Noni Madueke: Page 47 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Noni Madueke

DiabyKungFu

Wasn't great but it seemed like we missed him somewhat when he went off. Having a winger that you can spam the ball to and have them reliably get the ball up the field 20+ yards is an underrated aspect of being able to control possession.

awooga83

What we have seen was everything he was at Chelsea I never understood what we were doing with this signing.

TambourineMan

This was so obvious in the summer too, and yet I got pelters on this forum for pointing it out.

Coombs

TambourineMan we all did, Tambo

Burnwinter

TambourineMan Fair enough, but pretty much every Arsenal signing we revere has improved under Arsenal conditions. There was and is plenty about Madueke to suggest he should be a great player ... he just isn't.

Those of us, me included, who supported taking a punt on him weren't idiotic for doing so. The price tag seems high but it's ballpark these days considering what Eddie, Balogun, etc go for, and the wages were reported as far more modest than usual. We'll go through this again with the next forwards we go after. In the current market any forward who might be top tier is £50m but the spread of English haramball means every one of them is a gamble.

awooga83

I mean there was a spilt between anyone looking at his performance at Chelsea and expressing concern on the transfer and those that seemed to say it was Chelsea that made him bad and he would thrive here

invisibleman18

There was also a split with those who who didn't want to sign from Chelsea bins again and we were told we were wrong. Again Chelsea laugh all the way to the bank. There's a reason they are happy for them to come to a rival. Who's in their bin for us this summer?

Don Pacifico

invisibleman18 because just thinking 'Chelsea bins' about a signing is a lazy assessment. And I'm not saying I didn't have reservations about signing Noni.

For all the reservations about signing Havertz, he's been a pretty good signing.

SimplyTheBest there are numerous instances of players through the years being undervalued by their previous club then going on to do wonders at other clubs. Because they had the right people around them, the right system etc. So to assume that Chelsea (particularly this current iteration of Chelsea) will always get it right is too simplistic.

SimplyTheBest

If this bloke was any good Chelsea wouldn't have let him go. It really is that simple. He is shit and whoever sanctioned his purchase should be canned.

invisibleman18

Don Pacifico point taken but it was never a sweeping statement with no basis. He was a player they were getting rid of who had shown he wasn't good enough for them, and it's hardly surprising he's not been good enough for us. As someone else pointed out in one if the threads, Man City got Semenyo for not much more, a player who had been an Arsenal fan and had expressed desire to play for us. Madueke never looked a good use of funds.

Don Pacifico

invisibleman18 I'm with you on the use of funds. For some time, I think we've had a track record of paying over the odds to bring a player in (quickly). Perhaps if we'd been able to bring him in for say £40m, this signing would have been more palatable. If that is the case, then I think the issue is less one of recruiting from 'Chelsea bins' and more the fact we're terrible negotiators.

For what it's worth, Noni probably has surprised me. I didn't rate him at all before we signed him but I can see there's something there. The lack of end product is still an issue but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that we're able to coach him to be more effective. It's just that on the evidence of this season, we've not seen any evidence of that.

Claudius

Don Pacifico I'm with you on the use of funds. For some time, I think we've had a track record of paying over the odds to bring a player in (quickly).

This can be contested. How is it that we spend less than our rivals, and have the most valuable English team per most outlets, yet we have a track record of overpaying. Either we are paying an okay price on average, or Arteta is getting a lot out of what he’s got. But we constantly hear the that the club and Arteta are doing quite the opposite

RowJimmy

Don Pacifico For some time, I think we've had a track record of paying over the odds to bring a player in (quickly).

My sense is that in recent years we've often paid a higher top line number in order to get the deal structured the way we want it (ie, delayed calendar of payments).

Qwiss

Claudius and have the most valuable English team per most outlets, yet we have a track record of overpaying.

Saka is about 120-150m in those outlets. That's why. Also I wonder how those stack up now with Ode, Havertz, White, etc at the moment. Definitely have lost value. Havertz is probably just about unsellable given his wages, form and fitness issues. A new Gabi Jesus in the making.

Doc

I'm fine spending over the odds if its for the right player and they provide what is needed... issue is a lot of the players we bought in were neither the right fit or quality.

Claudius

Doc I'm fine spending over the odds if its for the right player and they provide what is needed... issue is a lot of the players we bought in were neither the right fit or quality.

Last summer, we brought in Hincapie, Gyokeres, Madueke and Eze. How many of these did we pay over the odds for?

Gunner89

Claudius

Gyo was and still is fine, remember a 54m base fee + 10m in addons

Compare Solanke for 65m, Sesko 70m+, Woltemade 69m, even Wissa who's 29 went for 55m

Madueke is worth 20-30m, we'll make and take a loss for him when we sell which we should ASAP before it starts plummeting further

Eze is about right 55m plus 8? in addons, for a proven PL player

Hincapie - Probably fine not overpaid or underpaid - Have a good look at what decent CB's are going for these days

Doc

Claudius Madueke, maybe Hincapie? Maybe not... Point I was making is I don't really care whether we over / under paid by 20% or whatever, we were at a stage were we were completing the team and needed to bring in real quality in attack, getting a bargain should be the least of our priorities... Would be even more seriously pissed if that's why we ended up with Gyokeres for example...

Gunner89

Doc We ended up with gyokeres because we paid 55m for noni

Otherwise we'd have isak

Isak btw shouldn't be judged by his liverpool days so far... (that was due to what liverpool and newcastle both did)

Gunner89

Saka was a 150m player now I'd say he's a 100m player

Ode was a 100m player now he's a 50-60m player at best

Kai like you say would have "value" in these outlets but in reality no-one outside of Saudi is paying him 300k a week on top of any fee forget what whatever his "value" is according to these sources

est

Gunner89 Ode was a 100m player now he's a 50-60m player at best

Lol, that's very generous.

Anyway Madueke is complete garbage. I didn't think it was possible to outdo ourselves coming from Willian and Sterling, but 55m for this guy definitely takes the cake. One of the worst transfers we've ever made.

To make matters worse, it's come at a time when we're trying to challenge/had a proper chance for the League title and we desperately needed some quality cover for Saka/an added spark to our attack.

To make matters extra worse, after signing Madueke, City basically had a free run for the Arsenal fan Semenyo who helped turn around their season and deliver them the title we were going for.

Coombs

est To make matters extra worse, after signing Madueke, City basically had a free run for the Arsenal fan Semenyo who helped turn around their season and deliver them the title we we're going for.

Who could've seen it coming? Who could've known?

People keep telling me Arteta has more data than I do, that he's better positioned to make decisions, and yet...

« Previous Page Next Page »