I think we'd be ahead easily. Dortmund have zero reputation in Italy and no comparable wage offers.

Locatelli will be a nailed on starter for us though. The likes of Bellingham, Haaland, etc. would prefer playing time at Dortmund to riding the bench at a larger club. With Haaland there is also the small matter of his agent wanting another large payday with another obnoxious transfer.

Clrnc wrote:

You'd think so. Not sure about Italians and I also doubt Italians like to live in Germany after Immobile flop but Dortmund beat United to Haaland, beat tons of clubs for Ajkanji, Bellingham and Guerreiro, and beat us to Sancho and Reus in the past. They have a weird attraction for young players.

It's not that weird, they're pretty much the biggest club in Europe to aim for when you're a young talent. How many CL clubs consistently field four or five players under 21? Plus let's say Locatelli develops into a Madrid/Barcelona level of player in two years, it'd be a lot easier to leave Dortmund for those clubs than to leave Arsenal.

jones wrote:

Clrnc wrote:

You'd think so. Not sure about Italians and I also doubt Italians like to live in Germany after Immobile flop but Dortmund beat United to Haaland, beat tons of clubs for Ajkanji, Bellingham and Guerreiro, and beat us to Sancho and Reus in the past. They have a weird attraction for young players.

It's not that weird, they're pretty much the biggest club in Europe to aim for when you're a young talent. How many CL clubs consistently field four or five players under 21? Plus let's say Locatelli develops into a Madrid/Barcelona level of player in two years, it'd be a lot easier to leave Dortmund for those clubs than to leave Arsenal.

Would it really though? Not in our current state.

Yeah I think so. For one our financial means are on a different level to Dortmund, and also the latter give concrete assurances to young players they could leave otherwise they wouldn't sign in the first place. With us it's been a while we had to let a player go against our will

One of the reasons its harder to move on from us is because the wages are higher though. Thats a plus more than a negative for a player.

Agreed. Only thing I'd say is Locatelli is a 23yr old international already being courted by Juve, so I'm not sure he quite fits the profile of a young player looking for a stepping stone. If anything this is normally the stage where Dortmund sell for €70m.

Yeah he's got the exposure now. I still don't think he'll choose us but it'll more likely be about playing in Europe, probably the CL, than his ability to move on in a few years.

spaceman spiff wrote:

He looks one-paced to me. That doesn't translate well to England unless you are top of the pops technically and in beating the press - which maybe he is. I've only seen him these Euros

I'm thinking that like Lampard or Cesc who are high-profile examples, Locatelli wouldn't necessarily be the quickest but he plays relatively sharp, good spatial awareness, technique, premeditated vision for his age. I think its worth the punt for a club of Arsenal's resources. Also seen him only at the Euros, mind.

Pre season starts next week. We've released or sent a bunch of boys on loan, holding a medical for Tavares, renewed Tierney and Balogun. Was hoping we could have renewed Smith-Rowe and been further along bolstering our weak positions but oh well.

So here is how we stand:

In: no one. Nuno Tavares(7 mil and add ones) & Sambi Lokonga(17 mil and add ones) are most likely done.

Total £24.000.000+

Out:
Trae Coyle - Free
Zech Medley - Free
Mark McGuinness - Free
Dinos Mavropanos - £500k loan fee; £3m loan obligation if Stuttgart stay up, option if relegated
Daniel Ballard - Loan
Ben Sheaf - £750k
Daniel Okegoke - Free
Matt Smith - Loan

Total: £1,250,000

I still think there will be opportunities to sign quality and value as there are a number of top level and elite clubs that need to sell in a BIG way.
Barca need to raise about 700m to service their short term debt, let alone the La Liga wage cap as % of revenue which IIRC they are 70% above due to COVID.
RM have the same levels of debt but not as short term loans, and the same issues re wages.
Inter also need to sell to either raise 60m re debt servicing or to reduce wages = I forget which.
However the biggest financial issue is with the entire Ligue 1 which is in disarray with the collapse of their new TV deal, which will see clubs lose about 400m on projected revenues = shades of the SPFL TV deal collapse and potential outcomes. I was watching Ornstein & Co and they think it is at the point where actual clubs will/need to be sold, not just their players.

