Winter Transfer Missed Opportunities and Regrets

[Niall_Quinn]

200 mill is the fee being bandied about for Isak now. LOL

You could build a whole team that could do a decent job in the PL for that amount.

This is another gift from the January window, sellers know how desperate we are and they'll milk it. If we do get a striker and can't secure a buyout we'll pay well over the odds. Which probably means we won't get a striker at all, at least not of the calibre we should already have signed several seasons ago.

[Mac76]

Is it more difficult now that Edu has departed?

Yes

Has anyone stepped into his position at the club?

No and it's very quiet on the subject, on the outside at least. I'm concerned Arteta will want a yes man which would be a disaster

This is going to be a very interesting summer.

or, as per above, a disastrous one

[21_GOONER_SALUTE]

I’m curious. Do you think we chose only to extend his contract by two years? Or maybe just maybe do you think that’s all we could negotiate with his agent. Who might have thought, well if we tie him down to this long a contract im not going to get my pay day when the big clubs in Europe come sniffing because I will have zero leverage in order to orchestrate a move.

Chelsea were able to sign youngsters down to these multi year contracts because there was no guarantee that any of these players would come good (and a lot of them haven’t) yet when Saliba signed a contract extension with us he’d already established himself as an invaluable player.

That plus they had no issue running an entirely unsustainable wage bill

I think we all recognise that there are things the club has done that is mistaken, but simply yelling “that’s what you should have done” at everything makes us sound like that character from Harry Enfield sketch

As usual, you just jump in with very little helpful, criticising posters who make observations about things you haven't pointed out yet. Next time I'll be sure to wait for your seal of approval before commenting on anything you haven't rubber-stamped.

We signed teenage Saliba, on a 5 year contract, in 2019 from a small ligue 1 club for a big transfer fee based on solely potential. His annual wage at that time was $2m and he was the highest paid teenager at the club and probably the EPL at that time . Remember he was not starting, nor even close to starting, but it was a gamble for the future which we were willing to risk.

He's shipped off on loan for the first 3 years where he does well. With increasing spotlight and fan pressure, Arteta reluctantly gives him a chance in his 4th year, breaks into the team, has a great season till March when he gets injured. Before the next season could start we approach him to sign his new 4 year contract while he is injured. We offer him a new annual salary of $10m, 5 times more than what he was earning making him top 5 best paid defenders in the EPL, probably top 10 in the world . These were the facts then

Saliba had a good 7 months in England. He's foreign born and has in interviews expressed poor knowledge of the history of the team he currently plays for. He's been asked about Real Madrid and only smiles. The best french talent for the last 2 decades have played in La Liga, it's not a secret. During his loan period PSG started sniffing around and he's childhood friends with Mbappe, whose father also happened to be his coach! Arsenal do not live in a bubble, which you seem to like to create when you are in the mood to defend the club

You mentioned Chelsea, thinking you'd preempt me, saying they are the ones silly enough to give young players, who everyone is gambling on, long contracts. But realistically, looking at this scenario, is it stupid, that once you've paid a high transfer fee for potential, and the potential seems to be coming through, you should be smart enough to secure your investment for as long as you can, especially when you've only really enjoyed it for 7 months and already you are having to pay top dollar to retain it? Is it really stupid?

Foden is a year older than Saliba. He broke into the Citeh's team in 2019 and before the end of the year, Citeh get him to sign a new five year contract after initially only offering him a 3 year contract when he was 16. The contract was for $624k a year and Foden had already started scoring goals for Citeh in both the EPL and CL by that time. This is the same year we signed Saliba, who everyone classified as potential. Anyway Foden's next contract with Citeh would be in 2022 when he's already a superstar, and guess what, its 5 years again, but this time at almost $12m. Before Foden, they'd had young stars like Stones come through from Everton who they signed for a 6 year contract initially and at the age of 26 still offered him a 5 year contract, which he is still currently on. I don't need to tell you that Haaland's first contract was 5 years and his new one is a shocking 10 years.

