that have his ability don't fuck about with the basics and Jack is not. He's worth every penny.Quote:
Time will tell because he's coming back from injury but it's flawed to talk about consistency and top level performances when he's only played one full season for us and hasn't performed anywhere near the level of Cesc.
Hang on, are we actually debating whether or not Jack's Pulling his weight in the current squad????
Potential my arse. Wilshire's become another player we've come to depend on after been gone for a year and only a handful of first team apperances. Even if he got no better than he is now, he's a better holding midfielder than most in the league barring a small handful of captains and specialists, half a dozen years older and on double the wages. WTF is wrong with GW???
Funny people should be saying an obvious talent like Jack is being over-hyped, yet they are trying to present Theo as that player whose talent has been honed and developed and he has now arrived.
Subtract Theo's flurry of goals against total shit teams and then show me the stats. Spread his goals across a broader surface of games, and not just a deluge of goals in one or two games, and then present those stats.
I'll say again, that he's not as good as some would have us believe and I couldn't care less if he fucks off. I've had it with these average players thinking more of themselves than they really are, thereby holding the club to ransom the minute they start to show signs of doing what they have always been paid to do.
Well I would care if Theo fucks off. Theo gets goals. That's important even if that's all he gets. I'd be happy if we got him to sign at any expense. But don't just don't present Jack as a yardstick because he's much better at his job than Theo is at his; mainly because he has the natural talent that Theo never will.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshGooner
And there's the nonsense "Theo isn't a big game player" bullshit again.
Reading comprehension is a bitch, ain't it?
Can anyone be bothered to do some analysis?Quote:
Originally Posted by AKBapologist
He's not the sort of player who will pop up with important goals in big games like a van Persie will, is he?
His stats are fairly impressive, his finishing is very good, but I have to say I never expect him to really produce in the big games.
Prove me wrong, stattos, prove me wrong.
What? So you don't think top scorers fill their boots against shit teams?Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshGooner
Not that Theo hasn't delivered against some of the biggest teams in Europe or domestically, but what kind of fucking stupid argument is that?
Chelsea, Man Utd, Barcelona, Spuds, Liverpool and thats off the top of my headQuote:
Originally Posted by Letters
OK. But did we win the games. Were they winners, plus 1s, consolation goals? What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cripps
Just asking...
Good post. Theo is a very dangerous player and jack is already one of the best mf in the league. These two players need to be contracted to us and they deserve whatever inflated wage they want when they are miles ahead of their team mates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cripps
From summer 2011...Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
At UEFA Euro 2012, Walcott appeared for England as a second half substitute in the group game against Sweden. Shortly after coming on, Walcott scored to bring the game level at 2–2. Less than 15 minutes later, he provided the cross for Danny Welbeck's 74th minute winner in England's 3–2 victory.
On 16 August, Walcott scored his first goal of the season in the first leg of a UEFA Champions League qualifying match against Udinese, giving a vital 1–0 win to Arsenal to carry on into the second leg of the tie
Walcott scored again in the second leg as Arsenal came from behind to win 2–1 and 3–1 on aggregate which helped Arsenal secure qualification for the lucrative group stage of the competition for the 14th straight season.
Walcott scored Arsenal's first goal in the 2011–12 Premier League campaign against Manchester United though this was a mere consolation as Arsenal lost 8–2.
He netted his fourth goal on 29 October in a 5–3 win at Chelsea where he picked up the ball on the wing, slipped, then got up and jinked past two Chelsea players before scoring. The goal was voted by fans as Arsenal's goal of the month.
On 26 February Walcott scored two second-half goals against Tottenham to help them win 5–2 after being 0–2 down.
On 30 October 2012, Walcott scored Arsenal's first goal in first half stoppage time and their fourth goal in second half stoppage time in a League Cup tie at Reading to help the club complete a comeback from 4–0 down to 5-7.
etc etc
Part of the reason why he's so "overrated" is because of all those big game moments he provides for fans...
Theo has performed at his usual level regardless of opposition. He did well against Barca and Chelsea. Don't think that's an issue. People tend to overrate the debate about 'big game players'. New Ronaldo and Henry were called bottlers.
