As we're unlikely to see terraces again at football, this is the virtual equivalent where you can chat to your hearts content about all football matters and, obviously, Arsenal in particular. This forum encourages all Gooners to visit and contribute so please keep it respectful, clean and topical.
LDB wrote:I voted yes, I wouldn't say he is "the future of the club" (whatever that is supposed to mean) but he is by far one of our most productive players and has been for a couple of years now. Not a perfect player by any means but I doubt any other big club would make such a piffling fuss about a 100k pw contract for one of its best performers through his peak years. Only at the Glorious People's Republic of Arsene.
But if we were to have an overhaul of our wage structure which resulted in top players being paid top money and those beneath them being paid on a sliding scale accordingly, then shouldnt this overhaul start straight away ? Isnt overpaying feo on the basis that others are shit just a continuation of the same wage policy that all of us fans have bemoaned for a long time now ? Players should be paid based on consistant performances and ability end of.....if wally suffers on the back of that get tough formula then so be it
Look the reason why I, and several others on here, want to see him signed up is pretty fucking simple. He is currently the best striker at the club and we know that if he goes then the history of the past 5 years shows that any replacement would almost certainly be lower quality
Is Walcott a natural centre forward? No
Is Walcott the finished article? No
Is Walcott likely to have even half the impact of TH14? No
But on the other hand....
Will the Self Harmer sign anyone better? No
Do I want to see another one of our better players supplement City, Chelsea or United's squad? No
Is 90k even remotely a lot of money in PL terms these days? No
This is quite simple - all those voting not to pay it are clearly comfortable with seeing the club's new best striker leave and join a rival club something which provoked an outcry last time (not saying he's as good as RvP before knickers get twisted) followed by a cheap African/Frenchman joining as a replacement. That is undoubtedly what will happen if he goes
If Wenger changed his policy......if we cleared the clutter off the wage bill.....if we paid top players 150k per week etc. I'm not interested in fiction - those 'ifs' have been in the room since we moved to the Bowl and neither Jimmy K, Chief Chump or the Self Harmer will ever address those issues. So under the present regime Walcott needs to stay for all our sakes
I am not answering this until you spell Walcott correctly. He is one of the easy names to spell. I would understand if it was Chamkah or the even harder mekon/Gervinho.
Tbh David Ornstein from BBC Sport's 'inside info' is much more believable.
Basically said that Arsenal haven't actually tried any formal negotiations since the first contract was rejected, but Walcott is thawing due to playing time up top and is very likely to sign if Arsenal come back with a financially-improved offer, as his agents are expecting in the near future.
spendsum4uckingmoney wrote:Does Cott deserve 90k a week? nah but then Rosicky, Denilson, Bendter, Diaby dont deserve 40-50k a week. Atleast Cott plays double the amount of those guys. Hope its only a 2-3- year deal tho so if he doesnt improve we can shove him out.
Who the fuck is "Cott"? Is that some shit nickname you made up yourself?
LDB wrote:I voted yes, I wouldn't say he is "the future of the club" (whatever that is supposed to mean) but he is by far one of our most productive players and has been for a couple of years now. Not a perfect player by any means but I doubt any other big club would make such a piffling fuss about a 100k pw contract for one of its best performers through his peak years. Only at the Glorious People's Republic of Arsene.
But if we were to have an overhaul of our wage structure which resulted in top players being paid top money and those beneath them being paid on a sliding scale accordingly, then shouldnt this overhaul start straight away ? Isnt overpaying feo on the basis that others are shit just a continuation of the same wage policy that all of us fans have bemoaned for a long time now ? Players should be paid based on consistant performances and ability end of.....if wally suffers on the back of that get tough formula then so be it
There are surely two parts to fixing our wage structure: Paying our top players more as well as paying the dross less. This is purely academic because this wont change until Wenger is gone and we can speculate about when that will be until the cows come home. In the meantime I'll happily see at least half the equation dealt with to stop us getting any worse, even if it means (heaven forbid) poor old Ivan, Arsene and Stan's profits take a slight hit.
I Hate Hleb wrote:Sorry OBG but it is a shite thread with a dodgy and lopsided poll (1 positive option and 3 negative ones) to boot!!
Not sure that is fair tbh hlebby - for those in the pro wally camp it is a straight forward yes but for those who oppose paying him 100k, the options try to find out why and I think that it is fair enough I am surprised that less than half advocate paying him but option 2 to me suggests that fans are not opposed to paying him that much but only after he has shown the consistant level of performance to merit those wages and I have advocated that for a long time and it isnt an anti feo sentiment/option as such
I Hate Hleb wrote:Sorry OBG but it is a shite thread with a dodgy and lopsided poll (1 positive option and 3 negative ones) to boot!!
Actually Hlebby that's not quite correct - there are 2 - what could be said to be 'Positive' or 'Pro-Walcott' Options 1 & 2
And there are two that basically say get shot of him 3 & 4.....
Isnt overpaying feo on the basis that others are shit just a continuation of the same wage policy that all of us fans have bemoaned for a long time now ? Players should be paid based on consistant performances and ability end of.....if wally suffers on the back of that get tough formula then so be it
Is that some shit nickname you made up yourself? 
I am surprised that less than half advocate paying him but option 2 to me suggests that fans are not opposed to paying him that much but only after he has shown the consistant level of performance to merit those wages and I have advocated that for a long time and it isnt an anti feo sentiment/option as such