At Liverpool, its pretty much the same for young talent. Gomez has signed 4 contracts with Liverpool since he's been there and they've all been 5 years. Robertson has signed 3, all 5 years. Trent's first 3 had all been 5 years or longer, till this recent one which he signed for 4 years.....and now Liverpool are running helter-skelter, trying to get him to renew and its the usual suspect that wants to take him for a free

So its not a Chelsea thing, that when you have young players that are performing remarkably for their age, you get them to sign contracts of 5 years or more. To me its just common sense that you'd want to protect a gamble that paid off. But you can go on trying to score cheap points and making your argument that "it was the best his agent would allow us to do and poor Arsenal have no leverage" , when even Saka, who would bleed for this club, is only on a silly 4 year contract.

BTW the terms are all in dollars as I used this website for the contract info.

www.spotrac.com

[Niall_Quinn]

My understanding (although it could be just paper talk) is that an agreement to bring in Roberto Olabe as Edu’s replacement is pretty much a done deal. This was the Sociedad director of football, and would make sense given the players from Sociedad that we have shown interest in

Signed Merino, Odegaard

Practically signed Zubimendi


Interested in players like Isaak and Take Kubo

Let's see if we've still practically signed Zubimendi once the season tickets have been renewed.

[IBK]

As usual, you just jump in with very little helpful, criticising posters who make observations about things you haven't pointed out yet. Next time I'll be sure to wait for your seal of approval before commenting on anything you haven't rubber-stamped.

We signed teenage Saliba, on a 5 year contract, in 2019 from a small ligue 1 club for a big transfer fee based on solely potential. His annual wage at that time was $2m and he was the highest paid teenager at the club and probably the EPL at that time . Remember he was not starting, nor even close to starting, but it was a gamble for the future which we were willing to risk.

He's shipped off on loan for the first 3 years where he does well. With increasing spotlight and fan pressure, Arteta reluctantly gives him a chance in his 4th year, breaks into the team, has a great season till March when he gets injured. Before the next season could start we approach him to sign his new 4 year contract while he is injured. We offer him a new annual salary of $10m, 5 times more than what he was earning making him top 5 best paid defenders in the EPL, probably top 10 in the world . These were the facts then

Saliba had a good 7 months in England. He's foreign born and has in interviews expressed poor knowledge of the history of the team he currently plays for. He's been asked about Real Madrid and only smiles. The best french talent for the last 2 decades have played in La Liga, it's not a secret. During his loan period PSG started sniffing around and he's childhood friends with Mbappe, whose father also happened to be his coach! Arsenal do not live in a bubble, which you seem to like to create when you are in the mood to defend the club

You mentioned Chelsea, thinking you'd preempt me, saying they are the ones silly enough to give young players, who everyone is gambling on, long contracts. But realistically, looking at this scenario, is it stupid, that once you've paid a high transfer fee for potential, and the potential seems to be coming through, you should be smart enough to secure your investment for as long as you can, especially when you've only really enjoyed it for 7 months and already you are having to pay top dollar to retain it? Is it really stupid?

Foden is a year older than Saliba. He broke into the Citeh's team in 2019 and before the end of the year, Citeh get him to sign a new five year contract after initially only offering him a 3 year contract when he was 16. The contract was for $624k a year and Foden had already started scoring goals for Citeh in both the EPL and CL by that time. This is the same year we signed Saliba, who everyone classified as potential. Anyway Foden's next contract with Citeh would be in 2022 when he's already a superstar, and guess what, its 5 years again, but this time at almost $12m. Before Foden, they'd had young stars like Stones come through from Everton who they signed for a 6 year contract initially and at the age of 26 still offered him a 5 year contract, which he is still currently on. I don't need to tell you that Haaland's first contract was 5 years and his new one is a shocking 10 years.

At Liverpool, its pretty much the same for young talent. Gomez has signed 4 contracts with Liverpool since he's been there and they've all been 5 years. Robertson has signed 3, all 5 years. Trent's first 3 had all been 5 years or longer, till this recent one which he signed for 4 years.....and now Liverpool are running helter-skelter, trying to get him to renew and its the usual suspect that wants to take him for a free

So its not a Chelsea thing, that when you have young players that are performing remarkably for their age, you get them to sign contracts of 5 years or more. To me its just common sense that you'd want to protect a gamble that paid off. But you can go on trying to score cheap points and making your argument that "it was the best his agent would allow us to do and poor Arsenal have no leverage" , when even Saka, who would bleed for this club, is only on a silly 4 year contract.

