Summer Transfers 2025 Missed Opportunities and Regrets

[Mac76]

Funny how on the one hand fans say that Arsenal should just pay what the selling club wants to get the job done, but on the other they bleat over a perception that we have not played hard ball with a transfer fee

... the crucial difference being that we absolutely MUST get a good striker and Eze is a quality signing which anyone with eyes would like to see at Arsenal - in other words they, in terms of the specific players, are much higher priorities than a suspect Chelsea reject - so in terms of bargaining we have got it the wrong way around

Anyway, how do you know that Arsenal made no attempt to negotiate the Madueke fee? This would run counter to what we know about how Arsenal does business...

because all the signs from reputable sources are that we are paying what Chelsea wanted hence the fact we got it done in a week basically, unlike Gyokeres who's taken two months despite being desperate to play for us and Eze who is taking much longer also.

And your basic maths point is pretty irrelevant really.

That looks like an HCZ type of 'irrelevant' which means you've no credible answer so you just dismiss it

Whether the Madueke fee affects other transfers depends what funds are available to the club to spend.

sorry but

[Marc Overmars]

All negotiations have moving parts and are never the same, you can’t compare each deal. The most important thing is that the player signs and that’s what we’re getting done.

Gyokeres has taken longer because Sporting didn’t want to play ball, probably because the player himself put their nose out of joint by going on strike.

Madueke was done quickly because we apparently have a good relationship with Chelsea at board level and the clubs valued the player pretty much the same. We can scoff at the fee but look at what players are going for now especially from PL to PL club. 50m is basically 20m 10 years ago.

[Mac76]

So there's an additional sticking point with Gyokeres apparently, relating to the terms of the add-ons

This is why I've not been premature about it being done, hopefully it's just a bit of posturing by Sporting but ffs Arsenal don't mess this up over some loose change please

[Marc Overmars]

Newcastle in talks to sign Hugo Ekitike. Wonder what that could mean for Isak, would be quite horrific if he ends up at Liverpool.

[Mac76]

Newcastle in talks to sign Hugo Ekitike. Wonder what that could mean for Isak, would be quite horrific if he ends up at Liverpool.

Maybe it's just to give them more firepower, Callum Wilson's not at the right level any more

[IBK]

... the crucial difference being that we absolutely MUST get a good striker and Eze is a quality signing which anyone with eyes would like to see at Arsenal - in other words they, in terms of the specific players, are much higher priorities than a suspect Chelsea reject - so in terms of bargaining we have got it the wrong way around




because all the signs from reputable sources are that we are paying what Chelsea wanted hence the fact we got it done in a week basically, unlike Gyokeres who's taken two months despite being desperate to play for us and Eze who is taking much longer also.



That looks like an HCZ type of 'irrelevant' which means you've no credible answer so you just dismiss it



sorry but

OK I'm bored, so...

It makes me smile how fans with no inside knowledge at all make judgments about how we approach transfer business in such a black and white fashion based on their perceptions of our needs. I get that we need a striker of course, but making assumptions about the negotiations for Madueke and those for Gyokeres, and slamming the club for their alleged different approach in these is IMHO misguided and unjustified. Firstly, what is key in any negotiation is what Arsenal's valuation of a player is. It has been reported that the club believe they have secured a ‘great deal’ with Chelsea and are excited by the versatility that Madueke possesses. Also, that the structure of the Madueke deal - £48.5 million up front, likely in instalments, with £3.5 million in performance related add-ons’ on top of this - is such that it allows Arsenal to move for Eze.

If you look at Madueke as a cheaper, versatile option with potential to improve in a far healthier environment and with an excellent coach in Arteta than say Rogrigo - that retains the club's ability to move for Eze - the deal starts to look very different.

Then you have the selling club. While many Gooners don't want Arsenal to do business with Chelsea (I couldn't care less who we deal with if we get the player the manager wants), the fact is that we have a good relationship with them, and it is quite possible - particularly given that they were keen on selling him - that they simply didn't go the traditional route of slapping an overvaluation on him and then having to be negotiated down. A quick deal does not necessarily mean that we overpaid, and I emphasise again that Arsenal do not have a track record of overpaying for players - quite the opposite. I'm sorry, but the theory I have seen that we somehow were open to doing Chelsea a favour is ridiculous. We wanted the player, the deal was in line with our valuation, and we landed him.

