Jeez you can be dense. Please explain how the ability to compete translates, and is the same thing in your mind, to actually competing ....
?? What the hell ??? The question is can we compete with City or not. In a one off game - YES - across a 38 game season - NO - our squad is not good enough because Wenger has been buying the wrong players and insists on playing dodgy tactics.
Well then I will answer. Actually competing means Signing one or two £15-£20m players to improve our team each year. Not paying average players huge wages and maintaining a playing staff of 70+ players - most of them deadwood. Getting rid of players that are clearly not good enough instead of playing them regularly for 4 years. Changing the tactics - and adjusting them as necessary for each game. Having our players concentrate for 90 minutes. Overhauling the way we defend Showing ambition to the fans and players by not pretending that 3rd or 4th is a success Keeping hold of our best players We can and could have done all of those things, but we didnt and it remains to be seen whether the lessons have been learned for next season. The last 5 years have been failure - not because we had no chance, but because we didnt make the right decisions.
I believe we're only two top players from a title winning squad. But that would require.. 1. The board not to sell another top player (RVP). 2. Wenger to stop procrastining and just buy the ****ing players we need. 3. The club to release a few more (bendter, denilson?) to make room in the squad/wage bill.
I agree. I'd add to that a change of tactics now and then to make us more compact/tougher to beat in certain games too.
I think Hulk is a decent player but a massive gamble at that sort of money. He's played in two quite weak leagues and looked great and has done reasonably well in European games but it's a huge step up in quality and pace and South Americans don't tend to take too well to the PL. Hazard is clearly superb although with a rather inflated opinion of himself judging by the almost papal way he kept people on tenterhooks while deciding who to play for.
We have not been that far off. Our ability to beat both City and Chelsea and finishing 3rd demonstrates that. I agree that we're two or three players away from a serious challenge on the title. It's City and Chelsea's ability to buy quality throughout the squad that has enabled them to be consistent and where we have fallen away. Our first XI is a match for any team. I can understand why the club have been austere since the stadium move, we might not have liked it, but if we'd tried to come anywhere near matching Chelsea, City or Liverpool terms of spending, we could have bankrupted the club. I think it was telling that the board actually came out and said that we needed to turn a transfer profit of £24m each season, it's no wonder they sold our best players. That said, it looks like we are now in a position where we can realistically be expecting the club to be spending £15-£20m on players who could make a big improvement to our squad. We also need to trim down wage bill on players who aren't of the required standard. I can understand why the club gave them long and healthy contracts at the time, but it's definitely time to cut loose on a few players. Let's hope we do this
£38m is a ludicrously inflated price for Hulk. It demonstrates how clubs like Chelsea totally skew the transfer market.
they're lucky to get him for 38 million, when you consider his release clause was rumoured to be 80 something million.
£80m - It's crazy money ! Even at £38m he's way overpriced. Anyone who thinks that the money from the big spenders hasn't affected the game is living in cloud cuckoo land.
When you consider our transfer record is £16 million (rather small for a huge club), you're very correct there.
You keep harping on about this, but I am yet to see a single comment from anyone who is claiming this ! What Chelsea and City spend on players is not our concern, it doesn't affect us because we don't go for the same players.
It is small. Considering what we have spent, we've done okay relatively. That said, if we want to take it to the next level, we need to stump up some cash for some players who are going to improve us. Podolski was a bargain at £10m, but that was largely down to him being in the last year of his contract - and nobody else coming in for him.
Chelsea were offering £2m more in Transfer (not a huge amount) but £8m more in wages over the contract.
He's only supposed to be on about 70k a week, thats within our range easily, if we're paying Djourou 60k a week, then Mata is good value.
Compared to Djourou, I'd have to agree with that. But it doesn't negate the fact that we missed out on him because someone else was willing to pay more. I'm not excusing that, I'm saying that we need to try and come some way to matching it.
