or to join or start a new Discussion

33 Comments
Article Rating     Not Rated Yet

Who would you have bought this summer?

I see a lot of (valid) uproar amongst the fans around the transfers we've made this summer (both in terms of the incomings and the lack of outgoings).

My question is who would you have signed this summer, and for how much?

My list would have been:

Buendia - £40m
Bissouma - £40m
Zaha - £40m
Onana - £8-10m

That takes us to £130m spent in total, for 4 nailed on starters.
For context, we have spent a similar amount this summer and only two of the 4 players we have bought (Odegaard and White) actually start for us.

Plus I would potentially get (if we have leftover cash from outgoings)

A new striker - £30-60m (depending on who it is)
A new RB - £15-25m

That would take us to around £200m of outgoings.

Potential sales:

£25m Willock
£15m Xhaka

Plus whatever we can get for:
Bellerin
AMN
Nketiah
Auba or Laca (but not both - my preference would be Auba)

Net net, with the above, you'd hope to end up around £100m net outlay with a significantly improved first team.

Right now we have an identical first 11 to our final game of last season, with the exception of David Luiz for Ben White - yet we've spent £130m on new signings.

It's a bit worrying.


posted on 20/8/21

Still trying to blame Wenger 8bit? We're so far beyond "Arsene's fault " now it's unreal.

The problem is Stan ke, it's always been him and it's going to keep being him right up until that Godforesaken family sell up and clear the feck out. HOW we spend money is all about him hamstringing EVERY transfer regime since he had a controlling share. He doesn't understand football and he understand s even less about how football business is conducted. That's why no matter how much we spend he ALWAYS wants too much footballer for the cash he's spending.

Example, we've just spent over 100 mil, yeah. But Arteta's had to buy FIVE feckin players for that. Meanwhile City, Chelsea, Man U and Pools Managers are free to stomp 60, 80, 100 mil on ONE player. Almost every season THEY are buying someone 60 mil plus, sometimes more than one. Meanwhile our managers have to buy 2 or 3 players for that. Unless they can find some mad long payment deal like Pepe.

So where they will accumulate 4-5 top players over as many years by default. Our managers are largely forced back to the drawing board each season to rinse and repeat after more than half what they bought is dire and the rest is average at best. They've accumulated top talent where we've accumulated dross. THAT'S what ultimately stuffed Wenger, despite what our spend appeared to be. No manager actually gets to spend the money HOW he wants on WHOMEVER he wants. ke's demented idea of transfer spending has been in the way for years and it's the underlying cause of the decline over the last 8-10 years. He is a slow cancer Wenger stemmed off for years then fell on his sword for by keeping quiet about just how much that dumb yank interferes in all things money. You keep hating on/blaming the wrong bloke mate.

posted on 20/8/21

Don't agree with WB2. I don't think you can fault KSE for not putting money when they have been doing for a while. Its pretty much a fact. You can fault with people who demand the spending and then actually spend the money. Thats the managers.

Do accumulate deadwood you have to buy it first.

posted on 20/8/21

If anything KSE can be faulted for trying to run the club by remote control. They have no clue how to appoint managers and then how to monitor/judge their progress.

posted on 20/8/21

comment by Dan Arsenal (U21084)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 6 minutes ago
MY first signing this summer would have been Zidane and feck Arteta off. Then give ZZ the 125 mil the arrogant management inept moron has just been given to spend.

In the ideal world that he takes the job and fat cheque with it, he then goes and gets who he wants. Unlike Arteta has the pedigree to attract FAR better players than Arteta. Some players would opt for us over a CL club simply because it means they get to work with a football God for 3-4 years. Our only hope this window was Arteta being sacked and a manager of that status being brought in. Because without CL footy, that's the ONLY way we could have gotten any top player still worth. As opposed to the "Relative nobody's turning us down," Arteta run sh !t show we have seen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This ain't fantasy football mate. Why would a superstar like Zidane come to struggling 8th placed Arsenal? Arteta is our level at the moment. Much like Nuno is Tottenham's
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're overlooking that regardless of the recent sh !t show, we are still Arsenal FC one of the world's biggest clubs. At season's end we were "1 top manager and a fat spend in the window" away from CL footy 21/22. So unless ZZ was desperate to manage in CL this upcoming season the lack of it for us is irrelevant. Since if he takes it and finishes 4th after getting a couple of top quality players (who come because it's him) then he's in CL next season at one of the biggest clubs in the world's best league.

