Morgan Schneiderlin (seems he's signed for United....): Page 34 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Morgan Schneiderlin (seems he's signed for United....)

y va marquer

I wouldn't classify Schneiderlin as a "best preferred option" for our midfield.

goon

The moment you pay someone like him that sort of wage you'll immediately put yourself on the backfoot in all contract negotiations. For United that's not even half the wage of the highest paid player.

Anzac

jones wrote:
You don't understand how giving Schneiderlin higher wages than Özil or Alexis will pose a problem?

I know what the implications are but I'm not so much talking specifically about Schneiderlin, as opposed to the idea of not being prepared to pay top wages to the player deemed as meeting the highest requirement to address the biggest issue to enable the team to succeed in it's current tactic etc.
IMO if you can afford the transfer fee and wages then it's akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Similarly I don't care if it means that we'd need to increase the wages to other current players in subsequent contracts - we pay under market rates for our top players so as to accommodate the development players.

Anzac

otfgoon wrote:
The moment you pay someone like him that sort of wage you'll immediately put yourself on the backfoot in all contract negotiations. For United that's not even half the wage of the highest paid player.

And 'IF' that player IS 'the missing link' and the team becomes genuine PL/CL title contenders would it not be value for money,
as opposed to paying 50m & higher wages for the likes of Sterling/Cavani etc?

As much as I love the likes of Ozil & Sanchez both can be considered as luxury buys at the time compared to the cluster that has been our midfield balance for the best part of a decade. I'd much rather pay market value for a player that is a direct need rather than any number of players who may be of better quality but don't address the most pressing issues.
Hope that makes sense.
For mind it smacks of form over function and principles/policy over capability.
If you're not going to pay to meet the identified requirements, then change the style so as to remove/mitigate the weakness.

jones

Anzac wrote:
Similarly I don't care if it means that we'd need to increase the wages to other current players in subsequent contracts - we pay under market rates for our top players so as to accommodate the development players.

You don't care because you don't manage the club. Us paying below the going rate for top players allowed us to sign those players in the first place, and allows us to sign more of them to boot. Breaking that habit by breaking the bank on fucking Schneiderlin of all players will lead to a massive overall increase in the wage bill, leaving us with the players we have, with the only hope of improvement being selling out of favour players (on high wages) or the development players that you're so vehemently against.

goon

Anzac wrote:
otfgoon wrote:
The moment you pay someone like him that sort of wage you'll immediately put yourself on the backfoot in all contract negotiations. For United that's not even half the wage of the highest paid player.

And 'IF' that player IS 'the missing link' and the team becomes genuine PL/CL title contenders would it not be value for money,
as opposed to paying 50m & higher wages for the likes of Sterling/Cavani etc?

As much as I love the likes of Ozil & Sanchez both can be considered as luxury buys at the time compared to the cluster that has been our midfield balance for the best part of a decade. I'd much rather pay market value for a player that is a direct need rather than any number of players who may be of better quality but don't address the most pressing issues.
Hope that makes sense.
For mind it smacks of form over function and principles/policy over capability.
If you're not going to pay to meet the identified requirements, then change the style so as to remove/mitigate the weakness.

If people don't think he's worth that sort of money it's because there's plenty of these guys around. Guys like Sanchez and Ozil are a far more rare a specimen, hence the premium in wages. It's got nothing to do with principles, it's about functioning as an organisation.

Anzac

jones wrote:
Anzac wrote:
Similarly I don't care if it means that we'd need to increase the wages to other current players in subsequent contracts - we pay under market rates for our top players so as to accommodate the development players.

You don't care because you don't manage the club. Us paying below the going rate for top players allowed us to sign those players in the first place, and allows us to sign more of them to boot. Breaking that habit by breaking the bank on fucking Schneiderlin of all players will lead to a massive overall increase in the wage bill, leaving us with the players we have, with the only hope of improvement being selling out of favour players (on high wages) or the development players that you're so vehemently against.

We have the money to pay our top players market wages, but we don't because of our wage structure & principles.
Our wage budget is the 4th highest despite AW being our highest earner & our top players being paid under/no more than 150k = you get what you pay for.

My stance is based upon the requirement rather than the individual.
As has been said here previously a number of times the front line from Barca or RM isn't going to win with us whilst the midfield remains an issue in this current style.

Anzac

otfgoon wrote:
Anzac wrote:
And 'IF' that player IS 'the missing link' and the team becomes genuine PL/CL title contenders would it not be value for money,
as opposed to paying 50m & higher wages for the likes of Sterling/Cavani etc?

As much as I love the likes of Ozil & Sanchez both can be considered as luxury buys at the time compared to the cluster that has been our midfield balance for the best part of a decade. I'd much rather pay market value for a player that is a direct need rather than any number of players who may be of better quality but don't address the most pressing issues.
Hope that makes sense.
For mind it smacks of form over function and principles/policy over capability.
If you're not going to pay to meet the identified requirements, then change the style so as to remove/mitigate the weakness.

If people don't think he's worth that sort of money it's because there's plenty of these guys around. Guys like Sanchez and Ozil are a far more rare a specimen, hence the premium in wages. It's got nothing to do with principles, it's about functioning as an organisation.

Which is all well and good provided AW signs one of them.

My bad - I thought we were a football team.

