He's a fantastic striker. But you've got Giroud and Podolski now. Two great strikers, different In style, so you have diversity up front, and can play different games for different occasions. You have some good quality in midfield, but I reckon you could do with a bit more flair and creativity in it. Keeping RVP would guarantee you the best strike force in the divison, but not the best team. The cash you'd get from RVP would be enough to reinforce your team and make it better. You could buy 2-3 top quality players to assist your new strikers or make your team more solid. I think now that keeping RVP would only hurt your squad. He obviously wants to leave, and he would only hurt the dressing room, plus you've got striking quality now. You will lose your best player, but gain the resources to make your team better. What would you rather have? Hope that RVP will carry you to another CL spot? Or make your team better so it can achieve more long term?
I don't think it would be good for us, it'll be bad, not as bad as it would have been at the beginning of the transfer market before we signed any body though. I don't think this will affect the dressing room much either, there are some reports from some reliable journalists and bloggers that the dressing room is 'buzzing' and that van Persie is conducting him self in an extremely professional way. Regardless of whether he stays or goes, it's believed that we will be bringing in another 2 players, 3 if he does leave, so I think our team will be fine next season. But it would certainly be better with him, than without.
Got to agree with Zlatan really, I think we'd be weaker without RVP and I don't buy the 'unsettled player' reason either. If RVP is one thing, he's determined - and whether that's to leave our club or fight for it next season, I think he'll give it his all. If he's got any sense, he'll realise that his statement now rings hollow, so he has to decide if he wants to honour his commitment to Arsenal and his desire to 'return them to the glory days' as he's never had a better opportunity to do so than now.
I see the reasons for selling RVP now. But for me other than the fact that we'd get some money, which of course we'd have to invest to match his loss, I see no reason why it would be good for us.
Tbh the fact that hes even considering joining utd really Makes me wish he does go. No turning back from that. he wont be as good at utd as the team wont be built around him. We can get a more than adequate replacement for him. He wont play with full heart. Utd will become weaker bcse if not rvp they will get a player more suited to them.
Not currently and not if we spend the money wisely. I also believe by selling him to utd will weaken them
I am wondering if we will reinvest the money we would get from selling Van Persie. If that is not the case, then from a football perspective, keep him! From a financial perspective (which tends to be arsenal's view), sell him!
It's fair to say that we haven't reinvested the same amounts that we've received in transfer fees over the years. But even with the cash, I question whether we can replace what RVP offers us. I can't see any benefit for Arsenal to sell RVP, especially to one of our biggest rivals. That for me is what drives my opinion on this.
Look they will spend that chunk of cash somewhere i would rather they spent it on rvp than someone like sahin or alonso (just an example)
Sorry mate, I don't get your logic. why would you rather our rivals bought our best player ? It strengthens them and weakens us. I think it would be a bad error of judgement for the club to sell RVP to Utd.
Scenario 1 We keep a disheaetned rvp. They buy a central midfielder like ganso who would be far more useful. Scenario 2 We sell rvp for £20mil buy a good striker for the same price. Utd dont get their central midfielder get a 29yr old rvp sucseptible to injury. Imo we are better off in scenario two
With all due respect mate, that is a lot of speculation. I don't see how anyone can argue that not having RVP in the Arsenal team would be a good thing ?