BTW the terms are all in dollars as I used this website for the contract info.

www.spotrac.com

I get all that, but we did sign Saliba to a 4 year contract in 2023 - so is your point that we should have tied him down to 5 years? That's only one year more - and I'm not sure even a 5 year contract would prevent RM from sniffing around now? Also, contracts are not one sided. It's more than possible that in 2023 - with our project still in the formative stage - Saliba's people were not willing to extend this term.

It's pretty common for even the most well organised clubs to start renewal negotiations 2 years out. And for a club like Arsenal (unlike Chelsea or Citeh with unlimited funds) you have to plan for these not to turn out the way you want.

I'm not sure we have (yet) mismanaged Saliba's renewal. Our problem is that unlike Liverpool or Citeh, we haven't won anything, and that will count against us to a greater or lesser degree.

If he is not prepared to commit to a new contract, then the one thing we can't afford to do is risk him running his present one down and not cashing in on a valuable asset. Balancing this situation is tricky...my fear is that we won't have the nous to manage it.

[HCZ_Reborn]

As usual, you just jump in with very little helpful, criticising posters who make observations about things you haven't pointed out yet. Next time I'll be sure to wait for your seal of approval before commenting on anything you haven't rubber-stamped.

We signed teenage Saliba, on a 5 year contract, in 2019 from a small ligue 1 club for a big transfer fee based on solely potential. His annual wage at that time was $2m and he was the highest paid teenager at the club and probably the EPL at that time . Remember he was not starting, nor even close to starting, but it was a gamble for the future which we were willing to risk.

He's shipped off on loan for the first 3 years where he does well. With increasing spotlight and fan pressure, Arteta reluctantly gives him a chance in his 4th year, breaks into the team, has a great season till March when he gets injured. Before the next season could start we approach him to sign his new 4 year contract while he is injured. We offer him a new annual salary of $10m, 5 times more than what he was earning making him top 5 best paid defenders in the EPL, probably top 10 in the world . These were the facts then

Saliba had a good 7 months in England. He's foreign born and has in interviews expressed poor knowledge of the history of the team he currently plays for. He's been asked about Real Madrid and only smiles. The best french talent for the last 2 decades have played in La Liga, it's not a secret. During his loan period PSG started sniffing around and he's childhood friends with Mbappe, whose father also happened to be his coach! Arsenal do not live in a bubble, which you seem to like to create when you are in the mood to defend the club

You mentioned Chelsea, thinking you'd preempt me, saying they are the ones silly enough to give young players, who everyone is gambling on, long contracts. But realistically, looking at this scenario, is it stupid, that once you've paid a high transfer fee for potential, and the potential seems to be coming through, you should be smart enough to secure your investment for as long as you can, especially when you've only really enjoyed it for 7 months and already you are having to pay top dollar to retain it? Is it really stupid?

Foden is a year older than Saliba. He broke into the Citeh's team in 2019 and before the end of the year, Citeh get him to sign a new five year contract after initially only offering him a 3 year contract when he was 16. The contract was for $624k a year and Foden had already started scoring goals for Citeh in both the EPL and CL by that time. This is the same year we signed Saliba, who everyone classified as potential. Anyway Foden's next contract with Citeh would be in 2022 when he's already a superstar, and guess what, its 5 years again, but this time at almost $12m. Before Foden, they'd had young stars like Stones come through from Everton who they signed for a 6 year contract initially and at the age of 26 still offered him a 5 year contract, which he is still currently on. I don't need to tell you that Haaland's first contract was 5 years and his new one is a shocking 10 years.

At Liverpool, its pretty much the same for young talent. Gomez has signed 4 contracts with Liverpool since he's been there and they've all been 5 years. Robertson has signed 3, all 5 years. Trent's first 3 had all been 5 years or longer, till this recent one which he signed for 4 years.....and now Liverpool are running helter-skelter, trying to get him to renew and its the usual suspect that wants to take him for a free

So its not a Chelsea thing, that when you have young players that are performing remarkably for their age, you get them to sign contracts of 5 years or more. To me its just common sense that you'd want to protect a gamble that paid off. But you can go on trying to score cheap points and making your argument that "it was the best his agent would allow us to do and poor Arsenal have no leverage" , when even Saka, who would bleed for this club, is only on a silly 4 year contract.