Makes no sense. And, quite frankly, even if a player didn't perform against better teams, i don't consider it that important when 16 teams in the league are worse than you.
usually that argument is condensed into knock out competition finals, not taking into account the vital 'big games' in terms of qualifying or at crucial points of a league season. that's how henry got labelled with it. as you say, if feo bagged 20+ purely against the bottom half of the table, are we now saying that is a bad thing for the team?Quote:
Originally Posted by Synti Claus
There were plenty of occasions last year when van Persie popped up with a goal which turned 1 point into 3. He's doing it this year for Utd. That isn't over-rated, he did it in the Manchester Derby and it could be the difference between ManYoo being champions or not. Last year van Persie was the difference between us being top 4 and not. That isn't over-rated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synti Claus
Syn…you’re acting like an idiot. You’re usually level headed and there is no need to adopt that tone with me. Keep it cool without the insults and listen to my argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synti Claus
There is no dispute about Wilshere’s talent but if people are going to talk about consistency and performances related to pay, then Jack hasn’t earned that £85k simply because he hasn’t been in this squad long enough or played consistently as the top player that drags the team with him when everyone is slacking. That doesn’t mean he can’t do it. But it’s idiotic for anyone to look at Theo and ask what’s he done over then look at Jack and say it’s justified. He’s only played one full season for goodness sake. It’s flawed logic.
If we’re saying JW should earn as much as all the other important first teamers, that’s another issue and fair enough. If all the first team players around that mark, then fair play, but you can’t argue he’s earned it through performances in such a short space of time. Even with Cesc, he wasn’t earning next to the same amount as Henry after a couple of seasons, it doesn’t matter about the going rate at that time he wasn’t propelled to the top that quickly. But at the end of the day, the value of the player doesn’t really matter as long as they’re playing for us. It shouldn’t be an issue for fans.
in regards to his position being out wide, last season his two goals helped us qualify for the cl, which was big. two more goals switched the game and our season on its head against tottenham. let's not forget this is from wide right, where bar ronaldo, you don't find many who score such vital goals. since he's come into the middle he's scored. there are parts of his game to improve of course but he's doing the main part right so far. th14 was the worst passer of the ball after his first season here, so things change (and i am not saying he is going to be another th14 btw)Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
now when it comes to wages, i couldn't give a toss anymore. you'll stay pay a premium to get into the stadium and another 10/20k doesn't make any difference to anyone for a players contract, even in the football world.
That Spurs game was Theo in a nutshell. First half he was horrible, should have been hauled off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz
2nd half he goes and gets 2 goals.
:shrug:
How do you solve a problem like Theoria...
there isn't such a big problem, except for the ones anxious fans and shit pundits create. there was an expectation we would have a whizz kid on our hands who could score like this from 17/18 but it rarely happens - what didn't help was the large transfer fee for someone his age. 'arriving' at 22/23 is pretty much the norm.
what doesn't help players is overanalysis of absolutely everything. slowed down replays and a belief that football is still played in rigid formations of 442/433 etc. theo is doing absolutely fine and we need to stop looking at the value of his contract rather than his value to the team.
YepQuote:
Originally Posted by Terry Tuffnutz
If this was a one off situation I'd be inclined to haul all sorts at Theo but it's not. Many players have turned their back on the club and it's about time we started looking closer to home. I don't know what it is but something stinks at the club when it comes to these issues.
Sagan will be the next one in the firing line.
A thin layer of canestan cream, two times daily for a fortnight should clear it up :good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
The reason why the club is prepared to pay for potential is the same reason it generally refuses to pay older players. It's run as a business, with a sharp eye on maximising value.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Overmars
A player may feel he is entitled to a certain wage, based on what he has done in the past, but from an employers point of view, it's not what you have done, but what you will do, over the span of your next contract that should determine your value to the side and therefore your wage.
Older players on high wages but declining in value and usefulness are an inefficient way to spend your cash (although that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have made some exceptions).
Young players are well rewarded, not only for their future worth, but for their future improvement.
Which brings me to Theo. Within our pay structure £90k puts him pretty much near the top. To rate that, he will need to operate at a level more like say, his Newcastle performance or above, and less like his Swansea performance (or below) for the duration of his contract, 3-4 years.
This is why Theo's consistency is a concern. At his best, he is worth it more or less. At his worst, he isn't, not even close. I think the club's £75k offer was reflective of this.
