Arsenal Thread

Taylor_94 said:
Actually when money and success came into the game Arsenal and other clubs had the advantage of being successful post-money, you actually are a prime example of a fan who knows nothing about a clubs history, if football was such a global thig back when Ajax where dominate you can bet your last dollar that they would be up there with the best.
Click to expand...

This.

And i never said that Arsenal don't deserve their position in England. They certainly do. The advantage English clubs have versus other clubs is unfair, because they had the luck of being successfull when the globalisation began...

Clubs like Chelsea and Man City became what they are because of the glass ceiling. In early days promoted clubs could compete in English highest division. Nowadays they fight for relegation (what happened last year, that all the promoted teams stayed up is a one off). If you are not able to compete in a normal, fair way, you try other ways.

It is against the nature of fair sports that succesfull teams like Porto and Ajax loose their players immediately after their success. This was not the case during Ajax first good period. Cruijff left for Barcelona because his team mates elected another captain, this had nothing to do with money.
 
Lami said:
It's not that easy mate. Appeal isn't an easy task to achieve. For example, Dubai, with all it's touristic popularity, people go there for a change, not to stay. The weather doesn't help as well. The Asian CL isn't the same, not even close. It will take either quite a long time for that to ever happen naturally, or God forbid, a financial disaster in Europe.
Click to expand...

Financial disaster isn't looking like too much of a long shot tbf, but that's another rant for another time.

The appeal will be achieved at a unprecedented pace, Drogba has the backing of about half his nation just for him.
 
gerd said:
This.

And i never said that Arsenal don't deserve their position in England. They certainly do. The advantage English clubs have versus other clubs is unfair, because they had the luck of being successfull when the globalisation began...

Clubs like Chelsea and Man City became what they are because of the glass ceiling. In early days promoted clubs could compete in English highest division. Nowadays they fight for relegation (what happened last year, that all the promoted teams stayed up is a one off). If you are not able to compete in a normal, fair way, you try other ways.

It is against the nature of fair sports that succesfull teams like Porto and Ajax loose their players immediately after their success. This was not the case during Ajax first good period. Cruijff left for Barcelona because his team mates elected another captain, this had nothing to do with money.
Click to expand...


Completely agree, stars leave. Which is why Porto have a safety net of using but put clause in. 90% of their contracts, but that's another tangent.
 
gerd said:
This.

And i never said that Arsenal don't deserve their position in England. They certainly do. The advantage English clubs have versus other clubs is unfair, because they had the luck of being successfull when the globalisation began...

Clubs like Chelsea and Man City became what they are because of the glass ceiling. In early days promoted clubs could compete in English highest division. Nowadays they fight for relegation (what happened last year, that all the promoted teams stayed up is a one off). If you are not able to compete in a normal, fair way, you try other ways.

It is against the nature of fair sports that succesfull teams like Porto and Ajax loose their players immediately after their success. This was not the case during Ajax first good period. Cruijff left for Barcelona because his team mates elected another captain, this had nothing to do with money.
Click to expand...

So now arsenal and co are lucky due to them being succesful by there own merits at the right time?

Come on gerd. that is not the case. Arsenal and co got there so called advantage because they were good sides with good style of football.

they did not bring in some billionaire and threw money at the club so i still cant see why u are treating arsenal and co the same bracket as city etc. its far from it.

City and co had there chance to compete in a fair way but as history says, city, chelsea were shit back then. diddnt win much etc etc. not arsenals fault.

That is what gets people angry, the fact that city and co done FUCK ALL in the past to build there status they are in now
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
So now arsenal and co are lucky due to them being succesful by there own merits at the right time?

Come on gerd. that is not the case. Arsenal and co got there so called advantage because they were good sides with good style of football.

they did not bring in some billionaire and threw money at the club so i still cant see why u are treating arsenal and co the same bracket as city etc. its far from it.

City and co had there chance to compete in a fair way but as history says, city, chelsea were shit back then. diddnt win much etc etc. not arsenals fault.

That is what gets people angry, the fact that city and co done FUCK ALL in the past to build there status they are in now
Click to expand...

