Nasri: Page 8 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

Nasri

Rex

Why is this abomination of a thread still in The Arsenal section??!

YounGunner

Arsenal received just over £72m from the sales of Adebayor, Nasri, Clichy & Toure to Man City. Combined apps = 115 games

Rex

What´s your point? You think we are a better team for it? How has that money benefitted our senior squad?

Mirth

Yes, we're a better team for not having Nasri, Adebayor, Clichy and Toure.

Or put it this way, I wouldn't want any of them back.

Mirth

General Mirth wrote:
I'm incline to agree with Captain. Fabregas doesn't strike me as a 20 goal-20 assist type player that Wenger sees him to be. I much preferred his role during 2006-2008.

Shows what I know. 😆

Rex

General Mirth wrote:
Yes, we're a better team for not having Nasri, Adebayor, Clichy and Toure.

Or put it this way, I wouldn't want any of them back.

All those players would strengthen our squad. My point was basically that although we made a lot of money off those transfers, we haven´t really used said money to strengthen the squad sufficiently.

Nasri hasn´t been replaced as of yet, and neither has Adebayor really. IMO Clichy is also a better FB than either of Santos and Gibbs.

asajoseph

Nasri is better than Gervinho or Walcott.

Adebayor isn't better than Van Persie, but he'd be an excellent squad option.

Rex

We´d all kill for an Adebayor instead of Chamakh. Note that I wrote "an Adebayor"...

Mirth

Adebayor and Nasri have the sort of attitude that stunk the place up and contributed to the inevitable capitulations we see at the end of the season. And apart from six months last season, Nasri's contribution in terms of deciding games is on par with what Gervinho and Walcott manage these days. We failed miserably in replacing those players but selling them off is no great loss. And if you're going to sell a player, you might as well fleece the buyer. I'd take Clichy back but only because we've not seen as much of Santos to decide one way or another.

Humble Rex wrote:
We´d all kill for an Adebayor instead of Chamakh. Note that I wrote "an Adebayor"...

In other words, a completely different player. My point exactly.

Rex

That lot down the road seem to do ok with both Ade and Gallas, two players apparently good at stinking places up.

The reality is that Ade is a good player. Had the Man City incident last year not happened there would be lots of fans wanting him back right now.

Mirth

Humble Rex wrote:
That lot down the road seem to do ok both Ade and Gallas, two players apparently good at stinking places up.

The reality is that Ade is a good player. Had the Man City incident last year not happened there would be lots of fans wanting him back right now.

They're good players, my remark was more to do with their incredibly awful attitudes. Yes, Adebayor is doing well for Spurs but this after a few years being carted about as a complete waste of space. He's got something to prove now and, for his sake, he'll keep it up.

Gallas I'd probably take him as third choice - which is role he occupies for Spurs anyway.

And people were fed up with Adebayor before the Man City incident, which tbh I didn't mind all that much, his entire contribution during the 08/09 season and a certain game at Old Trafford while comparing Milan to Beyonce the summer before was what set sparks off.

GaelForce

That performance in the Champions League at Old Trafford was a disgrace. I was always a huge fan of Ade's (still don't mind him that much), but it was obvious he needed to go after that match.

Nasri can fuck off.

Rex

They can both fuck off. They are only being discussed because it was pointed out how much money we have had from City. I then merely stated that the money from those sales was never really invested in strengthening the squad. And it wasn't. We would have been a stronger side having kept the players.

Ray

adebayor tbf was never good enough to be a starter he was massively overated after that 30 goal one off season of which most were tap ins and penalties. at best he could have become like kanu a super sub but with his ego it would just ruin the team anyway. Nasri similarly was overated after a couple of good months and clichy had too many mistakes in his defensive game and wasnt that great going forward either. Toure is the only one i would have kept but even he was in decline.

Mirth

Humble Rex wrote:
They can both fuck off. They are only being discussed because it was pointed out how much money we have had from City. I then merely stated that the money from those sales was never really invested in strengthening the squad. And it wasn't. We would have been a stronger side having kept the players.

We'd be where we are now. While those players were at the club we still alternated between struggling for fourth and chasing the title only to collapse in Feburary.

Alfonso

Feel Nasri would have been much better at Utd, Adebayor is massively underrated on here, I would have him over Dzeko for example.

Rex

When Ade was a forward here we already had RVP. Ade shits all over both Park and Chamakh. Ergo - we are weaker at CF.

We bought Gervinho while both Theo and Nasri were here. IMO Nasri is better than all our wingers and wasn´t really replaced. Ergo - we are weaker at WF.

Clichy IMO is better than both Santos and Gibbs. Ergo - we are weaker at LB.

Toure when he left was not the best CB, but he was still Arsenal through and through and ALWAYS played with heart and desire. I would have loved to have kept him, although at this point he probably wouldn´t have been better than 4th choice.

Gazza M

Don't miss Toure and Clichy at all. I'd have both Nasri and someone of Adebayor's level in a heartbeat

squallkid

At the end of the day Nasri will have his fat pay check and might just pick up a league medal come May. I doubt he's bothered.

y va marquer

He's such a little crawler.
He was tweeting his "thanks for the support" message to the City fans after the game.
He should have been apologising for his ghostlike presence on the pitch.

« Previous Page Next Page »