HomeSteak Wouldn't be surprised if it were true in concept—what kind of offer? He's rated at €35m on Transfermarkt. I reckon we'd take that if another club offered it. It's just a scenario that won't happen.
Arsenal Outs 2024
https://www.arsenalinsider.com/news/arsenal-player-wages/
Here's a list of our wages, not sure if its 100% accurate but it seems to be mostly in line with what I've seen elsewhere. Seems to me we do have issues on wages but Nketiah is far from the problem. Jesus as a back up on a quarter of a million per week. Partey on 200k per week. Tierney on £100k. Those are serious issues. Especially given their inability to stay fit and their fading status in the first team. You could add Zinchenko on £150k too. Nelson on £100k is too much too, I agree on that.
There is a reason Nketiah has suitors even at £100k and a reason no one want to buy the others I listed here. If you are giving out wages to retain value then the player has to remain a saleable asset on that wage.
Clrnc I'm not sure that's right. I mean Brentford started last summer wanting £40m for him, despite Raya only having one year left on his deal, which is why Spurs ended with Vicario. I might be wrong, I can't see them being prepared to sell Raya 2 years earlier for less money - that's not really how they roll.
I just think they need to be more realistic on Ramsdales fee now. We bought him for £30m, replaced him with a guy who cost £27m and yet we think Ramsdale is worth £50m? That doesn't add up. No one is going to pay that. Its just not realistic money for a goal keeper that we don't even want to keep.
RocktheCasbah That's because he had sorta an impressive season. The season before that they were a newly promoted team. Their highest ever record sale is Watkins for 28m pounds. I don't think he could have commanded 40m.
Everything is negotiation tactic. Of course they were going to put something ridiculous like 40m so they can end up selling him for 20-30m.
How much do you think they would have bent over for Raya the season before when they were newly promoted? Certainly not more than what we paid for Ramsdale. Look at the historic fees for keepers and you get the picture. Both our keepers are one of the most expensive ones.
As you might remember, I had a vested interest in this one given Raya's previous club and the fact I grew up around Brentford and I have one especially annoying friend who kept going on about Raya going to Arsenal. I'm pretty sure that Arsenal were looking very seriously at Raya over the summer of 2021. My understanding of the situation at the time was very much that having been promoted, Brentford absolutely did not want to sell Raya, hence Arsenal pivoting to Ramsdale.
I think we're all agreed the decision to give Ramsdale a new contract seems absolutely loco given the subsequent signing of Raya - I just don't think we should retrofit the initial signing of Ramsdale as an exercise in bad planning. Arsenal went for what was available at the time.
RocktheCasbah this is also the way I see it.
Overall, it’s a suboptimal outcome, but I believe they made the right decisions along the way given what they knew at different points.
And funnily enough, it was consistent. We know they’ve always loved Raya. The minute he was available, they acted quickly and secured him. It sounds like we track a lot of these transfers for a long time, eg Calafiori sounds like it’s been in the works since last summer.
Clrnc It would have been a similar story with Sesko had our approach been considered. We're definitely not omniscient with our scouting.
https://www.cannonstats.com/p/are-arsenal-cheaping-out-at-the-worst
Shorter Scott Willis: either we're mindful of PSR and the new salary cap, or KSE are starting to cheap out a bit. Could be a bit of both.
Burnwinter a lot of chatters online that the PSR seems fine and we can spend but not huge amounts. Main thing is owners want to see returns now and is putting a stop to us selling on a cheap and always buying over the value.
They want to improve our reputation in the market etc.
- Edited
Clrnc a lot of chatters online that the PSR seems fine and we can spend but not huge amounts.
Suppose we're considering spending X for Merino and Y for a forward currently. X is probably £30m, and Y would need to be at least that to secure a starter.
Some Arsenal fans are basing "we're fine" comments on the absolute funds available now under PSR (estimated to be around £100m), and the expected absolute funds in the next window if we spend X+Y, which seem like they'd be vaguely okay (at least something like they are now).
However, Arteta, Edu and the money men have to be reasoning in terms of the "football utility" of spending now (let's say we go for Merino and Saka cover) versus the expected utility of spending in 2025 and 2026.
I originally did some back of the envelope calculations, but I'm not 100% confident how the whole system works. However I think our high nett spending after June 30 2023 continues to whack us until at least the end of the January 2026 window.
This window we've abandoned "Rice" targets like Guimarães because of these factors. Roughly speaking, having sold Emile and signed Calafiori, we'd still have to sell Nketiah and wipe out our entire £100m PSR stack to go in hard for a "Rice" now, leaving us with pennies next summer.
The players we would want such as Bruno either aren't available, or they're too costly. Being logical we're instead bargain-hunting for "Trossard" targets like Merino.
But even with very good value players like Merino available, it would be reckless to lock in a £50–100m nett spend this window (the result of getting in Calafiori, Merino and "random forward" without further sales).