They were lucky yes, before globalisation good teams came and went, like Arsenal would have done and Ajax and co did

You're stubborn, I'm done here.
 
Taylor_94 said:
They were lucky yes, before globalisation good teams came and went, like Arsenal would have done and Ajax and co did

You're stubborn, I'm done here.
Click to expand...

Nope i am not stubborn. i am posting my opinions on the matter. You think arsenal and co are cheating and bought success that they dont deserve like chelsea and city, thats fine but i disagree and i have said why countless times.

have a nice day
 
jonneymendoza said:
Nope i am not stubborn. i am posting my opinions on the matter. You think arsenal and co are cheating and bought success that they dont deserve like chelsea and city, thats fine but i disagree and i have said why countless times.

have a nice day
Click to expand...

Have you read all of my posts? You're in lala land sonny boy.
I'm with Gerd on this.

You have a good day too.
 
Yes I have and I don't think you have read all my points either. No need to be a dick about it either buy being rude in your last few posts about me.

You don't see me and gerd being dickheads to each other as we are mature having a matur convo
 
The reason for financial doping :LOL: (cheeky ) is the likes of Mutd,Liverpool,Arsenal and Chelsea led the field so long. It called catching up by rapid success.

example:
a person went through school to start working, to become successful. Now, we have those who didn`t go through that channel and started from the top. The person who started through the long journey expects EVERYONE to go through that process.

example 2 :

A Boss hired 2 blokes and promise them an exact pay for the job. One started early morning the other showed up after lunch. Both receive the same pay one that worked all day complains n rants about the other. Boss says " I gave you what I promise, yes?" mmm...
 
I never said Arsenal cheated. Never. And the same goes for Taylor_94.
I challenge you to search a quote where i said literally those words. The cheating is an interpretation by you jonney.
 
gerd said:
It is not natural.
But it is not natural that clubs like Arsenal have much more money than most other European football clubs. Now you will say that Arsenal is a bigger club than those clubs. Are they?

Compare their palmares with Ajax, Porto or even Anderlecht. Ajax won 4 EC1 or CL, Porto won at least two CL's, Anderlecht won an UEFA CUP and 2 EC2. They all have a palmares that is at least as good as Arsenal. I could also have mentioned clubs like PSV and Benfica. Yet from the 90's on those clubs can't compete financially with the average English club of the championship (when West Ham was in the Championship, their budget was bigger than Anderlecht's). Is this a natural evolution? No.

Just like most fans of big English clubs, your outrage is very selective.

And to end this rant, would you complain if Abramovich would have invested his money in Arsenal or Fluminese? Be honest and say no.

This said, for the sake of football, i hope Arsenal can compete for the title this season (and loose it to Spurs on the last day). Oh and i would say exactly the same in the Spurs thread.
Click to expand...

Arsenal is a very big club in the richest League. That's your answer. I'm not even beginning to discuss whether this is fair or not.
But as for palmares, titles and past glory, I'm sorry but this means nothing to our discussion. Important titles give you cash prizes, increase your fanbase and make your brand more valuable. The rest is up to the Club to capitalize on. And here I ask you: can the best clubs in the Dutch, Belgian and Portuguese leagues capitalize in the same way?
Do you see the difference how football is marketed in England compared to other places? You gave Juventus as an example. I agree with you they're a huge, legendary and traditional club with lots of important titles. But not long ago they had been playing in Stadio Delle Alpi with the majority of empty seats. I'm not aware of how they're doing today at their new stadium, and I don't know how well they do on TV contracts in Italy. But things such as corruption and match fixing in Serie A, for example, certainly don't help.
Each country and league have characteristics of their own. The English Premier League happens to be the most profitable in the world. It's an extremely marketable product, TV rights sell for excellent rates all over the world (and TV rights distribution among English Clubs is quite fair, as we've covered here before - meaning that teams like Fulham can build a very competitive team too). Contrary to Italian clubs, Arsenal plays at every home fixture for a strong 60,000 supporters. I'm not exaggerating. And mind you, Arsenal is the most expensive ticket in the Premier League! So selling out the most expensive tickets, earning lots of money on TV rights all over the world and, because of the team's and the League's popularity, being able to sell a lot of merchandise and branded products in foreign markets, and so on. Some clubs from Holland, Belgium and Portugal didn't begin to scratch the surface on that. Sadly, they can't at the moment. Their leagues have to go much stronger and attractive first.
Do I think it's a good thing that a mid-table team like Fulham can be stronger than the Belgian Champions? No, it's not. But do I think it's unfair? No! It is what it is.

