Percy if only, could of kept Galles for another year as well. Would given proper cover at the back, and a old head when needed..Percy Dalton wrote:I know nothing about the guy but I amhappy that he is experienced and not too green.
I will admit that I would have liked someone with Premier League experience but that would have cost a few quid and you know the rest!
EXCELLENT post. I have been making this point for several years, and pointing out how this basically allows the Board to say "money is available to spend" without actually having to spend it. It's actually even been allueded to by the manager who when discussing a few players has said their wages make pursuing them pointless.psychoangus wrote:I've said this elsewhere, but it's not always in the case of Arsenal how much we have in the transfer kitty. Wenger is given by HR and Finance (or whatever the equivalent is) a rock-solid wage structure. Players under 21 in the first team will have a maximum level per week, players under 21 as squad players a separate wage structure, first team superstars like Van Persie will have another. There will be criteria laid down for how much a week Arsenal will be prepared to give a 37-year old goalkeeper, and it wont be much. Therefore we can offer £20mil for Schwarzer, but if he wants 50k a week, and our structure is limited in the case of old goalies to 25k, then the deal's dead.MegaGooner wrote:The board.....lol. Well disguised though.USMartin wrote:A lot of what you say above is valid and spot-on. But why are you so sure its simply down to the manager and if in fact you aren't why is there any hope for change under anew manager if in fact its his employers selling us short by not making more money available?MegaGooner wrote:This thread is a good example of how divided our supporters are now. It's actually becoming a joke. It just goes to show the state in which we find ourselves(and club) in. I can understand everyones points on here, but on a personal note feel that Wenger is selling our club short. Making signings just to fill numbers makes no sense. We ARE a big club. We shouldn't be negotiating over price. I understand that we don't want to overpay on players, but from experience, sometimes just biting the bullit and putting the money on the table would guarentee we get the player. It's frustrating when you hear that we lost out on certain player because of a 500K difference in the valuation of the player. AFC should be argueing about a £2m price difference on a player. We are fast becoming a club that will attract players for Wengers willingness to reward mediocrity and not because we win trophies.Soon we will have all average players and no World Class players. I hope Wenger can prove me wrong, but until that time...I live in hope. Rant over.
I am just so frustrated with Arsenal at the moment. FFS we are a big club. We were told in January that we had a £30m budget. At the beginning of this window, we were told we got £30m to spend. My point is if we had £60m to spend, I wouldn't have spent it either. I would have bought Chamakh in Jan for 3m. He could have saved our season...if not, it would have gotten him used to the pace of the PL. So if we got all this money and we are the highest "credit" rated club in England, and we got a good bond rate, why are we trying to pay the loan off in this impossible amount of time, knowing that it is hurting us badly. AFC should understand that we are not an estate agent. WE ARE A FOOTBALL CLUB AND A VERY GOOD ONE AT THAT. So come on AFC...listen to your people.
Of course, people will say "Well use some of the transfer kitty to bump up the wage structure to accomodate such players" and I agree this can be done (although it basically gives everyone in the entire squad, from youth to first team a pay rise) but this structure is being handed to Wenger from HR and Finance and therefore the Directors; I imagine although he can spend as much as he feels in terms of transfer funds, he has no control over the maximum he is able to offer in wages.
All I'm saying is it might be beyond Wenger's control when it actually comes to the contract, and concentrating on how much we should offer the clubs for these players might be missing the point of the problem.
For instance Werder probably did accept an offer from us for £13m but if Ozil wants 150k a week, then he ain't coming to us.
But if you wanna wail on the board who set this wage structure then go ahead, I fully agree.
