I think the question we need to ask is what has Buendia done for anyone to conclusively say he was the better choice over Odegaard?
Obviously we tried to get him Buendia and the narrative now is that we missed out on him, but it could be argued that he's just as much unproven at prem level as Odegaard is. I'm not convinced a 6 months winter loan spell is enough to judge a player. Looking at stats will only lead to wrong conclusions when judging a playmaker, they don't always make the final pass that everyone calls the assist. Sometimes the pre-assist is the most crucial part of an attacking move.
In the Westham game we saw him come alive, after that he got injured and was apparently playing through pain for the remaining games of the season. In other words, we might not be missing out on Buendia.
If you miss out on Odegaard too does that mean you didn't miss out on either? Or if they both flop next season is it neither?
I think they're both very good players. Buendia is less of a risk seeing as he's already living and playing in England.
Arsenal missed out as they were not willing to pay the fee Norwich wanted and Villa did. Unfortunately for Arsenal, then low balling teams won't work out unless no one else is interested.
I think it will end up being another season on loan for Odegaard as Arsenal don't have the funds to make a permanent transfer.
Jury is still out. Didn't show anything at Arsenal to match his hype.
Did this Buendia guy choose Villa over Arsenal?
comment by Everywhere you go always take Lamela with you. (U7905)
posted 12 minutes ago
Did this Buendia guy choose Villa over Arsenal?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends who you ask.
I for one was not overly impressed by him. He looks decent, but there was nothing there that really made him seem special.
---------------
Playing devil's advocate here but who has looked "special" in this team/set-up?
Partey is yet to justify the hype and his pricetag. Same can be said about Pepe, Gabriel and Mari.
Willian has been shocking while Auba scored less than half of the goals he did in the previous season.
Only Saka has had a good season and even him, it was mainly the first few months.
This is not me saying we should sign Ode by any mean. But there is a reason we finished 8th and it's hard to judge players in a very unbalanced team.
If we did get Ødegaard I'd be over the moon. He has the potential to the best playmaker in the world.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
We’re being quoted £35m for Neves, which has been described as being a ‘cut price deal’. 🤔
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Legacyton 125.2 (U8879)
posted 20 minutes ago
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All of this, really.
Pre-pandemic 50m would have been a great price for him, but who knows what the level is now.
People don't realise we took Ødegaard after him not playing for 6 months, had him adjust to a new league, team and tactical set up and had him carrying an injury for most of his time here. Despite visibly not being at his best, his introduction (along with the brilliant ESR) saw results that, if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming.
He's a lot, lot better than some here think.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Arsenal AFC (Absolute Fooking Crap) (U3245)
posted 40 minutes ago
Odegarbage is pretty poor though. He had 2 good games during his time here and one of these was against an awful Olympiacos. sort of player that only plays well when the team plays well, if we are struggling he will go missing. not the sort of player we need at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Buendia different in that regard?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Arsenal AFC (Absolute Fooking Crap) (U3245)
posted 28 minutes ago
"if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming."
do you honestly believe this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I mean, objectively yeah. I'm not saying that if we had played esr and Ødegaard all season we'd have done it, but if we could have it'd have been a remarkable success.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by We got our Arsenal back (U10012)
posted 1 hour, 50 minutes ago
I for one was not overly impressed by him. He looks decent, but there was nothing there that really made him seem special.
---------------
Playing devil's advocate here but who has looked "special" in this team/set-up?
Partey is yet to justify the hype and his pricetag. Same can be said about Pepe, Gabriel and Mari.
Willian has been shocking while Auba scored less than half of the goals he did in the previous season.
Only Saka has had a good season and even him, it was mainly the first few months.
This is not me saying we should sign Ode by any mean. But there is a reason we finished 8th and it's hard to judge players in a very unbalanced team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by We got our Arsenal back (U10012)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
I for one was not overly impressed by him. He looks decent, but there was nothing there that really made him seem special.
---------------
Playing devil's advocate here but who has looked "special" in this team/set-up?
Partey is yet to justify the hype and his pricetag. Same can be said about Pepe, Gabriel and Mari.
Willian has been shocking while Auba scored less than half of the goals he did in the previous season.
Only Saka has had a good season and even him, it was mainly the first few months.