I think in the context of the profitability of the Premier League, Arsenal does very well to capitalize. And this is getting wealthy in a legitimate way. For me this is correct and all the Arsenal board can rest their heads on their pillows at night and have a clear conscience.

What is done at Chelsea and City? That is not natural, not legitimate and the fact that they do financial doping in the most profitable league in the world just make things even worst. I think it's a bizarre thing and if the authorities don't put a full stop to this we will see £1m a week salaries in 3 years.

This is not the tunnel vision of an English Arsenal supporter here, Gerd. I look at the bigger picture too. You mentioned Porto as an example. I am Brazilian, so consider this. When poor poor Porto has to sell their best players to stronger leagues, where do you think they look for replacements? How did they come up with Jardel? Deco? Hulk?

You are accusing English fans here of being too self-centered and looking at their own league, ignoring the smaller European Leagues. But I'll ask you: are you sure you aren't doing something similar? Aren't you an European who is too self-centered to even consider the impacts outside Europe?

At this point I'm guessing you follow worldwide football, so you might have an idea of how many young Brazilian prospects who go to Europe before even breaking into their first team in Brazil. Is this a good thing for Brazilian League? No! The quality level of the league is low, compared to Europe, but not only in structure, but also the players who stay (they're not good enough for Europe). The league is getting better because there's this trend of veteran superstars coming back to Brazil in their 30s, and with the World Cup 2014, Brazil is getting trendy and some famous foreigners are starting to go (Seedorf signed for Botafogo). But overall, the level of the league is nowhere near as good as the average European league. But do I think this is unfair? No, man! It is what it is. It's a Dog Eat Dog business. In the end, someone who got financially out muscled will always find someone in a more fragile position and exploit them too! Come on, the Belgians do that too. What do you have to say about young South American players who go play in the Belgian league? Remember Oliveira, the Brazilian who even played for the Belgian national team and even forgot how to speak Portuguese? :)

Look, I was annoyed when Rafael and Fabio Da Silva were sold to Man United before even making a professional debut for Fluminense. But deep down inside I know they would go sooner or later anyway. But I also know they went to a team who got where they are based on tradition and legitimate growth. Man United are wealthy, but not by lottery.

But individuals taking over and industrially infecting money in a club, this is not normal, this is something I can't digest. And it doesn't help the other teams in the smaller leagues either. If anything it makes the whole thing even more unbalanced. I don't even know why you tend to "defend" the sugar daddy owned teams :P

Someone mentioned that those billionaires also invest in their homeland's clubs. This is true. I might be wrong, but doesn't Abramovich own a a major stake at CSKA Moskow? But then again, they are investors. They will go where the big bucks are. It's only logical they would choose England. They want to flash the cash. Only desperate players go to Anzhi or to other obscure leagues only because of money. I couldn't see Fernando Torres going to Russia.
The sugar daddies will want to operate in the biggest leagues and make their presence felt. But the minute they get tired of measuring their cock sizes in the form of £50m signings or trophies, we will see what will happen to City and Chelsea.

You asked me if I would like an Abramovich or Mansour to inject money in Fluminense or Arsenal. Arsenal doesn't need that, thank you very much. Fluminense is backed by a very powerful sponsor who is almost a sugar daddy - and you know what? It terrifies me to think of the day when they leave this agreement. So was I happy that Fluminense were Brazilian champions in 2010? Yes! Is this what I really want for my club? Short term success bought by an outsider's money? No! Some football fans are glory hunters and they don't care. But not me, I know I will be watching football in 20 years time and it would scare me to think what the consequences would be for my team after the suggar daddy leaves.
 