This does not mean to say that all prices will fall, but that many players (not just French) will be available for sale at the new market value rather than being retained by their clubs.
It seems most of the deals being considered are players + cash or loans with an option/obligation to buy, & those who can make a cash offer for anything remotely like current market vale (post COVID), are going to potentially either take the cream and/or dine like kings subject to their requirements.

I also find it interesting/telling that we have seen 3 of the current title winning managers move from those clubs over finances and player sales for this season.

https://arseblog.com/2021/07/getting-high/

https://gunnerstown.com/arsenal/2021/07/22/will-arsenal-go-to-top-man-why-i-believe-arsenal-will-still-spend-big-this-summer/

Anzac wrote:

https://arseblog.com/2021/07/getting-high/

Good read!

“When opportunities present themselves (on either foot) he prefers the ambitious passes that hold greater risk, but greater reward should he break deep defensive lines.” says Phil Costa but Micheal van Vanderbergh on todays Arsecast said the opposite. Says Lokonga is very smart but doesn't take enough risks with his passing.

Just 5 weeks remaining - still lots to do. Only thing they really concerns me though is the lack of any real news around a CM.

goon wrote:

Just 5 weeks remaining - still lots to do. Only thing they really concerns me though is the lack of any real news around a CM.

Ideally we still need a CM, CM/AM, and a right back.

Plus his goalkeeper situation with Leno might to be sorted out.

how would we feel spending 120m on white, ramsden and Abraham?

Gazza M wrote:

how would we feel spending 120m on white, ramsden and Abraham?

Shut the club down

Gazza M wrote:

how would we feel spending 120m on white, ramsden and Abraham?

Chelsea don't need to sell Abraham to sign Halaand. If he decides he's going to them they'll spend what they have to sales or no sales.

goon wrote:

Just 5 weeks remaining - still lots to do. Only thing they really concerns me though is the lack of any real news around a CM.

Pretty worrying that we don't seem close to a CM. Its looking like we'll start the new season without one which none of us wanted. It really should have been sorted by now.

Qwiss! wrote:

Chelsea don't need to sell Abraham to sign Halaand. If he decides he's going to them they'll spend what they have to sales or no sales.

I mean to say: If Abraham is deemed not good enough by Tuchel, Chelsea sell him to us and go and sign Haaland - we shouldn't be whining in 3 months when we're nowhere near them in the League. We'd have no right to be.

If a PL team gets Halaand we certainly wont be competing with them any time soon whether its Chelsea, City or United. TBH I don't think anyone expects us to be competing for the title at the moment anyway, getting into the CL spots is the goal for this season.

goon wrote:

Just 5 weeks remaining - still lots to do. Only thing they really concerns me though is the lack of any real news around a CM.

less then 5 weeks to get transfers done but less then 3 weeks till we start the season, yet again we won't be ready to go from the start.

[/Twitter]

ode rumours heating up, more local journos chiming in

odegard or maddison? maddison carries more of a goal and set piece threat, and as talented as ESR and saka are neither are prolific. only pepe, auba and laca are real goal threats. whereas I like odegaards creativity and workrate far more than maddisons

I'll take one Ødegaard.

My preference is Maddison but I'd happy take either.

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

I'd have ESR over either of them. They're both good players but so is Emile, neither of them are particularly prolific. I think ESR could easily manage to score and assist as much as Maddison given a full season in a fully functioning side. If I had to choose between the 2 it'd be Maddison though, we seen what Odegaard can do in this team and doesn't raise our game much.

Ricky1985 wrote:

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

Gazza M wrote:

Ricky1985 wrote:

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

I'm going by Maddison himself describing his role for Leicester this past season as definitely an '8' and not a '10'.

I agree that Maddison has the greater goal threat though, but I think that ball striking and final pass can still be useful from a deeper starting positon, again, sort of like Modric. Whereas Ødegaard is too unathletic to be able to be of much use without the ball, even I don't doubt his application and work rate.

It may be on the back of his Leicester City shirt, but James Maddison does not want to be labelled as a number 10.

The midfielder says his best position is the box-to-box number eight role he now most regularly plays under Brendan Rodgers.

