el Janny Tranny: Page 5 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

el Janny Tranny

GooneriC

We should go for Lookman

Kel Varnsen

Lookman is excellent. Nusa is better.

Coombs

Dom I can see the logic for buying Calafiori.

Absolutely. He's an excellent footballer. Very classy, great forward drive, charismatic, strong, etc. But we paid for that, it wasn't like we unearthed some kind of bargain on the cheap. It was big money, and we knew he had a massive injury and that playing in the PL is just different than playing in Italy, especially at the volume we'd hope for. I think people forget how young he is, and how little football he's played - he hadn't even made 100 professional appearances in his whole career, or something like that. 42m is quite a significant gamble, and its the kind of gamble that we seem totally unwilling to make for the forward line - even when the odds are much better.

goon

Coombs and its the kind of gamble that we seem totally unwilling to make for the forward line - even when the odds are much better.

You say that but we were a Chelsea madness away from splashing 90m on Mudryk.

I don't think it's that complex. £35m on a full back you love = £100m plus luck on a forward you love.

You could compromise and gamble and go for cheaper, more readily available forwards and hope they're better than what we have, because we're not looking for squad filler, but let's not compare apples and oranges.

goon

Coombs

That 'fortune' buys you an Eddie Nketiah up front.

Coombs

goon that isn't actually true, is it? I mean factually, it's wrong. So why bother saying it? The broader point is also wrong. Pedro Neto cost 51.3m, which is closer to Calafiori's reported price than Eddie's fee. Why couldn't we have taken that risk instead of or in addition to Riccy? Why is that too much of a risk, while Calafiori is rationalized? It makes no sense.

Coombs

goon you're the one comparing apples to oranges. I'm not saying spend 42m on a forward, I'm saying spend money on the forward line even if it means taking a few risks, which are relatively the same risks we took with Calafiori.

Where are you even getting 35m from? It's an irrelevant figure to this conversation.

Clrnc

goon Calafiori cost closer to 53m than 35m

goon

Coombs

It’s apples to oranges because Calafiori isn’t a risk on a player they’re not sure about, it’s a player Arteta adores, loves and has been tracking.

Point being, the forward equivalent probably isn’t Pedro Neto. Not because of his price, but because it’s probably not who Arteta has his eye on.

goon

Clrnc

Depends who you ask I guess, Romano said 40m euros plus add ons, but we’re splitting hairs.

Coombs

goon well, that's even worse. Arteta better start loving, adoring, and tracking some attacking players.

goon

Coombs

I guess Willian was just a figment of our imagination, was he?

Coombs

goon 😢

daredevil

Coombs

In hindsight, and I suppose foresight for others, Calafiori was a bad decision because he's just as injury prone as the players he was supposed to replace. However, people were not happy with Zinchenko nor Kiwior as a LB, so we needed to spend money there regardless.

Merino also provides insurance to Rice who is integral in providing physical presence in midfield, whose absence would be sorely missed. So I don't particularly think he was money poorly spent.

There was however a need to refresh the forward line, but for whatever reason we couldn't get someone over the line. Pedro Neto has also only scored 1 league goal all season. Savinho has scored 0. Doku has scored 2. Sancho has scored 2. Williams has 1 league goal this season. (Highlighting some of the players who have moved this season or we tried to sign). I can't help but think signing an attacker who isn't more of the same, and is a genuine upgrade on our existing options is going to be very difficult.

I would definitely look at Kvicha or Rafael.

Coombs

daredevil I have taken pains to articulate that I am not saying signing an attacker would have worked out. Over and over, I've framed it in terms of risk. We took a big risk on Calafiori, but did not for an attacking player. We took a minor risk on Raheem Sterling. The result was that we failed to improve our forward line because of an inability or refusal to take any real risks on a forward signing.

If we had signed Mudryk, he might be outscoring Mo Salah for us right now. Probably not, but that isn't the point. The point is, we'll never know if we never push the boat out for a big attacking signing.

banduan

Coombs The point is, we'll never know if we never push the boat out for a big attacking signing.

we're probably traumatised by the last time we did that

Claudius

We know that the beginning of the summer was dominated by us chasing Šeško. And that we tracked Nico all summer. From reliable journalists.

Top forwards are much more hotly contested market than defenders and midfielders because their quality is easier to assess - and even City has had challenges beyond Haaland. Doku, Savinho and Grealish must have 4 goals amongst them in all competitions despite costing £175m

banduan

Claudius We know that the beginning of the summer was dominated by us chasing Šeško. And that we tracked Nico all summer. From reliable journalists.

we are quite possibly getting Sesko next summer.

Claudius

banduan wouldn’t be against that. Would still be good to get another speedy winger in as well

Qwiss

Seskos not really looking like a game changer this season. I think given his lack of ambition last summer we should move on.

daredevil

Qwiss

Every time I've watched him, he's looked mediocre. We should go for Duran instead.

« Previous Page Next Page »