Lots of good points in that last post rentboy. I still don't agree with you on everything, but we feel roughly the same.
As for Porto-Brazil: i agree with you. Porto was only an example to prove my point, but it was perhaps a bad example (Ajax would be a better example, since they have lots of youth products in their success teams).
Since Brazil is becoming an economic power, there is more money in the Brazilian league and i expect good Brazilian players to stay longer and more often in Brazil. IMO this is good for football.

I appreciate the fact that you don't want Abromovich or Mansour investing in Fluminense. I don't know what i would answer to that question. Do i want Abramovich to invest in Racing Genk? I don't think so. I'm not sure i would like to know how Abramovich got rich, the timing of it seems very suspect (but i'm not sure). I think i would want a guy like the sugar daddy of Offenheim invest in Racing Genk.
 
Last edited:
gerd said:
I never said Arsenal cheated. Never. And the same goes for Taylor_94.
I challenge you to search a quote where i said literally those words. The cheating is an interpretation by you jonney.
Click to expand...

You may not have said the actual word cheating but you clearly said arsenal have a "unfair" advantage over the rest.

"unfair advantage" is classed as cheating by many.

Just like when a player hand balls to get a better control of the ball is classed as unfair advantage.

simple. You class arsenal and co of having an "unfair advantage" over Ajax and co. That is your exact words not mine


bebo said:
The reason for financial doping :LOL: (cheeky ) is the likes of Mutd,Liverpool,Arsenal and Chelsea led the field so long. It called catching up by rapid success.

example:
a person went through school to start working, to become successful. Now, we have those who didn`t go through that channel and started from the top. The person who started through the long journey expects EVERYONE to go through that process.

example 2 :

A Boss hired 2 blokes and promise them an exact pay for the job. One started early morning the other showed up after lunch. Both receive the same pay one that worked all day complains n rants about the other. Boss says " I gave you what I promise, yes?" mmm...
Click to expand...

Rentboy said:
Arsenal is a very big club in the richest League. That's your answer. I'm not even beginning to discuss whether this is fair or not.
But as for palmares, titles and past glory, I'm sorry but this means nothing to our discussion. Important titles give you cash prizes, increase your fanbase and make your brand more valuable. The rest is up to the Club to capitalize on. And here I ask you: can the best clubs in the Dutch, Belgian and Portuguese leagues capitalize in the same way?
Do you see the difference how football is marketed in England compared to other places? You gave Juventus as an example. I agree with you they're a huge, legendary and traditional club with lots of important titles. But not long ago they had been playing in Stadio Delle Alpi with the majority of empty seats. I'm not aware of how they're doing today at their new stadium, and I don't know how well they do on TV contracts in Italy. But things such as corruption and match fixing in Serie A, for example, certainly don't help.
Each country and league have characteristics of their own. The English Premier League happens to be the most profitable in the world. It's an extremely marketable product, TV rights sell for excellent rates all over the world (and TV rights distribution among English Clubs is quite fair, as we've covered here before - meaning that teams like Fulham can build a very competitive team too). Contrary to Italian clubs, Arsenal plays at every home fixture for a strong 60,000 supporters. I'm not exaggerating. And mind you, Arsenal is the most expensive ticket in the Premier League! So selling out the most expensive tickets, earning lots of money on TV rights all over the world and, because of the team's and the League's popularity, being able to sell a lot of merchandise and branded products in foreign markets, and so on. Some clubs from Holland, Belgium and Portugal didn't begin to scratch the surface on that. Sadly, they can't at the moment. Their leagues have to go much stronger and attractive first.
Do I think it's a good thing that a mid-table team like Fulham can be stronger than the Belgian Champions? No, it's not. But do I think it's unfair? No! It is what it is.

I think in the context of the profitability of the Premier League, Arsenal does very well to capitalize. And this is getting wealthy in a legitimate way. For me this is correct and all the Arsenal board can rest their heads on their pillows at night and have a clear conscience.

What is done at Chelsea and City? That is not natural, not legitimate and the fact that they do financial doping in the most profitable league in the world just make things even worst. I think it's a bizarre thing and if the authorities don't put a full stop to this we will see £1m a week salaries in 3 years.

This is not the tunnel vision of an English Arsenal supporter here, Gerd. I look at the bigger picture too. You mentioned Porto as an example. I am Brazilian, so consider this. When poor poor Porto has to sell their best players to stronger leagues, where do you think they look for replacements? How did they come up with Jardel? Deco? Hulk?