Turning to Gyokores, the situation is clearly different in that we have a valuation that Sporting has been unwilling to meet. Sporting is a notoriously difficult club to deal with and this, not adopting a different approach to Madueke, is the reason why matters have become protracted.

Then the perceived merits of the 2 players. We lack a striker for sure, but this need was hugely exacerbated last season by the long term injuries to Jesus and Havertz. We are not a team that depends on a 30 goal a season striker - I have argued previously that 15-20 goals would be sufficient to elevate us to where we need to get to. In terms of importance, you could turn things around and argue that of all our injuries last season - that of our best player, Saka, was the most significant reaon why we didn't win silverware. Madueke is clearly being brought in to relieve the burden on Saka, potentially to provide an option on the LW also; to add unpredictablility and pace to our team and to try to mitigate against key injuries next season. There is an argument that this is equally as important as bringing in a striker. To be clear, I make these points not as a debate on the merits of Gyokores or Madueke per se - but to counter your assumption about priorities as regards the needs of this team. Remember, I am not for a moment suggesting that buying a striker is not a top priority. I am simply countering the criticism the club is getting for the Madueke deal.

As for your dismissal of my response to your 'basic maths' point, I am surprised at this because it is so simple. If what we paid for Madueke does not prevent us from signing Eze what exactly is your issue?

[IBK]

All negotiations have moving parts and are never the same, you can’t compare each deal. The most important thing is that the player signs and that’s what we’re getting done.

Gyokeres has taken longer because Sporting didn’t want to play ball, probably because the player himself put their nose out of joint by going on strike.

Madueke was done quickly because we apparently have a good relationship with Chelsea at board level and the clubs valued the player pretty much the same. We can scoff at the fee but look at what players are going for now especially from PL to PL club. 50m is basically 20m 10 years ago.

You basically sum up what I am trying to say much more succinctly than my post mate, but like I said I'm a bit bored today

[HCZ_Reborn]

OK I'm bored, so...

It makes me smile how fans with no inside knowledge at all make judgments about how we approach transfer business in such a black and white fashion based on their perceptions of our needs. I get that we need a striker of course, but making assumptions about the negotiations for Madueke and those for Gyokeres, and slamming the club for their alleged different approach in these is IMHO misguided and unjustified. Firstly, what is key in any negotiation is what Arsenal's valuation of a player is. It has been reported that the club believe they have secured a ‘great deal’ with Chelsea and are excited by the versatility that Madueke possesses. Also, that the structure of the Madueke deal - £48.5 million up front, likely in instalments, with £3.5 million in performance related add-ons’ on top of this - is such that it allows Arsenal to move for Eze.

If you look at Madueke as a cheaper, versatile option with potential to improve in a far healthier environment and with an excellent coach in Arteta than say Rogrigo - that retains the club's ability to move for Eze - the deal starts to look very different.

Then you have the selling club. While many Gooners don't want Arsenal to do business with Chelsea (I couldn't care less who we deal with if we get the player the manager wants), the fact is that we have a good relationship with them, and it is quite possible - particularly given that they were keen on selling him - that they simply didn't go the traditional route of slapping an overvaluation on him and then having to be negotiated down. A quick deal does not necessarily mean that we overpaid, and I emphasise again that Arsenal do not have a track record of overpaying for players - quite the opposite. I'm sorry, but the theory I have seen that we somehow were open to doing Chelsea a favour is ridiculous. We wanted the player, the deal was in line with our valuation, and we landed him.

Turning to Gyokores, the situation is clearly different in that we have a valuation that Sporting has been unwilling to meet. Sporting is a notoriously difficult club to deal with and this, not adopting a different approach to Madueke, is the reason why matters have become protracted.