BTW the terms are all in dollars as I used this website for the contract info.

www.spotrac.com

That was a very beautiful homily.

So the examples you gave me are Joe Gomez who let’s be fair is a squad player at best for Liverpool and Phil Foden who is a Man City academy player. The circumstances aren’t really like for like are they?

But again I ask you, do you think the club chose to only give Saliba a two year extension or do you think they might have wanted to tie him down to a longer deal but a player with no natural loyalty to the club and an agent who like all agents is thinking of money first and foremost may have persuaded his client to only sign a two year deal?

My problem with some of your moans is you treat the club like it was run like Kidz company and we’ve got someone like Camilla Batmangeldh running things. For me it’s as silly as the zombies who intone “Trust the process” because they probably weren’t even born when we first won the title under Wenger.

You’re pissed off with things at the moment (and absolutely with good reason) there are times where I’ve gone off the deep end and need to get a sense of perspective. If I think someone is being over the top I’m going to say so….people have with me on here when I’ve gone into a psychopathic fury over something Arteta has done

[21_GOONER_SALUTE]

I get all that, but we did sign Saliba to a 4 year contract in 2023 - so is your point that we should have tied him down to 5 years? That's only one year more - and I'm not sure even a 5 year contract would prevent RM from sniffing around now? Also, contracts are not one sided. It's more than possible that in 2023 - with our project still in the formative stage - Saliba's people were not willing to extend this term.

It's pretty common for even the most well organised clubs to start renewal negotiations 2 years out. And for a club like Arsenal (unlike Chelsea or Citeh with unlimited funds) you have to plan for these not to turn out the way you want.

I'm not sure we have (yet) mismanaged Saliba's renewal. Our problem is that unlike Liverpool or Citeh, we haven't won anything, and that will count against us to a greater or lesser degree.

If he is not prepared to commit to a new contract, then the one thing we can't afford to do is risk him running his present one down and not cashing in on a valuable asset. Balancing this situation is tricky...my fear is that we won't have the nous to manage it.

My point was, there was no reason for us at that time, to do the bare minimum and agree to a 4 year contract, when it was clear we were in the stronger bargaining position. He'd played for us for only 7 months, he was already injured and still about 20-21....who in their right senses does the bare minimum to keep someone at that age who has impressed you so much within such a short space of time?!

Yes, it should have been at least 5 years and lets not forget for 3 years we'd been paying his salary and allowing him to get cuddles from mummy while sleeping at home in France.

Yes, an additional one year would never stop Real Madrid from sniffing around, after all they are Real Madrid for a reason i.e. insatiable ambition. You'll never see me complaining that the likes of RM or PSG want our players...its a good sign like I pointed out earlier in another post.

I just can't see the justification for us being a weaker position now, because all this should have been expected i.e. all big clubs want young talent and will try and get it cheaply off you if they can. Even without the Mbappe example, young players can afford to run down their contracts, they are just at the start of their careers, its just common sense.

I've always complained about our transfer strategy. In the last 30 years we've produced some of the best young players in the world and only been compensated properly once IMO, the Anelka transfer which some people here weren't even alive when it occurred. That's a big shame for a big club like ours.

Anyway, it's not the end of the world, but I wish some posters will stop making it sound like we are always doing our best when a lot of things we do show small club mentality. Also IBK, I'm sure the Spuds , who don't have a limitless budget do the same with young players and longer contracts

BTW, I don't believe winning trophies would stop a player like Saliba from leaving. He's never really hit me like that type of "trophy driven" player. If he leaves it will be a cultural thing (and probably because he is young), all I am saying is they should have expected it knowing his bio, at least I do (and a lot of the press to it seems).

[IBK]

My point was, there was no reason for us at that time, to do the bare minimum and agree to a 4 year contract, when it was clear we were in the stronger bargaining position. He'd played for us for only 7 months, he was already injured and still about 20-21....who in their right senses does the bare minimum to keep someone at that age who has impressed you so much within such a short space of time?!

Yes, it should have been at least 5 years and lets not forget for 3 years we'd been paying his salary and allowing him to get cuddles from mummy while sleeping at home in France.