Over the summers of 2025 and 2026 you can predict we're gonna crave at least two "Rice" signings:
- the elite midfielder we'll need to compensate for Partey and Jorginho truly becoming senile
- an elite forward, because winning back to back league and European doubles is hard
Those signings will be attempted in a market where sales may be trickier due to flow-on effects of a continued contraction of Premier League spending throughout Europe ... but our money might go a smidgen further as well.
In general a contraction due to this regulation won't favour us. We're holding a very complete squad and ultimately you can bet we'll turn to that slightly less cash-happy market with a few players who are currently beloved, guaranteed starters. Any player on old school wages with performance or injury issues will be hard to sell.
So there's no way to escape this window being about frugality and sales. I'll be very surprised if we secure Merino and we're somehow still moving for a forward good enough to start ahead of Martinelli and Trossard.
A move such as triggering Nico Williams' £47m release clause would be a hell of a punt unless we achieve some unlikely sales: maybe tie a bow on Nketiah, Ramsdale and Nelson for a total over £50m before the window closes.
Good news is at least we've boosted commercial revenue quite a lot (I read somewhere up to £85m a year) through stuff like flogging off the Colney naming rights to Sobha Realty.
Burnwinter it's something I've often found frustrating when there's reporting on how good our scouting. I remember for Partey, it was talking up the fact that Cagigao scouted him at Mallorca - great to hear but we still took a good c. 5 years to buy him and then his price was much greater.
I'm not sure what the hold-up is - hesitant recruitment that wants to reduce the level of speculation on players or a firm belief that said players need to reach a certain level before they become viable purchases (or something else). Feels like something we could improve but might be held back by our historic poor selling (ie. we'd be more willing to speculate on players if there was more confidence we'd get a decent return for them).
Don Pacifico a firm belief that said players need to reach a certain level before they become viable purchases
With Calafiori and Sesko you've gotta think it's because performances at Swiss or Austrian clubs aren't much to go by. No doubt we've got a scouting database with these leagues and more in it, but perhaps whatever "moneyball" methods we've got don't surface them for fuller research, flights etc.
I've got no idea how the economics of scouting works.
I wonder if it might be worth actively tracking more of these dudes who are doing okay on loan in weak leagues from stronger clubs. Especially if we don't have competitors in their positions in our academy.
Don Pacifico I'm not sure what the hold-up is - hesitant recruitment that wants to reduce the level of speculation on players or a firm belief that said players need to reach a certain level before they become viable purchases (or something else)
It's a difficult balance, isn't it? You go too early, people say as they have with Fabio Vieira, what's he doing here? He's not good enough. And the truth is, he might never be - especially at the level Arsenal have now reached. But you wait too long and then you find the player out of your reach, because Chelsea, or Manchester United maybe, come and do something silly.
RocktheCasbah yep, survivor bias is real.
The club probably have a 100 players on their list now that are “highly rated”
Mirth exactly. Just because we scout or show interest in a player doesn't mean we believe they are capable of making the step up. If they go somewhere a level below us and show they can step up it makes sense for us to move then. All the big clubs operate like this. We could probably take a few more risks and try to send them on loan but overall no one was clamouring for Calafiori before this summer. Even before the euros he was hardly mentioned. If he turns out to be worth the money then its all good.
We do need a few more gambles in the back up slots though. If we can't find a top class attacker this summer I definitely think taking a gamble on someone in one of the back up slots would be a good idea. Particularly as cover for Saka.
Qwiss We do need a few more gambles in the back up slots though.
I'd be stoked if we found a "Saliba" style signing up front: an under 20 chance with "generational talent" in areas we're missing, who's also athletic and physically up to scratch. Now's a good time, while we've got decent but not fully convincing options. We'd just have to find the right profile for big money but not Højlund money.
There goes the potential Eddie sale. Good signing for Bournemouth. He was a real handful when we played Porto.
Agreed. Excellent striker and great signing for Bournemouth.
We seem to have priced Nektiah out of a move. Shame.
TambourineMan kroenke wants his money I hear.
But this is simple maths. Nobody is paying £30m for Eddie and then committing another £25m to him on a 5 year deal. That’s rich.
Keep Eddie then, and let him play in Carling Cup and random FA cup games. Figure out whatever loophole you need to figure out to enable us pick up Merino and whoever else is wanted, and move on.
I reckon another club will want him, I doubt we've had all our hopes pinned on Bournemouth.
But if we end up with less than what Marseille allegedly talked about, we've fucked up.
Forest and Palace interested according to socials
- Edited
I don't think Bournemouth were ever in for him. It was just a case of journos seeing them sell a striker and knowing we'd one available. Looks to me like they had Evanilson all but done before they let Solanke go.
It's a race now
no way is reiss on 120k a week. even if he got a sign on bonus we would have paid that up front and not add it into his weekly wage thus making him unsellable.
- Edited
If they up their bid by a couple million, this'll get done.
Edit: just seen they're in for Gimenez too...hmm...
We should go for Gimenez , he's better than Nketiah. Would be a good switch
Eddie saying his goodbyes
Topping up that Nico Williams fund
Good. 4 years over due.
HomeSteak we better not fuck this up.