I personally thought he would stay longer and didn't expect him to leave that season. Not for his love of Arsenal but I assumed he would be more realistic of his chances of breaking into that Barcelona midfield.
Fabregas wanting to go back to Barca was the worst kept secret in football ever. Nasri wanted more cash, RVP was getting old and Song was just a twat. Some might see it as wishful thinking, but my gut feeling says Walcott will stay at Arsenal
I think he'll stay too. I just can't imagine that any other top team would put him up front like we have done. Utd are hardly going to bench RVP and Rooney for Theo; I don't think Chelsea want him as a striker; at City the competition for strikers is ludicrous and I can't see him moving abroad just as he's been granted his wish to play as a striker with us. Seriously, where would he go? Liverpool? Why? Spurs? Again, why? I think we'll agree to give him a decent pay rise, he'll sign and that will be that. I blame all this uncertainty on the agent. Agents are twats.
Ba is going to Chelsea and Sturridge has signed for Liverpool so options for Theo Walcott are not as much. Perhaps abroad (Real Madrid or maybe Manchester United. I think though that he will stay.
I fecking hope not, but I think it's the likely thing to happen. He'll link up with RVP again, and the whole "i want striker thing" was just an excuse so the Arsenal fans won't hate him as much for doing it.
If he goes to Man Utd and plays on the wing then I would lose any respect I have for him. Because as you say the whole 'I want to play as a striker' thing would have been proved to be an outright lie. He is never going to play upfront for United.
I think him saying he wanted to play as CF was just about that really, with Arsenal. I'm not convinced it's a ploy to lever a move away from the club, I think it was his genuine desire. The contract situation has got us all ****ting bricks, but I think as mentioned it's about the agents and the club's negotiators, which makes me think that it's been about money too. Gazidis has said we can 'now compete on a wage level with the best clubs in Europe' so it's time to test that theory.
fabregas... agreed.... Nasri .... agreed.... RVP....seriously? getting old? he's 28 ish...silly argument Song...no arsenal fan seemed gutted so can believe that. Walcott...think he'll sign a new contract...think it's a negotiating tool. He won't play as regularly at any other "top 4" team...city have too many strikers as it is; ditto re United; and Chelsea want to persevere with Torres. I've always rated him...he is like Lennon...does lots of very good unseen work (tracking back; keeping 2 players occupied so creating space etc.) is great on his day but is easy to criticise. Funny how they both scored great goals yesterday that would have had pundits jacking off if scored by messi or ronaldo
Ok ...my bad ... he's 29 ish not 28 ish...my point was saying he was getting old so he was sold is a silly arguement
Getting old, contract running down, injury prone player, not sure about whether to commit to a new contract. For 25 million or whatever it was, good business. He's a twat for leaving for United though.
I've had a horrible feeling for a while that he's off to Utd, just like i did with Persie. Hopefully i'm wrong this time
If we sell Walcott to united then we really don't have any ****ing ambition as a club. In my opinion it would be even worse than letting go of RVP because Theo has not reached his peak and if we can't hold onto him then **** it we might as well sell Jack next season to the highest bidder, Cazorla or any other talented player in our squad just so we can make a profit. I don't think this will happen but money seems to be the motivation for most of our boards odd decisions not actually winning trophies. I hope they prove me wrong.
Our problem is that Walcott is free to go anywhere he wants once his contract expires.He can even sign a pre-contract agreement with a foreign club from this month
Yeah i understand that CYM but my point is we should be doing everything in our power to keep him. How does it always come to this stage in a players contract with Arsenal? Too much dithering, erming and ahhing about what Walcott is worth to the club until the sand runs out and we are left without any option but to sell. When a player has 2 years left on his contract either get him to sign a new one or sell him so we avoid this disruption to our team every season. It's not rocket science it's contract talks for **** sake. Sign or sell a really simple formula.
It would appear that we leave it late to enter into negotiations with players over new contracts but in all honesty none of us know what goes on behind the scenes.
Wenger once said that we were lucky to have Cazorla - and he was right: we were incredibly lucky. The guy is being paid half of what he is worth on the market. Normally the club with our salary structure can not afford having top players. Luckily there are exceptions, like Cazorla or Bale with Spurs. Wilshere is another exception. The guy is the "Arsenal boy", was out for a long time, etc. But sooner rather than later some really rich club will put £200+ K on the table and what do we do? Problem is like any 2nd tier club we can not afford to make our own players exceptionally good. Because then we most probably will loose them. Money is the motivation for our owner. Just look at his other clubs. We are a typical American franchise. Optimise the performance to maximise the cash flow. Fighting for trophies is way too risky - we can spend tonnes of money and still get nothing. Our current model is optimal. Still "fighting" , still "a top club" earning CL money, full stadium, winning matches, sponsorship deals, and spending peanuts. Nice! Why change anything?