This is not me saying we should sign Ode by any mean. But there is a reason we finished 8th and it's hard to judge players in a very unbalanced team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some truth to this but I'd argue the following -
1) Gabriel HAS looked special. And he showed that right from the start.
2) I personally think Mari is our best defender. He is solid, reads the game very well and makes very few mistakes (none that I can remember to be honest). He brings an air of calm and is deceptively quick. I would love to see us work on pairing Mari and Gabriel with Saliba being integrated and Hilding/Chambers as back up.
3) Pepe has been maligned due to the stupid price tag. In reality he was worth half that and at that price, he has been a success...despite playing for 3 managers and Arteta in his foolishness consistently dropping him for Willian. Pepe is the one of 3 players who I think are likely to score in games. Saka...for all his attributes is not one of those 3.
My biggest fear is that Arteta will mismanage any player we bring in. He has shown the inability to get the best out players and plays favourites (Willian over Pepe, Bellerin and Chambers over Cedric). Next season is the ultimate test for him.
comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
comment by Arsenal AFC (Absolute Fooking Crap) (U3245)
posted 40 minutes ago
Odegarbage is pretty poor though. He had 2 good games during his time here and one of these was against an awful Olympiacos. sort of player that only plays well when the team plays well, if we are struggling he will go missing. not the sort of player we need at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Buendia different in that regard?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buendia has proven himself in this country and the PL. You don't get to boss the Championship if you are not talented and strong physically and mentally. He also was in the top 5 chance creators in the PL whilst playing for a team that got relegated. That shows that he was still able to showcase his talent even at the highest kevel
comment by Girøulski Alt-0216 forever (U14971)
posted 2 hours ago
comment by Legacyton 125.2 (U8879)
posted 20 minutes ago
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All of this, really.
Pre-pandemic 50m would have been a great price for him, but who knows what the level is now.
People don't realise we took Ødegaard after him not playing for 6 months, had him adjust to a new league, team and tactical set up and had him carrying an injury for most of his time here. Despite visibly not being at his best, his introduction (along with the brilliant ESR) saw results that, if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming.
He's a lot, lot better than some here think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
35 mill for a 24 year old who has played and proven himself (scoring and assisting) in the PL and Championship... or a reported 50 mill for a 22 year old who we still are unsure of how well he'd fit into the PL?
comment by MaineGunner (U10130)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by Girøulski Alt-0216 forever (U14971)
posted 2 hours ago
comment by Legacyton 125.2 (U8879)
posted 20 minutes ago
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All of this, really.
Pre-pandemic 50m would have been a great price for him, but who knows what the level is now.
People don't realise we took Ødegaard after him not playing for 6 months, had him adjust to a new league, team and tactical set up and had him carrying an injury for most of his time here. Despite visibly not being at his best, his introduction (along with the brilliant ESR) saw results that, if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming.
He's a lot, lot better than some here think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
35 mill for a 24 year old who has played and proven himself (scoring and assisting) in the PL and Championship... or a reported 50 mill for a 22 year old who we still are unsure of how well he'd fit into the PL?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair points. For the record I really like Buendia and was excited by the prospect of him joining up with us. I had concerns that he was too similar to ESR in his play, but didn't consider them too big of an issue.
Ødegaard is a little bit better at controlling a game and its tempo . Whereas Buendia is all-action attack, Ødegaard (when he's on song) can dictate the game from slightly deeper. Stylistically, he's much more similar to Fabregas in that way. I'd hazard that that's more important for this Arsenal side right now.
I know the stats paint a story, but I believe in his talent. It seems people are unwilling to look at the potential in players these days, and are only willing to look at statistics. How many players under Wenger were clearly talented but took a while to get going? Henry took 8 games to score a goal. Ødegaard has only played 14 games for us, many of them carrying an injury.
Sometimes, football is about seeing something yet to blossom.
Sign in if you want to comment
Odegaard
Page 1 of 2
posted on 7/6/21
I think the question we need to ask is what has Buendia done for anyone to conclusively say he was the better choice over Odegaard?
Obviously we tried to get him Buendia and the narrative now is that we missed out on him, but it could be argued that he's just as much unproven at prem level as Odegaard is. I'm not convinced a 6 months winter loan spell is enough to judge a player. Looking at stats will only lead to wrong conclusions when judging a playmaker, they don't always make the final pass that everyone calls the assist. Sometimes the pre-assist is the most crucial part of an attacking move.