He obviously wouldn't be cheap but I think the right pay cheque, Arteta's transfer kitty, the pedigree of the club and the fact the squad was/is NOWHERE near as bad as Arteta's made it look this season. That's not particularly "Fantasy" to be honest I'd see any potential deal derailer more likely being, English weather, English food or English people. Nothing football related, just the French not liking us or our stuff very much

posted on 20/8/21

comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 17 seconds ago
If anything KSE can be faulted for trying to run the club by remote control. They have no clue how to appoint managers and then how to monitor/judge their progress.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. How cheap can his wages be

2. How much can I loball his transfer demands.

There's the candidate selection criteria, as for the progress/performance monitoring that's done by way of the "How much money have I managed to funnel away from team into dodgy deals that'll stick it in my pocket this season" scale. Arteta's kept his job despite the worst showing for 80-90 years because Stan got FFFFECKIN PIZAAAAID! last season. So he's re-signed the chump on chump change (compared to class) wages and he's set to get his greedy pockets lined again this one. Dude gets a fat chunk of money out of every one of these botched ass windows we see. Why else do you think he's keeps doing it even though the team suffers for it.

posted on 20/8/21

comment by WB2 {Tackle Like Tierney} (U8276)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 17 seconds ago
If anything KSE can be faulted for trying to run the club by remote control. They have no clue how to appoint managers and then how to monitor/judge their progress.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. How cheap can his wages be

2. How much can I loball his transfer demands.

There's the candidate selection criteria, as for the progress/performance monitoring that's done by way of the "How much money have I managed to funnel away from team into dodgy deals that'll stick it in my pocket this season" scale. Arteta's kept his job despite the worst showing for 80-90 years because Stan got FFFFECKIN PIZAAAAID! last season. So he's re-signed the chump on chump change (compared to class) wages and he's set to get his greedy pockets lined again this one. Dude gets a fat chunk of money out of every one of these botched ass windows we see. Why else do you think he's keeps doing it even though the team suffers for it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Every club has to limit their losses or they can't buy players. So wage budgets reflect how well the club is doing to an extent. Remember you have to be able to attract players to your club as well. And if Arsenal are not in Europe you can't really do that.

Now you excused Arteta by saying he had to spend £130m on 5 players rather than on 1 player. Just look at Arteta's spending:

Pablo Mari £10 million.
Gabriel £27 million.
Partey £45 million.
Runarsson £2 million.
Tavares £8 million.
Lokonga £20 million.
Ben White £50 million
Ødegaard £30 million.
Ramsdale £30 million.

That’s £220 million spent.

We spent top whack on Partey, Ben White, Odegaard and Ramsdale.

Ben White is in the top 10 of the most expensive Centre Backs in premier league history.

Ramsdale will become the fifth-most expensive stopper in the world. Ever.

We paid Partey's release clause so we didn't get a discount on him. And he is one of the most expensive CMs in history.

posted on 20/8/21

comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
Don't agree with WB2. I don't think you can fault KSE for not putting money when they have been doing for a while. Its pretty much a fact. You can fault with people who demand the spending and then actually spend the money. Thats the managers.

Do accumulate deadwood you have to buy it first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes but as I keep saying we accumulate deadwood because Stan keeps under cutting the spend. City 100 mil for Grealish alone, where Arsenal's manager has to buy 3 or 4 players for the same spend.

Like I said, he wants too much footballer for what he does put in. The way you talk about him putting money in, anyone would think we'd regularly brought in top quality signings for big money each window. But we haven't because our manager's have been for to stretch the money they've been given.

It's neither accident nor mass staff incompetence for years which is behind us NEVER buying the CORRECT single big buy but always buying "Someone cheaper" or 3-4 nobodys instead. That's ke's damned transfer business model. And the current team is the result of season upon season of forcing managers to overextend the cash provided to the huge long-term detriment of the squad.

posted on 20/8/21

Its more like the managers weren't good enough to target players that would have made the difference. We are never going to out spend City or Utd. However if you examine our net spend for the last 10 years its actually very similar to Chelsea. Have you noticed how much success they've had compared to us?

Whats the difference? They change managers if they under perform whereas we stick hoping they come good. In my opinion thats been the problem. The managers we hire have too much influence on our signings and then we have to start again when we have to fire the managers (which we do too late). The players they have signed end up as deadwood.

What we need to do is have a coherent upper management who buy players and then make sure our manager hires are appropriate to their skillset. Then if they are not move onto the next man quickly.

Its far cheaper to hire and fire managers. Players cost a lot of money, take time to develop or settle and its very difficult to find good ones.

posted on 21/8/21

comment by TBag. (U11806)
posted 1 day, 18 hours ago
Keep Saliba & don't sign White
Onana as GK
Guimarães for CDM
Someone like Aarons for RB
Buendia for AM

Would still do Tavares & Lokonga

Then if we can shift Laca, Eddie and a few others I'd go all out for a top young CF like Martinez or Vlahovic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yup this would have been my approach, although I'd sign Bissouma ahead of Bruno (Bruno being my 2nd choice).

posted on 21/8/21

comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 12 hours, 45 minutes ago
Its more like the managers weren't good enough to target players that would have made the difference. We are never going to out spend City or Utd. However if you examine our net spend for the last 10 years its actually very similar to Chelsea. Have you noticed how much success they've had compared to us?

Whats the difference? They change managers if they under perform whereas we stick hoping they come good. In my opinion thats been the problem. The managers we hire have too much influence on our signings and then we have to start again when we have to fire the managers (which we do too late). The players they have signed end up as deadwood.

What we need to do is have a coherent upper management who buy players and then make sure our manager hires are appropriate to their skillset. Then if they are not move onto the next man quickly.

Its far cheaper to hire and fire managers. Players cost a lot of money, take time to develop or settle and its very difficult to find good ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This.

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 0 from 0 votes

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available