Yes, an additional one year would never stop Real Madrid from sniffing around, after all they are Real Madrid for a reason i.e. insatiable ambition. You'll never see me complaining that the likes of RM or PSG want our players...its a good sign like I pointed out earlier in another post.

I just can't see the justification for us being a weaker position now, because all this should have been expected i.e. all big clubs want young talent and will try and get it cheaply off you if they can. Even without the Mbappe example, young players can afford to run down their contracts, they are just at the start of their careers, its just common sense.

I've always complained about our transfer strategy. In the last 30 years we've produced some of the best young players in the world and only been compensated properly once IMO, the Anelka transfer which some people here weren't even alive when it happened.That's a big shame for a big club like ours.

Anyway, it's not the end of the world, but I wish some posters will stop making it sound like we are always doing our best when a lot of things we do show small club mentality. Also IBK, I'm sure the Spuds , who don't have a limitless budget do the same with young players and longer contracts

BTW, I don't believe winning trophies would stop a player like Saliba from leaving. He's never really hit me like that type of "trophy driven" player. If he leaves it will be a cultural thing (and probably because he is young), all I am saying is they should have expected it knowing his bio, at least I do (and a lot of the press to it seems).

Well if it was possible for us to tie Saliba down to a longer contract I can kind of see your point. But there's nothing to suggest that Saliba's people would have agreed this. I don't buy that winning trophies would make no difference to his desire to leave. There's nothing to base your 'trophy driven' observation on - and like almost all 'top players' silverware is a significant motivation. Like you say he is young and if he ultimately wishes to play for RM or PSG then he could do while re-signing with us. Not winning - or looking like we will win - makes it more likely that he won't re-sign.

I don't disagree with you about the club not maximising transfer values for outgoing players generally, but in this particular case I'm not sure that your criticism is totally merited - or the biggest of our failings. Like I say, I don't think 4 years was negligent in terms of contract length, and there's nothing to say the club didn't push for longer, or an extension clause. 2 years out we can still cash in well if he doesn't want to commit to us. But this takes a certain amount of bravery and replacement planning. It is these latter attributes that I have less confidence in, not the deal done in 2023.

[21_GOONER_SALUTE]

So the examples you gave me are Joe Gomez who let’s be fair is a squad player at best for Liverpool and Phil Foden who is a Man City academy player. The circumstances aren’t really like for like are they?

But again I ask you, do you think the club chose to only give Saliba a two year extension or do you think they might have wanted to tie him down to a longer deal but a player with no natural loyalty to the club and an agent who like all agents is thinking of money first and foremost may have persuaded his client to only sign a two year deal?

So let's make this easy, seeing as I'm the one who is being irrational, despite being the only one who bothers to give similar examples to why I believe we faltered, yet again.

Can you give me an example, in the last 5 years, of a top professional footballer (before you go looking for what happened at Notts County) who turned down a new contract at his existing club because it was 5 years or more.

Once you do that I'll apologise to everyone here for being irrational and OTT.

Edit:
@IBK
Just seen your last post, the same challenge goes to you

[HCZ_Reborn]

So let's make this easy, seeing as I'm the one who is being irrational, despite being the only one who bothers to give similar examples to why I believe we faltered, yet again.

Can you give me an example, in the last 5 years, of a top professional footballer (before you go looking for what happened at Notts County) who turned down a new contract at his existing club because it was 5 years or more.

Once you do that I'll apologise to everyone here for being irrational and OTT.

Edit:
@IBK
Just seen your last post, the same challenge goes to you

At the risk of answering your question with a question, have you heard of a club withdrawing from contract negotiations with a player because they wanted to tie him down for longer than the player wanted?


This is why they are called contract negotiations, the club might want one thing, the agent and the player another and in most cases the press aren’t going to hear about what goes on behind closed doors


So to put my point in further perspective. There are lots of decisions made by management in my job that utterly mystify me…but I accept that I can only reason with the information available to me. I make a point in meetings of questioning what they do, and you know sometimes they’ve had to factor in something I’ve not even considered, and sometimes yeah….its just utter fucking stupidity

So alls I’m saying is, it’s not a happy time to be an Arsenal fan we all feel pissed off. But as I say, it could be that we have people in charge who are about as business savvy as those at the head of ENRON. It could equally be that there are factors involved that we’ve not considered