Point being that if you aren't prepared to pay to sign players to make your system work to it's optimum, then change the system. AW has a track record of doing neither, and to make matters worse those areas are part of the team spine.

goon

Oh I agree, Wenger has left us short in that position several times over the past decade and he'll need to sign another if he doesn't sign this guy, preferably someone withy a higher ceiling. Were a football club, one that doesn't run on fairy dust.

Anzac

otfgoon wrote:
Oh I agree, Wenger has left us short in that position several times over the past decade, but that has nonrelevance to whether or not Morgan is worth that sort of money. Also, you might want to google want an organisation is.

Again don't think of the individual player rather than the need/requirement.
This debate is irrelevant so long as AW either brings in another player / changes the system accordingly / both.
As I have said a number of times my concern is that his track record suggests he will not do so on the basis of his principles, and the excuse given previously has been in regards to our structure and policy as an organisation - hence my comment about us being a football club despite that also being an organisation.

IMO paying Schneiderlin/whom ever as our 3rd highest player in our current wage structure (when the top earner is no higher than 159k), is immaterial if we can afford to do so and that he is the missing link (as opposed to being a cheaper alternative), and is intended to be a starting player in a key role in the team spine.
The issue is doing so when the player is already an alternative option for those same reasons re fee or wages, and that AW is approaching the point where he considers the drop in quality does not suit his needs, and he does nothing.

goon

I see where you're coming from, if it's Morgan on 120k or no one then you'd prefer the former. I don't necessarily disagree, but I see no reason why we can't find an alternative, he's not top of the range where options are limited.

Rex

I like Schneiderlin as a player. A lot even. But we are right to back out of a deal for him if he demands wages in the region of what Alexis and Özil are on.

Anzac

otfgoon wrote:
Oh I agree, Wenger has left us short in that position several times over the past decade and he'll need to sign another if he doesn't sign this guy, preferably someone withy a higher ceiling. Were a football club, one that doesn't run on fairy dust.

Sorry mate - you edited whilst I was responding to your original post.

This is basically what I'm saying. IMO your spine should be the best you can afford to buy and should also be fit for purpose regrading your style and role requirements to provide balance and function/capability.

We don't run on fairy dust but we do have close to 200m in the bank & don't need to pay senior starting wages to development players u21/u23, and/or who are not yet established starting players. As such I disagree with paying any of Wilshere, Rambo, Walcott etc 100k+ until they are proven re quality, capability and fitness.

Anzac

otfgoon wrote:
I see where you're coming from, if it's Morgan on 120k or no one then you'd prefer the former. I don't necessarily disagree, but I see no reason why we can't find an alternative, he's not top of the range where options are limited.

OR if it is to be no one then I'd prefer AW to change the style & roles so that he removes the need for such a player to be signed.

For example the preference may be to sign 1 player to cover the attributed provided by Coquelin & Cazorla to enable AW to revert back to his 4141 with Giroud as CF. If he's not going to sign the required quality then he may need to retain the current structure of a 2 man CM line as opposed to a lone DLP. Alternatively he may wish to play a CLP who is less capable defensively & play a player who is more physical & versatile in midfield such as a Vidal.
That then also raises further questions regarding player loyalty, which again should not be a factor above & beyond the team requirements.

Anzac

Rucks wrote:
I like Schneiderlin as a player. A lot even. But we are right to back out of a deal for him if he demands wages in the region of what Alexis and Özil are on.

Alternatively he is asking for market value when we are paying unders?

Do I think Schneiderlin is the best option - not necessarily, although he may well be the best genuine option that is likely or known to be available this summer.

Further to this there is also another question regards our intent & ambition with our top earners if we continue to leave the team short. Is doing so a good use of our top earners, and are our top earners & roles then signed as compensation for deficiencies in the team capability?
IMO AW signed Ozil not because of his assists but more so because of his efficiency in the final 3rd, because of the style we play to a linking CF, but is this an optimal use of his abilities? Likewise we rely on numbers rather than individual roles or capability.
Are we building the team around compensating for the deficiencies rather than actually directly addressing the issue/s?

jones

Anzac wrote:
Rucks wrote:
I like Schneiderlin as a player. A lot even. But we are right to back out of a deal for him if he demands wages in the region of what Alexis and Özil are on.

Alternatively he is asking for market value when we are paying unders?

What is market rate to you? United probably have the highest wage bill in the world, you want the club to not only match but raise what they'll offer a midfielder who's going straight into their first XI?

This is all speculation anyway. Özil and Alexis didn't move to Arsenal because of the wages they were offered but a whole lot of other factors. Schneiderlin is probably the same, if Wenger was really interested in signing him and offering him a first team role he probably wouldn't care about the difference in wages. It's much more likely that Wenger wouldn't give him the same guarantees that he gave Alexis or Özil, rightly so.

Qwiss

Considering we (according to the papers) pay Welbeck £115k then it seems like we're misappropriating funds if we are refusing to pay Schneiderlin just a little more.

Claudius

We can't be paying Welbeck that much. You'll make me bring back the Wenger's crimes against football thread

jones

I don't trust these figures thrown around one bit, especially looking at the figures given for the rest of the squad. Wenger making a bench player from United to his third highest earner in the squad? Fuck no.

Qwiss

that's the problem isn't it. We haven't a clue really, if a contract negotiation stalls what's the easiest news story? "He wants more money?". Half these guys have no inside source at the big clubs.

« Previous Page Next Page »