Oly Arsenal will know? Come now - we know know easily enough we see the players on the pitch now and how good they are or are not and now have a pretty good idea how they are paid.stg wrote:Unrealistic or not it could happen then where does it stop he demands xxxK per week increase, Walcott walks in and demands the same because he set up most of his goals, Fabregas and RVP walk in and what a rise inline with NB and Walcott. Wenger and the board say no all lets loose on the forums because RVP/Fabregas and Walcott put in transfer requests. Arsenal have a set wage structure how many players have left Arsenal because of wages in the past 5 seasons there is a fine line between giving too much or too little but only Arsenal will know if they have it correct or notWe have the money to do that if it were to come to that. If a player s performance earns a greater deal isn't that what we want? But since that is about as likely to strike as a streak ofhumility in the lad I think that is pretty unrealistic
The reality is simple - even if we assume what you say might happen does happen. You deal with each situatiion individually, measuring the value of the individual player to the team relative to their wages and/or wage demands. At the same time you measure the cost of replacing that player if you are unable or unwilling to meet their wages.
Its funny but we didn't a bunch of players beating down the door to leave Arsenal before 2005 in part because they were paid sufficient wages and in part because they were in a winning team that won trophies. You think those players couldn't have left for more money if that suited them?
They almost all left on frees because either they couldn't earn more elsewhere or couldn't be confident of winning trophies where they could earn more. That is why we have had so many players particularly the summer of 2004 leave for free or minimal transfer fees (Wiltord, Kanu, Parlour). The reason Edu and Pires and Campbell the first time round all left for free was because they were on satisfactory wages until the time to sign new contracts arose.
Losing players like them for free was solely down to an unwillingness to pay them what they actually earned at Arsenal going forward. I mean what other business benefit was there in losing them for free? Oh that paying them 70K was better than paying their replacements 70K because replacements on those wages of that quality would cost more in transfer fees.
Of course had we sold Highbury instead of borrowing another 120 million and eliminating revenue to pay for the stadium loan as we did then we might not have been forced to make the same sorts of choices, no?