In the Westham game we saw him come alive, after that he got injured and was apparently playing through pain for the remaining games of the season. In other words, we might not be missing out on Buendia.
posted on 7/6/21
If you miss out on Odegaard too does that mean you didn't miss out on either? Or if they both flop next season is it neither?
posted on 7/6/21
I think they're both very good players. Buendia is less of a risk seeing as he's already living and playing in England.
posted on 7/6/21
Arsenal missed out as they were not willing to pay the fee Norwich wanted and Villa did. Unfortunately for Arsenal, then low balling teams won't work out unless no one else is interested.
I think it will end up being another season on loan for Odegaard as Arsenal don't have the funds to make a permanent transfer.
posted on 7/6/21
Jury is still out. Didn't show anything at Arsenal to match his hype.
posted on 7/6/21
Did this Buendia guy choose Villa over Arsenal?
posted on 7/6/21
comment by Everywhere you go always take Lamela with you. (U7905)
posted 12 minutes ago
Did this Buendia guy choose Villa over Arsenal?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Depends who you ask.
posted on 7/6/21
I for one was not overly impressed by him. He looks decent, but there was nothing there that really made him seem special.
---------------
Playing devil's advocate here but who has looked "special" in this team/set-up?
Partey is yet to justify the hype and his pricetag. Same can be said about Pepe, Gabriel and Mari.
Willian has been shocking while Auba scored less than half of the goals he did in the previous season.
Only Saka has had a good season and even him, it was mainly the first few months.
This is not me saying we should sign Ode by any mean. But there is a reason we finished 8th and it's hard to judge players in a very unbalanced team.
posted on 7/6/21
If we did get Ødegaard I'd be over the moon. He has the potential to the best playmaker in the world.
posted on 7/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/6/21
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
posted on 7/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/6/21
We’re being quoted £35m for Neves, which has been described as being a ‘cut price deal’. 🤔
posted on 7/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/6/21
comment by Legacyton 125.2 (U8879)
posted 20 minutes ago
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All of this, really.
Pre-pandemic 50m would have been a great price for him, but who knows what the level is now.
People don't realise we took Ødegaard after him not playing for 6 months, had him adjust to a new league, team and tactical set up and had him carrying an injury for most of his time here. Despite visibly not being at his best, his introduction (along with the brilliant ESR) saw results that, if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming.
He's a lot, lot better than some here think.
posted on 7/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/6/21
comment by Arsenal AFC (Absolute Fooking Crap) (U3245)
posted 40 minutes ago
Odegarbage is pretty poor though. He had 2 good games during his time here and one of these was against an awful Olympiacos. sort of player that only plays well when the team plays well, if we are struggling he will go missing. not the sort of player we need at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Buendia different in that regard?
posted on 7/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/6/21
comment by Arsenal AFC (Absolute Fooking Crap) (U3245)
posted 28 minutes ago
"if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming."
do you honestly believe this?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I mean, objectively yeah. I'm not saying that if we had played esr and Ødegaard all season we'd have done it, but if we could have it'd have been a remarkable success.
posted on 7/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/6/21
comment by We got our Arsenal back (U10012)
posted 1 hour, 50 minutes ago
I for one was not overly impressed by him. He looks decent, but there was nothing there that really made him seem special.
---------------
Playing devil's advocate here but who has looked "special" in this team/set-up?
Partey is yet to justify the hype and his pricetag. Same can be said about Pepe, Gabriel and Mari.
Willian has been shocking while Auba scored less than half of the goals he did in the previous season.
Only Saka has had a good season and even him, it was mainly the first few months.
This is not me saying we should sign Ode by any mean. But there is a reason we finished 8th and it's hard to judge players in a very unbalanced team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 7/6/21
comment by We got our Arsenal back (U10012)
posted 2 hours, 45 minutes ago
I for one was not overly impressed by him. He looks decent, but there was nothing there that really made him seem special.
---------------
Playing devil's advocate here but who has looked "special" in this team/set-up?
Partey is yet to justify the hype and his pricetag. Same can be said about Pepe, Gabriel and Mari.
Willian has been shocking while Auba scored less than half of the goals he did in the previous season.
Only Saka has had a good season and even him, it was mainly the first few months.