Then the perceived merits of the 2 players. We lack a striker for sure, but this need was hugely exacerbated last season by the long term injuries to Jesus and Havertz. We are not a team that depends on a 30 goal a season striker - I have argued previously that 15-20 goals would be sufficient to elevate us to where we need to get to. In terms of importance, you could turn things around and argue that of all our injuries last season - that of our best player, Saka, was the most significant reaon why we didn't win silverware. Madueke is clearly being brought in to relieve the burden on Saka, potentially to provide an option on the LW also; to add unpredictablility and pace to our team and to try to mitigate against key injuries next season. There is an argument that this is equally as important as bringing in a striker. To be clear, I make these points not as a debate on the merits of Gyokores or Madueke per se - but to counter your assumption about priorities as regards the needs of this team. Remember, I am not for a moment suggesting that buying a striker is not a top priority. I am simply countering the criticism the club is getting for the Madueke deal.

As for your dismissal of my response to your 'basic maths' point, I am surprised at this because it is so simple. If what we paid for Madueke does not prevent us from signing Eze what exactly is your issue?

I’m a little resentful of the fact that we have good relations with Chelsea, but that’s because I despise the club, I think the club even more than Man City represents everything I despise in football and I’d enjoy nothing more than to seeing them get relegated and liquidated. However putting my rational hat on, we have a club that is abundant in footballers and if one of them meets the profile of what the club is looking for, then I can see the validity of us doing business for him.
The failure of some people on here is a failure to appreciate the difference between buying a player that the club either wants to sell or is ok with selling, with one the club distinctly doesn’t want to sell (even if the player themselves wants to come). Maybe where the club perhaps doesn’t always get it right, is that we sell the club to the prospective signing and believe that will put pressure on the selling club. I don’t think it does always work like that, and to be honest it’s massively hypocritical given we reported Chelsea to the FA over “tapping up” Ashley Cole, yet we seem now to have agreed personal terms with players before we’ve even approached the club.
We are far from alone in that regard, and I think it’s about the changing nature of how football transfers work but still.
I think ultimately there are people here who will not be satisfied no matter what we do, I don’t want Gyokeres im clear on that fact but from a dispassionate perspective, it has to be said the club operated quite efficiently in that it tried to get a deal for Sesko but realised this wasn’t going to work and the player himself wasn’t going to make waves to force the move so we moved on to our secondary target. There’s no doubt last summer and the January transfer window did not do wonders for the clubs perception of being competent, but I really think it’s hard to argue that we’ve not operated quite efficiently thus far this summer which doesn’t fit with the complaints about how the club has been sitting on its hands, we are quite possibly going to be in a position where six summer signings are in place by the time pre-season begins.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Personally I think it’s too early to pass final judgement on this summer transfer either positively or negatively, things could still go south but I do think the club seems to have at least tried to make good on its promises.

I’m not totally without understanding for people that have been jittery and trumping the “here we go again” line. Actions speak louder than words, and we all agree that what we can now probably call last season was largely a damp squib with the Real Madrid tie being the one unblemished positive in what was otherwise a great deal of stuttering and stalling.

However the reactions to the Madueke transfer have been childishly pathetic, I don’t mean so much here I mean in the other social media spaces. Imagine signing a petition or daubing graffiti on a mural over it, and for what? Because this signing might get announced before others, because people think we’ve overpaid (even though it’s largely very much in keeping with the going rate for young English talent) and other acts of childish petulance.

Whatever I say about anyone here, people come here and rant and that rant might prove to be founded or it might just be precipitous. But no one here is doing performative nonsense for influence peddling. I know it’s a low bar but in an online world where so much is done for “clicks”. This dusty old place, because there’s so few of us works far better as a venting vessel because it’s not going to influence mass toxic behaviour

[IBK]

I agree with both your posts. I was one of those getting jittery about our transfers a few weeks ago - with some justification given the tyre fire of the past 2 transfer windows. But the situation now is very different. If as I expect we land Gyokores then we are IMO nearly there as regards the business I would reasonably have expected the club to do, and we seem to have been reasonably effective in landing our targets and avoiding a damaging situation re our striker pursuit. I really want Eze - and think that this (or an equivalent) is necessary for our Summer transfer business to be regarded as a complete success, but I now have more faith than I did in our ability to get this done also.

Like you I feel that the Madueke hysteria in some quarters is embarrassing.