You are accusing English fans here of being too self-centered and looking at their own league, ignoring the smaller European Leagues. But I'll ask you: are you sure you aren't doing something similar? Aren't you an European who is too self-centered to even consider the impacts outside Europe?

At this point I'm guessing you follow worldwide football, so you might have an idea of how many young Brazilian prospects who go to Europe before even breaking into their first team in Brazil. Is this a good thing for Brazilian League? No! The quality level of the league is low, compared to Europe, but not only in structure, but also the players who stay (they're not good enough for Europe). The league is getting better because there's this trend of veteran superstars coming back to Brazil in their 30s, and with the World Cup 2014, Brazil is getting trendy and some famous foreigners are starting to go (Seedorf signed for Botafogo). But overall, the level of the league is nowhere near as good as the average European league. But do I think this is unfair? No, man! It is what it is. It's a Dog Eat Dog business. In the end, someone who got financially out muscled will always find someone in a more fragile position and exploit them too! Come on, the Belgians do that too. What do you have to say about young South American players who go play in the Belgian league? Remember Oliveira, the Brazilian who even played for the Belgian national team and even forgot how to speak Portuguese? :)

Look, I was annoyed when Rafael and Fabio Da Silva were sold to Man United before even making a professional debut for Fluminense. But deep down inside I know they would go sooner or later anyway. But I also know they went to a team who got where they are based on tradition and legitimate growth. Man United are wealthy, but not by lottery.

But individuals taking over and industrially infecting money in a club, this is not normal, this is something I can't digest. And it doesn't help the other teams in the smaller leagues either. If anything it makes the whole thing even more unbalanced. I don't even know why you tend to "defend" the sugar daddy owned teams :P

Someone mentioned that those billionaires also invest in their homeland's clubs. This is true. I might be wrong, but doesn't Abramovich own a a major stake at CSKA Moskow? But then again, they are investors. They will go where the big bucks are. It's only logical they would choose England. They want to flash the cash. Only desperate players go to Anzhi or to other obscure leagues only because of money. I couldn't see Fernando Torres going to Russia.
The sugar daddies will want to operate in the biggest leagues and make their presence felt. But the minute they get tired of measuring their cock sizes in the form of £50m signings or trophies, we will see what will happen to City and Chelsea.

You asked me if I would like an Abramovich or Mansour to inject money in Fluminense or Arsenal. Arsenal doesn't need that, thank you very much. Fluminense is backed by a very powerful sponsor who is almost a sugar daddy - and you know what? It terrifies me to think of the day when they leave this agreement. So was I happy that Fluminense were Brazilian champions in 2010? Yes! Is this what I really want for my club? Short term success bought by an outsider's money? No! Some football fans are glory hunters and they don't care. But not me, I know I will be watching football in 20 years time and it would scare me to think what the consequences would be for my team after the suggar daddy leaves.
Click to expand...


Nail on the head's. both cracking posts. one which simplfies my exact points and the other that further gives a much more understanding on why arsenal and co cannot be classed in the same vain as chelsea/city. No can people go off and say arenal and co gain unfair advantage just because they did business on and off the picth differently and and at certain time compared to ajax and co.

Gerd you should not generalize English fans and when that other bloke slagged belgiums, a mod comes in and defends you when imo both of you was wrong to do that.

in other news:

http://www.givemefootball.com/premi...l-deal?state=5213d3a2ece949b69d96369dcfff903e

Doubt he will stay. hope he just fucks off. cant have a player like that talking shit about the club whether its true or not in what he says.

What he did was worse then Nasri. Nasri had jibs with the fans but always had respect for the club and manager in general. RVP took it to a whole new level. sell the fucker even if he wants to sign a new contract. damage has already been done IMO cant see no way back for him
 
Last edited:
gerd said:
Lots of good points in that last post rentboy. I still don't agree with you on everything, but we feel roughly the same.
As for Porto-Brazil: i agree with you. Porto was only an example to prove my point, but it was perhaps a bad example (Ajax would be a better example, since they have lots of youth products in their success teams).
Since Brazil is becoming an economic power, there is more money in the Brazilian league and i expect good Brazilian players to stay longer and more often in Brazil. IMO this is good for football.