USMartin wrote:EXCELLENT post. I have been making this point for several years, and pointing out how this basically allows the Board to say "money is available to spend" without actually having to spend it. It's actually even been allueded to by the manager who when discussing a few players has said their wages make pursuing them pointless.psychoangus wrote:I've said this elsewhere, but it's not always in the case of Arsenal how much we have in the transfer kitty. Wenger is given by HR and Finance (or whatever the equivalent is) a rock-solid wage structure. Players under 21 in the first team will have a maximum level per week, players under 21 as squad players a separate wage structure, first team superstars like Van Persie will have another. There will be criteria laid down for how much a week Arsenal will be prepared to give a 37-year old goalkeeper, and it wont be much. Therefore we can offer £20mil for Schwarzer, but if he wants 50k a week, and our structure is limited in the case of old goalies to 25k, then the deal's dead.MegaGooner wrote:The board.....lol. Well disguised though.USMartin wrote:A lot of what you say above is valid and spot-on. But why are you so sure its simply down to the manager and if in fact you aren't why is there any hope for change under anew manager if in fact its his employers selling us short by not making more money available?MegaGooner wrote:This thread is a good example of how divided our supporters are now. It's actually becoming a joke. It just goes to show the state in which we find ourselves(and club) in. I can understand everyones points on here, but on a personal note feel that Wenger is selling our club short. Making signings just to fill numbers makes no sense. We ARE a big club. We shouldn't be negotiating over price. I understand that we don't want to overpay on players, but from experience, sometimes just biting the bullit and putting the money on the table would guarentee we get the player. It's frustrating when you hear that we lost out on certain player because of a 500K difference in the valuation of the player. AFC should be argueing about a £2m price difference on a player. We are fast becoming a club that will attract players for Wengers willingness to reward mediocrity and not because we win trophies.Soon we will have all average players and no World Class players. I hope Wenger can prove me wrong, but until that time...I live in hope. Rant over.
I am just so frustrated with Arsenal at the moment. FFS we are a big club. We were told in January that we had a £30m budget. At the beginning of this window, we were told we got £30m to spend. My point is if we had £60m to spend, I wouldn't have spent it either. I would have bought Chamakh in Jan for 3m. He could have saved our season...if not, it would have gotten him used to the pace of the PL. So if we got all this money and we are the highest "credit" rated club in England, and we got a good bond rate, why are we trying to pay the loan off in this impossible amount of time, knowing that it is hurting us badly. AFC should understand that we are not an estate agent. WE ARE A FOOTBALL CLUB AND A VERY GOOD ONE AT THAT. So come on AFC...listen to your people.
Of course, people will say "Well use some of the transfer kitty to bump up the wage structure to accomodate such players" and I agree this can be done (although it basically gives everyone in the entire squad, from youth to first team a pay rise) but this structure is being handed to Wenger from HR and Finance and therefore the Directors; I imagine although he can spend as much as he feels in terms of transfer funds, he has no control over the maximum he is able to offer in wages.
All I'm saying is it might be beyond Wenger's control when it actually comes to the contract, and concentrating on how much we should offer the clubs for these players might be missing the point of the problem.
For instance Werder probably did accept an offer from us for £13m but if Ozil wants 150k a week, then he ain't coming to us.
But if you wanna wail on the board who set this wage structure then go ahead, I fully agree.
This deliberate means of mis-leading supporters about their desire and ambitions is disgraceful frankly and it could first be seen in whatever you think of him personally the Ashley Cole Fiasco where the Premier League basically confirmed that the Board ignored the manager's desire to keep Ashley Cole over saving 5K a week. It's no surprise really that this coincided and the new wage structure now in place you refer to coincided with the Board over-borrowing to pursue re-developing Highbury for an as-yet unused additional profit that has benefitted no one so far but the club's biggest shareholders.
Cheers for explaining this in further detail so people can see it more clearly.
I know you'll find otherwise because I have read the report rather than trust in rumors on blogs.richpye wrote:I think you will find that the £5k was declined as it was specifically to pay the agent. £5k a week, for an agent. Why should we pay for the fucker???
This is a man who, for £5k a week, probably told Cashley that he was a model and not a footballer, that he could show his cock to whoever he wanted and get away with it and was probably sitting at home wanking over pics of Cheryl every other day.
Blame the board all you like, and in some cases it may be justified. But paying some fat fucking wanker to stuff us up every few years is not one policy I would have supported
marcengels wrote:I've heard that USMartin and Quartz are involved in the negotiations so...no chance.
Maybe marc was rightBasil is a Gooner wrote:http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archiv ... -squillaci
It is easier on the goalkeeper front because we are not short of numbers.