This is not me saying we should sign Ode by any mean. But there is a reason we finished 8th and it's hard to judge players in a very unbalanced team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some truth to this but I'd argue the following -
1) Gabriel HAS looked special. And he showed that right from the start.
2) I personally think Mari is our best defender. He is solid, reads the game very well and makes very few mistakes (none that I can remember to be honest). He brings an air of calm and is deceptively quick. I would love to see us work on pairing Mari and Gabriel with Saliba being integrated and Hilding/Chambers as back up.
3) Pepe has been maligned due to the stupid price tag. In reality he was worth half that and at that price, he has been a success...despite playing for 3 managers and Arteta in his foolishness consistently dropping him for Willian. Pepe is the one of 3 players who I think are likely to score in games. Saka...for all his attributes is not one of those 3.
My biggest fear is that Arteta will mismanage any player we bring in. He has shown the inability to get the best out players and plays favourites (Willian over Pepe, Bellerin and Chambers over Cedric). Next season is the ultimate test for him.
posted on 7/6/21
comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
comment by Arsenal AFC (Absolute Fooking Crap) (U3245)
posted 40 minutes ago
Odegarbage is pretty poor though. He had 2 good games during his time here and one of these was against an awful Olympiacos. sort of player that only plays well when the team plays well, if we are struggling he will go missing. not the sort of player we need at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Buendia different in that regard?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buendia has proven himself in this country and the PL. You don't get to boss the Championship if you are not talented and strong physically and mentally. He also was in the top 5 chance creators in the PL whilst playing for a team that got relegated. That shows that he was still able to showcase his talent even at the highest kevel
posted on 7/6/21
comment by Girøulski Alt-0216 forever (U14971)
posted 2 hours ago
comment by Legacyton 125.2 (U8879)
posted 20 minutes ago
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All of this, really.
Pre-pandemic 50m would have been a great price for him, but who knows what the level is now.
People don't realise we took Ødegaard after him not playing for 6 months, had him adjust to a new league, team and tactical set up and had him carrying an injury for most of his time here. Despite visibly not being at his best, his introduction (along with the brilliant ESR) saw results that, if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming.
He's a lot, lot better than some here think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
35 mill for a 24 year old who has played and proven himself (scoring and assisting) in the PL and Championship... or a reported 50 mill for a 22 year old who we still are unsure of how well he'd fit into the PL?
posted on 7/6/21
comment by MaineGunner (U10130)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by Girøulski Alt-0216 forever (U14971)
posted 2 hours ago
comment by Legacyton 125.2 (U8879)
posted 20 minutes ago
Various reputable journalists say Odegaard remains our ‘no.1 target’. Remains, suggests a / the reason we didn’t pursue Buendia harder than we did.
That said, I wonder whether the original plan was: sign Buendia and loan Odegaard, but RM have indicated if he’s to go out again next season, this time it needs to be permanent?
As to the OP, I like him, and thought his contribution for us was a lot better than some give him credit for.
£35-40m would be fine. £50m...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All of this, really.
Pre-pandemic 50m would have been a great price for him, but who knows what the level is now.
People don't realise we took Ødegaard after him not playing for 6 months, had him adjust to a new league, team and tactical set up and had him carrying an injury for most of his time here. Despite visibly not being at his best, his introduction (along with the brilliant ESR) saw results that, if we could have extrapolated them over a season, would have seen Arteta hailed as the second coming.
He's a lot, lot better than some here think.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
35 mill for a 24 year old who has played and proven himself (scoring and assisting) in the PL and Championship... or a reported 50 mill for a 22 year old who we still are unsure of how well he'd fit into the PL?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair points. For the record I really like Buendia and was excited by the prospect of him joining up with us. I had concerns that he was too similar to ESR in his play, but didn't consider them too big of an issue.
Ødegaard is a little bit better at controlling a game and its tempo . Whereas Buendia is all-action attack, Ødegaard (when he's on song) can dictate the game from slightly deeper. Stylistically, he's much more similar to Fabregas in that way. I'd hazard that that's more important for this Arsenal side right now.
I know the stats paint a story, but I believe in his talent. It seems people are unwilling to look at the potential in players these days, and are only willing to look at statistics. How many players under Wenger were clearly talented but took a while to get going? Henry took 8 games to score a goal. Ødegaard has only played 14 games for us, many of them carrying an injury.
Sometimes, football is about seeing something yet to blossom.
Page 1 of 2