I appreciate the fact that you don't want Abromovich or Mansour investing in Fluminense. I don't know what i would answer to that question. Do i want Abramovich to invest in Racing Genk? I don't think so. I'm not sure i would like to know how Abramovich got rich, the timing of it seems very suspect (but i'm not sure). I think i would want a guy like the sugar daddy of Offenheim invest in Racing Genk.
Click to expand...

Brazilian stars like Neymar are staying for longer. This is indeed good for the league, but it's been argued if this is good for the player's development. Most Brazilian players become a completely different animal after moving to Europe.

What you said about Abramovich is true: nobody even knows where the guy got his money from! Many Russian businessmen went billionaire overnight in the early 90s.
So what has been industrially pumped into Chelsea is money that God knows where it came from.

As for this Robin Van Persie piece of news, I don't believe it for a second. Those Givemefootball.com articles aren't very reliable. They are mentioning Ivan Gazidis' holiday trip, which according to Arsenal.com, is not true. The man's not even on vacations according to official Arsenal sources.

I still expect Robin to leave this summer.
 
This is kind of funny. I'll say this as simply as possible:

1. 99% of football clubs have to spend less money than they make.
1. 1% of clubs are able to spend significantly more than they make.

That's all this is about to me. I don't care about the names of the clubs, the history of the clubs or what country they happen to be in.

Manchester City and Chelsea will both LOSE more money this season than Arsenal have ever been able to lose, in their entire history, combined. That's where the model falls down.

I'm all for investment in football. But it can't be the type we have from Abramovich and Mansour. It has to be true investment. Chelsea were to be self sustaining from 2011. Then 2012. Then 2015. Well this year they'll lose more money than any season in their history. City will NEVER bring in more revenue than they spend on wages. Ever. These sugar daddies aren't 'investing' - that word implies a return. They will never make a return. They will lose money until they walk away, and then those clubs will wither and die.

Here's a really good article on what Arsenal would have to do, in theory, to get back on level terms with the 'big boys': http://www.7amkickoff.com/2012/how-...to-bring-arsenal-level-with-the-big-spenders/

Short answer is spend £215m.
 
Last edited:
C£ty will spend 400m
Mutd will spend 250m
Chel will spend 350m
Livp will spend 230m
Arse 215m wont scratch the surface :LOL:

All we can do is play I hope we dont get too many injuries, I rather we spend on the medics :LOL:
 
Oh dear, what were they thinking when they approved this? Our ugliest away kit yet.

479304P_F_500.jpg


http://arsenaldirect.arsenal.com/invt/479304p/

Nike is probably sabotaging us after Adidas and Arsenal seemed to reach an agreement for kit supplying.
 
I heard of it a month ago but I couldn't believe what I heard - unfortunately it was true. Anyway, this only hit the stores today?
I received an email from Arsenal with the headline "Purple Reign" :LOL:

When van Persie said he didn't agree with the direction the club was taking, I think he meant this horrendous kit :P
 
They probably tried forcing this on him for the photo-shoot which led to the transfer request...
 
This (Below) sort of highlights what I think Gerd is getting at, it is from the Tim Stillman Column on Arseblog. I can see where Gerd is coming from definately, but I still don't think it is hypocritical of us to talk out against Sugar Daddy clubs :))


There’s been some (understandable) shoe gazing about having our better players cherry picked by richer clubs. I think there’s resentment especially towards clubs whose wealth hasn’t exactly been hard earned poking around N5. It’s probably worth reflecting that we won’t receive much external sympathy on this point. We, of course, headed a syndicate of clubs that chose to form a breakaway Premier League some twenty years ago.

The purpose of the league was, effectively, to pool resources between a select band of clubs. There is many a Championship / League One team that would look at the inequality the Premier League created and regard our predicament with little bonhomie. We created the greed is good league and it spurned a monster that is stomping on our building. (You might also reflect on the fact that we were very active members of G14). There’s little mileage in any piety we might feel. You don’t have to accept that point, but it’s worth entertaining in any case. Till next time. LD.
Click to expand...
 
