January Transfers -- Speculation & Shit?

[Grebbo]

It's time to go big, or....fuck off, basically.

He needs to blow 50-60 million on some fucking awesome quality.

Enough is enough.

Aye. McCarthy, Holtby etc etc are pointless signings. They're good players but we have lots of good players. However we have zero great players.

We need to buy £30m+ players for them to make any difference to our squad.

[Ollie the Optimist]

Aye. McCarthy, Holtby etc etc are pointless signings. They're good players but we have lots of good players. However we have zero great players.

We need to buy £30m+ players for them to make any difference to our squad.

price means nothing to a footballers ability. 30 million plus can buy you torres or andy carol, 12 million buys you cazorla. we need to get off the subject of focusing on the amount spent on a player because its bollocks way of judging him, but rather looking at a player and judging him on what he has done etc.

it doesnt matter whether a player costs 30 million or 3 million, all that matters is if they are good enough to make a difference to our squad

[Letters]

spot on. the man has banked £56m in the past 8 years. we've won nothing in that time. how can he justify his salary?

one rule for him and another for the rest.

His salary isn't based on us winning things. That can come down to very fine lines.
The board's target is clearly top 4 finishes. He's delivered that every year and given how many other managers have tried and failed to deliver the same despite spending far more on transfers than Wenger, I'd say the board are content he's meeting his targets.

[She Wore A Yellow Ribbon]

its wrong. whatever way you want to analyse it, its wrong.

he shouldn't even be here let alone picking up £7m a year from a club supposedly 'financially constrained' and 'shackled' by the owner.

[Fist of Lehmann]

May need to help him with it first. . .

Here, use this.

[Grebbo]

price means nothing to a footballers ability. 30 million plus can buy you torres or andy carol, 12 million buys you cazorla. we need to get off the subject of focusing on the amount spent on a player because its bollocks way of judging him, but rather looking at a player and judging him on what he has done etc.

it doesnt matter whether a player costs 30 million or 3 million, all that matters is if they are good enough to make a difference to our squad

I can't think of too many £30m flops tbh. Whereas I can think of lots of mid-priced flops that just we have signed in the past few years: Arshavin, Gervinho, Ramsey.

Generally you get what you pay for but of course there are sometimes big flops.

Aguero for £30m or RVP for £24m seem like bargains.

[Ollie the Optimist]

I can't think of too many £30m flops tbh. Whereas I can think of lots of mid-priced flops that just we have signed in the past few years: Arshavin, Gervinho, Ramsey.

Generally you get what you pay for but of course there are sometimes big flops.

Aguero for £30m or RVP for £24m seem like bargains.

you get what you pay for, thats true to some extent, but its still not a great way to judge players. arshavin was a flop, however in first season he wasn't, and that 16 million was worth it at the begiingin, it turned out to be a flop but at frist looked good.

but look at some strikers, balotelli cost 25 million, torres 50, carrol 35. jsut because a player costs x million doenst mean he is either very good, average or shit. look at the player and his attributes and judge him on that, ignore the transfer fee because its bollocks.

[Özil's Panoramic View]

you get what you pay for, thats true to some extent, but its still not a great way to judge players. arshavin was a flop, however in first season he wasn't, and that 16 million was worth it at the begiingin, it turned out to be a flop but at frist looked good.

but look at some strikers, balotelli cost 25 million, torres 50, carrol 35. jsut because a player costs x million doenst mean he is either very good, average or shit. look at the player and his attributes and judge him on that, ignore the transfer fee because its bollocks.

Sadly, these things are also being looked at by the selling club, which brings us right back to Grebbo's point.

[Ollie the Optimist]

Sadly, these things are also being looked at by the selling club, which brings us right back to Grebbo's point.

not nesscarily. the selling might feel that they need money, know how much the buying club needs the player so up the price. lets take the carrol transfer to liverpool. newcastle knew htey ahd jsut got 50 million, so demanded more money for themselves, they would have known he was more a 15 million player at best.

using the david villa possible transfer. its quite obvious arsenal need another striker, barca dont have to sell, so knowing if arsenal are desperate for him, they can up the price creating a false price if you like to judge the player on.

[Grebbo]

but look at some strikers, balotelli cost 25 million, torres 50, carrol 35. jsut because a player costs x million doenst mean he is either very good, average or shit. look at the player and his attributes and judge him on that, ignore the transfer fee because its bollocks.

The transfer fee isn't bollocks, the fee is usually high because the player is good and in demand. Don't forget Torres, whilst overpriced, was awesome at Liverpool. Such a decline in form is very rare.

The days of us being able to buy players like Henry and Vieira for tuppence are long gone as every team now has a scouting system as good as ours. We have to spend big to get the necessary quality.