When he first arrived from Norwich, Maddison was considered an out-and-out attacking midfielder and spent much of his maiden City campaign in the hole behind Jamie Vardy.

But he now feels that the number 10 tag is not an accurate reflection of his qualities, with the 23-year-old adding a defensive nous to his game this term, when only Ricardo Pereira and Wilfred Ndidi have made more tackles for City.

“Number eight definitely,” Maddison said when asked for his preferred position. “I played as a number 10 at the start of last season, and then when the gaffer [Rodgers] came in, I transitioned into a number eight, and sometimes I play off the left.

“I don’t want to be labelled as a number 10. I’m not a number 10. I can’t remember a game where I’ve played as a number 10 this season, maybe West Ham at home.

“Being a number eight has made me add that defensive side to my game. I’m never going to be a big tackler, I’m never going to go around smashing people. It’s that awareness and that responsibility of getting little toes in, little interceptions, because as a number eight you find yourself deeper a lot, so I’ve had to add that.”

www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-citys-number-10-insists-4217730.amp

Gazza M wrote:

Ricky1985 wrote:

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

Agree, Odegaard could slot into a midfield three at some point while Maddison is almost a forward. Both are best as CAM but Ode could move back while Maddison could be a backup on the wing, he's both more explosive and has an overall lower work rate

Ricky1985 wrote:

Gazza M wrote:

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

I'm going by Maddison himself describing his role for Leicester this past season as definitely an '8' and not a '10'.

I agree that Maddison has the greater goal threat though, but I think that ball striking and final pass can still be useful from a deeper starting positon, again, sort of like Modric. Whereas Ødegaard is too unathletic to be able to be of much use without the ball, even I don't doubt his application and work rate.

It may be on the back of his Leicester City shirt, but James Maddison does not want to be labelled as a number 10.

The midfielder says his best position is the box-to-box number eight role he now most regularly plays under Brendan Rodgers.

When he first arrived from Norwich, Maddison was considered an out-and-out attacking midfielder and spent much of his maiden City campaign in the hole behind Jamie Vardy.

But he now feels that the number 10 tag is not an accurate reflection of his qualities, with the 23-year-old adding a defensive nous to his game this term, when only Ricardo Pereira and Wilfred Ndidi have made more tackles for City.

“Number eight definitely,” Maddison said when asked for his preferred position. “I played as a number 10 at the start of last season, and then when the gaffer [Rodgers] came in, I transitioned into a number eight, and sometimes I play off the left.

“I don’t want to be labelled as a number 10. I’m not a number 10. I can’t remember a game where I’ve played as a number 10 this season, maybe West Ham at home.

“Being a number eight has made me add that defensive side to my game. I’m never going to be a big tackler, I’m never going to go around smashing people. It’s that awareness and that responsibility of getting little toes in, little interceptions, because as a number eight you find yourself deeper a lot, so I’ve had to add that.”

www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-citys-number-10-insists-4217730.amp

Interesting interview although I have to say I never perceived him that way in any Leicester game I've seen, and tbf English midfielders are notorious for misunderstanding their own position on the pitch.

Maddison is still pretty young and I think ESR will turn into a similar (although better) player with a high goal output. He has a great strike on him even if he hasn't gotten to show it too often yet, but he will probably grab the opportunities as gets more experienced. With Ødegaard we'd have a lot more variety in our attacking options than with Maddison in my opinion.

I think Odegaard is a very Arteta player but that means he slows down our play outside the box and often gets into that pattern of passing around the box in the horse shoe shape. He almost always prefers that safe pass out to the wing, Maddison is much more direct.

People dislike safe passing and love direct players more than anything but I think we have enough direct players in Pepe ESR and Saka. What we need is someone who can recycle the ball further up the field and who can pick out a pass from 20 yards or more and we have nobody in the squad but Partey who does it and he does it from much deeper usually. Odegaard would fit our current needs better than Maddison, although to be fair that mostly depends on ESR staying fit.

I agree with that. I think if we bring in Odegaard, we go 4-2-2-2 with 2 of ESR, Saka and Ode acting as wide playmakers and moving laterally across the pitch and 2 of Auba, Pepe, Balo, Marty acting as the 2 forwards. In theory (and minus Arteta) should be as fluid a frontline as any.