Exactly Bobby.
Of course you are an atypical fan. But clubs need fans like you more than what i will call the average fan (and this entirely without disrespect).

This said, perhaps this guy is a litle bit too harsh for Arsenal. It sounds here as if Arsenal were the ring leaders...all the EPL clubs and the G14 agreed with it all.
 
Last edited:
Yes I saw that post by Little Dutch and it is sort of what we were discussing here the other day. How Arsenal were lucky to be among the main clubs in the league during that Era. We discussed how other formerly traditional clubs were in the lower divisions and remained trapped there because of the inequality the new Premier League created. But the real question is, would these clubs do differently if they were in such a position?
Like I said, Arsenal and other clubs just happened to be there in a strong position, in the right place and at the right time. This revamped, "breakaway" league was always going to happen anyway, as it represented a natural step up in terms of professionalism, organisation and profitability.

To me, that was not a noble thing to do, it was kind of a cartel indeed. But let's face it, any club would jump at the opportunity.
The creation of Premier League still represented a "natural" way of bringing more money to the game, as it still followed the basic rules of commerce after all. It made sense economically, and the clubs who tried to make too big a step (namely Leeds United) paid the price.

But what happens now with the sugar daddy clubs is a bizarre happening, really off the charts. Something that doesn't abide to any rules and defies logic.
Football is seeing an unprecedented amount of money. And by that I don't mean only clubs like City, Chelsea and PSG, or players like Nasri, Van Persie, and Zlatan and Thiago Silva (who, as we speak, are rumored to be signing with PSG)... but also FIFA and UEFA.
If you read Arseblog's post of today, he's getting at this, as the biggest problem football has ever faced. Do we believe FIFA's "for the good of the game" slogan? Having a World Cup in the desert, where temperatures reach easily 50 degrees, seems not to be a problem for the authorities if the pay is right.
 
Last edited:
Rentboy said:
Having a World Cup in the desert, where temperatures reach easily 50 degrees, seems not to be a problem for the authorities if the pay is right.
Click to expand...

This part is irrelevant actually, as all stadiums will be closed and air conditioned.

But yea, it's all about the crazy money again. Money makes the world go 'round, they say.
 
Now it seems indeed Walcott might be looking for a move. His people stopped contract talks to "see how Arsenal finished their season". Season's over, Arsenal will be in the CL, and then they were waiting for the Euros to finish. Euros are finished, England crashed out in the quarters and still no talks. Theo is on his extended vacations now. But come on, let's face it, who would postpone contract talks like that without a real reason?

The Sun apparently hints at Liverpool making a move for him, but that doesn't fly... Some other rumours are saying it's Chelsea, which is more likely.
It's only rumours in the end, but there's definitely something going on with the Walcott situation, and it needs to be resolved ASAP.

Rumour has it that Theo was looking to break the 100k a week barrier in his new contract. We all know what Arsene Wenger's stance will be on this. Not in this life, Theo!

If a player as inconsistent as Theo Walcott feels he can press Arsenal up against the wall like this, then that says a lot about the current state of affairs in the transfer market.

Well, I guess that's life when you're surrounded by sugar daddies paying £170k a week to the likes of Adebayor. It just skews the market so badly that it makes a Theo Walcott think he can get a similar pay, and basically just unsettles every player.

The truth is, Arsenal would have to join the madness to be able to offer contracts that are on par with what's going on among the top clubs in the league. We all know this is not gonna happen, so we are in a really bad place. We will have to live with that, losing our best players to the sheer power of cash. Wenger will have to renew his team constantly from now on, and I just don't know where this is going to end.
Maybe he get too frustrated with all that and will call it a day sooner than later. And then we will be in serious trouble without a man that talented to work on a tight budget - I never thought I would say that about Arsenal, but hey, that's what City and Chelsea are making us look like. Imagine the lives of Everton, Fulham, etc.

If they don't put a full stop to this madness, it will be a case of "if you can't beat them, join them", more on Usmanov's line of thought. I hope not.
There's no sign of any clubs like PSG, City and Chelsea worrying about Financial Fair Play though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom