Super Super Quality Transfer Speculation & Shit

[GunnerFan4Life]

Twitter with reference to newspapers say we're holding talks with CSKA over doumbia.

[Cripps_orig]

Decent player

[Master Splinter]

Twitter with reference to newspapers say we're holding talks with CSKA over doumbia.

Wenger paying that much for someone in their forties?

[KSE Comedy Club]

Euros are not an excuse.

We still wouldnt have bought anyone even if there were no Euros

It is.

Everyone wants to wait till after the euros now.

Clubs want a bigger fee and the players are hoping to hold out for a bigger wage offer.

I think there was some truth in Mvila being 99% done.

However, when he saw how much Hazard went for and what wage deal he got, he decided to wait until after the euros to see if he could get something similar, same with Giroud.

Its completely plausible.

[KSE Comedy Club]

More importantly,

Why the fuck havent we signed Dempsey yet?

[Marc Overmars]

More importantly,

Why the fuck havent we signed Dempsey yet?

We're in the waiting period but also little bit wanting period.

[KSE Comedy Club]

We're in the waiting period but also little bit wanting period.

Damn.

[AKBapologist]

That doesn't really address the issue. What if these rules aren't enforced and what happens if Wenger doesn't sign a new contract next year? Wenger won't be around forever and it's something we're going to have to deal with. I'm not accusing you of being a 'glory hunting twat' either. I'm just questioning where you guys (Letters and NQ) are going with this argument regarding Board ownership, money and transfers. If we're saying money is ruining the game and what Chelsea and City are doing is wrong, then why are you looking towards their model as the solution? I know you're not arguing for a takeover specifically, but we're still talking about spending our way out of this mess which is part of the problem with football these days. The solution is always seems to be in the transfer market these days. Don't get me wrong, we need some new players to come in because our squad is shocking, but even with a few more key players, I can't see any major improvements while Wenger is still in charge. His flaws run too deep and signings won't fix that. That's why I say he should leave.

I'm not convinced by this argument of Wenger being forced to operate on a shoestring budget. If that were the case and the same people also believe that it's impossible to compete with Chelsea and City, then how can so much blame be placed on the Board for not being able to compete with their bottomless pit of cash? Why argue for their removal? Who or what takes their place?

Why are you so thick? Whether wenger has been forced to operate on a shoe string budget or not, his level of performance has been more than acceptable to the people who pay his wages. If you want that to change at the club, then you have to accept there needs to be a change of ownership. Otherwise you might as well ask for the sky to be green or the sea to be red because fundamentally , that's the difference between us and the rich clubs..

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

[Cripps_orig]

More importantly,

Why the fuck havent we signed Dempsey yet?

Hes waiting til after the Euros as well

[Power n Glory]

Why are you so thick? Whether wenger has been forced to operate on a shoe string budget or not, his level of performance has been more than acceptable to the people who pay his wages. If you want that to change at the club, then you have to accept there needs to be a change of ownership. Otherwise you might as well ask for the sky to be green or the sea to be red because fundamentally , that's the difference between us and the rich clubs..

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

First of all, Wenger is not guaranteed to sign a new deal with us. This could be his last contract with us and that has to be taken into consideration soon enough. A job for life at Arsenal doesn't mean he has a job as the manager of Arsenal for life. He could be gone very soon and we need to accept that. Also, we don't know what's being said behind closed doors. Owners usually always back the manager in the public. They might not sack but they don't have to offer him a great new deal to stay on. But we'll soon find out.

As said before, I don't accept the need for a change in ownership because that sort of change is way more riskier than bringing in a new manager. This is why I question where you guys are going with this logic, I'm not the thick one here. On the one hand you criticise clubs like Man City and Chelsea for the money they spend and dodgy owners they have, yet you say we need new owners to see a change. Don't you see the problem with that?