Makes sense I guess. The appetite for actual on the field success pales in comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fist of Lehmann
Eruditely posited.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fist of Lehmann
I can understand the argument that Wilshere's being paid £85K/week based on an expectation of his future contribution, but the same should apply to Walcott. Theo's shown an increase in productivity right throughout his Arsenal career, and his game is developing. Based on this, it is reasonable to assume he'll go on to deliver even more goals and assists in future seasons, and therefore should be given a contract that reflects the fact that he'll become increasingly important to us as an attacking outlet. £90K/week, when you consider the wages other players who have not delivered close to what Theo has in the last 2 seasons, seems extremely reasonable. After all, we're not a mid table Premier League club with our heads barely above water yet, and if we want to mix it with the elites of the game, we need to be paying big money to the players who will keep us near the top.
Yep that's a totally logical way of evaluating how we operate and I do agree, though I would add player marketability to the table too. Not in the sense of what they are worth as a Football player, but more in terms of the merchandise they sell and their brand appeal. For example, I would expect Theo and Jack to sell far more shirts than say established players such as Sagna and Vermaelen. I think this is one aspect folks have missed out on when taking into account players/agents negotiating their wages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fist of Lehmann
The club can't have it both ways...because if it really was purely about Footballing ability then we wouldn't have this "ideological" wage structure in the first place.
"Footballing reasons"
:haha:
I know, I'm not saying any different. What I'm adding is that people over think the 'big game player' stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Letters
Most of our games are against teams worse than us. So if we have a flat track bully, who cares? At least he can help us win the games we're supposed to win.
I think players need to be paid according to market value. If Jack can walk into any team and command around £85k then it's our job to remain competitive make sure we keep him at the club. It's the same for Theo. But I find it hard to agree with anyone that's suggesting he should one of the highest paid in the club because of his past performances. He's had too short of career for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fist of Lehmann
I think that part of it comes from the manager's philosophy rather than an individual player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synti Claus
You've turned it around entirely. Read back. The discussion was about you using Wilshere and his contract to suggest Theo deserves equal or more. There's a clear difference in saying 'if Jack deserves that, so does Theo' and 'if theo deserves that, so does jack'. And you recognise that through taking logic 101. Your argument is bullshit because, quite simply, Wilshere is the far superior footballer who puts in better performances consistently. And that's all that matters. Also, I'm never an idiot, I'm just a dick to those being idiotic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Oh. I don't. There is little reason why a player would be able to perform against limited opposition and not better opposition unless that player was limited himself. It might take something special to perform against good opposition whereas walking all over the limited is easier. But, as I say, who cares? We're not playing Man Utd every week and we are not even beating Southampton, so roll on the flat track bullies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gervinho's Forehead
Go back and check the argument because you just jumped the gun and got all hot headed. Jack hasn't contributed more than Theo and that was where I started at so it's nuts for anyone to talk about Theo's performances as if he's contributed less. I haven't flipped anything and again, calm yourself down and stop acting all sensitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synti Claus
I don't think we can say that Wilshere puts in better performances consistently. He played almost all of 10-11 and was understandably inconsistent given that it was his first season at the top. The fact that he put in some superb individual performances (Barca at home and the CC Final against Birmingham) has somewhat clouded the fact that there were quite a few games that season where he struggled to make a huge impact. That doesn't mean he didn't have a good season (indeed, he performed infinitely better than Theo did in his first full season at Arsenal) but he wasn't consistently 7-8/10. Then, he got injured and missed all of the next season and has only just returned this year, where again he's been very good some games, decent/off colour in others which is again understandable.
Earlier in thread it's been said that Wilshere is given £80K/week because of future potential, and I agree with that (same with Theo, even if you think Wilshere will be the better footballer Theo's past productivity and progression suggests he'll continue to be a very important source of goals/assists for us). However, if the argument is that Wilshere deserves more because he has played better than Walcott on a consistent basis so far at Arsenal, IMO that doesn't ring true at all. Over the last 2 seasons Walcott has been one of the most consistent performers at the club.
I agree. Football supporting is sometimes a feel, and Theo feels like he's one of our only players who can produce class at times. Very few players can do so every game (Messi; RVP; Ronaldo), but we shouldn't underestimate Theo for all that. His response to his contractual position has been exemplary (have we forgotten Cesc; Nasri; Adebayor; RVP so quickly?), and he has convinced me - a former critic.Quote:
Originally Posted by selassie