Talksport say Citeh are in for Nasri at 20M.
Flog Nasri + Clichy to them for around 40M, sell Fabregas for 40M and drop all of that on Neymar and Sanchez pls.
If dreams came true
Talksport say Citeh are in for Nasri at 20M.
Flog Nasri + Clichy to them for around 40M, sell Fabregas for 40M and drop all of that on Neymar and Sanchez pls.
If dreams came true
The King Is Back.
Come on guys.
There are plenty of reasons to critisise Wenger and god knows he deserves it but lets not make stuff up to critisise him.
Theres no credible source who has said this other than some 14 year old kid on Twitter
But past experience suggests that we are overly stingy, so there's every chance that Cahill's wage demands are reasonable, but we're just trying to save a few bob, despite this putting the whole deal at risk.Originally Posted by Toronto Gooner
Toronto gooner, i remember when we gave Sol campbell £140k a week, we paid Market value for top players wages and fees. We just don't seem to want to do this anymore and it's gaulling given the contribution fans are expected to make.
Aside from the infamous 5,000, what other documented cases do we have?
Over and above that, do we really know that his salary demands are "reasonable". Anyone who wants 40,000 or 50,000 a week or more to kick a football is not being reasonable in all reality.
While all answers are responses, not all responses are answers.
From A-M
L'Équipe are reporting that talks between Lille and AFC over Gervinho have stalled again, with the fee said to be the sticking point.
The most I can recall Campbell getting was reportedly 100,000 a week, and that was in part because he came on a free with no signing bonus. Can you document the 140,000 a week. Besides Campbell was an established England international with around 40 appearances by the time he joined Arsenal. Cahill has played just 3 times and is already 25.
While all answers are responses, not all responses are answers.
He probably wants a wage close to the current "market value". Whether it's a "reasonable" wage is irrelevant until the rules are changed.
This is yet another example of how were getting shafted by rich club overspending.
not if kicking the football can result in leg-break/serious injury that could 'paralyze' one for the rest of one's life.
if underground coal-miners could ask for those sums of money they would.
if you could, you would
‘Arsene was very cautious and David was very ambitious for the club,’ said former director Keith Edelman, managing director at the time. ‘He was very good at getting Arsene into a position where he was comfortable spending money.’
The board have said if wenger identifies a player he really wants and he needs the money it's there. Wenger doesn't think it's worth it!
We are still one of the most richest football clubs in the world, with healthy turnovers recorded every year. The fact that City and Chelsea have distorted the market doesn't mean we are unable to afford top quality players. The board tries to lay the blame on the door of sugar daddies, and while they have had a negative effect on the sport, the reason why we've not made the necessary signings recently is because we have a manager who has placed far too much trust in low quality young players, and a board who are content to see their share values rise up through commercial and property deals, unwilling to put any pressure on the manager to rectify the weaknesses in the squad because they only care about their bank balances.
Posting Permissions
