Qwiss you must be thinking of somebody else, because I havenāt flip-flopped on anything this summer. Iāve said all along that if we want to seriously challenge for the title, we need more creativity and cutting edge (ideally down the left) and we still havenāt addressed that. Thatās been my biggest frustration, and Iāve been saying it all summer. So I don't know what you're talking about, and I don't think you know either.
Burnwinter
Count of Monte Cristo mode? Youāve got quite the high opinion of yourself if you think a simple follow-up on a forum is some grand vendetta.
Anyway, for someone claiming you āonly do confident bullshit,ā youāre still being non-committal, just with extra paragraphs. I get that we might still sign Eze, and if we do, fine - but my question was about the other scenario: if we donāt. In that case, would you agree that choosing Madueke over Eze was a poor use of resources? Because your reply here is long but still dodges a straight yes-or-no.
Age
23 vs 27 - yes, I can Google DOBs too. Nothing insightful here. You still donāt address whether Ezeās current level might outweigh Maduekeās āpotential ceilingā for a team that wants to win now.
Physicality
āElite pace and strengthā vs ādoesnāt have itā, so? Ezeās value isnāt in his speed, itās in what he actually does on the ball (a skillset we lack).
Backup for Saka
Cool, Madueke might play RW (very little evidence of that after Saka played 90 in a pre-season friendly - Arteta ain't resting his golden boy). My guess is that Madueke is our marquee LW signing and he isn't going to be good enough to move the needle for us to go from 2nd to 1st.
Ceiling
āThereās a decent chance he hasnāt reached itā - textbook hedge. You could say it about any U25. Itās a safe, vague way of sounding optimistic without actually committing to anything.
Fee, Wages, Resale
Pure filler: lower fee, lower wages, higher resale potential. All fine, but you could apply this logic to almost any younger/older player comparison (Eketike/Sesko vs Gyokores for example). Itās accounting language, not football reasoning.
āItās a good thing we signed Maduekeā
You keep making the case for Madueke in isolation rather than answering whether Eze instead of him would have been the better use of resources - which is the whole premise of my question.
The rest of the window
āWeāre in the market for a winger,ā āwe need to sell players,ā āTrossard might goā - none of this is breaking news. Let' see if we actually sign anyone for LW - I am not convinced we will.
Trust the process
āTime is on our side,ā āweāre doing business in the right orderā - PR fluff, completely generic, doesnāt answer the actual point.
Youāve written a lot to avoid a simple yes/no. If we donāt sign Eze/other left sided attacker, was going for Madueke a poor use of resources? I haven't seen an answer to this, just generic observations, hypothetical upside talk, and financial bullet points - which is exactly the kind of non-committal bullshit I was expecting. So good job.
