|
|
On January 16 2023 14:53 sharkie wrote:
Unpopular thought: Arsenal is playing better football since gabriel jesus has become injured. Eddie does a real good job leading the line and now more balls are shared between arsenals wingers and midfielders than when jesus was playing
As an Arsenal fan I am really happy jesus isnt playing for us atm. Jesus just wastes too many good chances and opportunities
I dunno.
Either way is good tbh. Jesus does waste chances, but he also creates chances that no-one else would see, so whether he's playing or not Arsenal are onto a winner.
|
On January 16 2023 15:01 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2023 14:53 sharkie wrote:
Unpopular thought: Arsenal is playing better football since gabriel jesus has become injured. Eddie does a real good job leading the line and now more balls are shared between arsenals wingers and midfielders than when jesus was playing
As an Arsenal fan I am really happy jesus isnt playing for us atm. Jesus just wastes too many good chances and opportunities I dunno. Either way is good tbh. Jesus does waste chances, but he also creates chances that no-one else would see, so whether he's playing or not Arsenal are onto a winner.
Yeah but pundits and experts (also in this thread) alike were saying how vital Gabriel Jesus is to Arsenal and how he pushed the team to better plays this season when his injury happened in the world cup.
And since then Arsenal has only been winning games dominantly and with way more chances and threats than when Jesus was playing. How would you explain the sudden shift in better play? Jesus has been creating chances maybe but so is Eddie who is skill-wise leagues worse than Jesus.
|
On January 16 2023 14:42 RKC wrote:Kane used to be a pure striker like Benzema. But now he's transforming into a deeper forward role like Griezmann during last WC (not sure if he's playing the same role in AM this season as well). That's what I meant. Obviously Benzema and Griezmann aren't quite the same type of player. Anyway, point is, despite his immense skill and technical ability for an Englishmen, I doubt whether Kane is highly regarded universally by top European teams in last 3-4 seasons. Put money aside. Would Bayern swap Kane for Lewandowski? Or Real for Benzema? Or Barca for Griezmann? Yes, Jimmy Greaves is probably still GOAT. Kidding about the other two 
those are dumb questions because for lewandowski and benzema youre swapping serial winning world class players for a player who could be at their level at best had he been given the same chance to play for those kinds of clubs. it logically doesnt make sense to ask whether real, bayern or barca would willingly swap their 9s out for kane. the correct question is had benzema or lewandowski left their respective clubs, would kane be able to fill their shoes? and i would lean towards yes more than no.
with barca though, i already put suarez in the same category as lewandowski/benzema and thats the guy kane would have to compete with, not griezmann. after suarez left barca i think barca would 100% take kane if kane was free (assuming kane is open to playing in spain). he may not be replacing griezmann necessarily, but he would still be a better player than griezmann no doubt. suarez left a void that griezmann couldnt fill and barca had to end up relying on players like braithwaite instead. kanes not really the same profile of player as suarez but still probably would have done better than griezmann/braithwaite.
|
On January 16 2023 06:51 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2023 05:47 RvB wrote:On January 16 2023 04:58 sharkie wrote:On January 16 2023 03:55 Pandemona wrote:
He was offered 50k a week from low balling Arsenal and Chelsea gave him 100k a week is the report....why wouldn't he agree to that. If he becomes world class in 2 years and is stuck for another 6 years with only 100k he will shoot himself lol And if he injures himself and never gets back to his old level he will be very happy with the deal. It's life changing money to earn that much and he will make it for 8.5 years. Most people would take this deal since there's no guarantee you'll ever get another offer as good as this one. Yes thats why there are so many 8 year deals in Football... Chelsea abused the ignorancy of the poor kid
We don't see deals that long because it's a massive risk for the club. I'm sure Chelsea remembers Winston Bogarde.
|
Perhaps the secret sauce to Arsenal's success is more to do with their solid midfield spine (eg Odergaard and Partey).
Fanboys can speculate and fantasise about what-ifs all they want, but the fact is that very few British players are actually considered by top European clubs as worth the hype (eg Beckham, Owen, Bale). And Kane is not one of them
|
Norway28873 Posts
Winston Bogarde was hilarious. 'Why should I throw fifteen million euro away when it is already mine? At the moment I signed it was in fact my money, my contract. Both sides agreed wholeheartedly (...) Few people will ever earn so many. I am one of the few fortunates who do. I may be one of the worst buys in the history of the Premiership, but I don't care.'
|
On January 16 2023 17:53 RKC wrote:Perhaps the secret sauce to Arsenal's success is more to do with their solid midfield spine (eg Odergaard and Partey). Fanboys can speculate and fantasise about what-ifs all they want, but the fact is that very few British players are actually considered by top European clubs as worth the hype (eg Beckham, Owen, Bale). And Kane is not one of them
easy to dismiss everything as "fanboyism" because you know whether the scenario of kane actually being sought after by a top european team has never been nor will ever be tested, with the exception of city's interest. all due to the fact that kane was stupid enough to lock himself into a long contract that priced himself out of the market completely.
|
On January 16 2023 17:54 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Winston Bogarde was hilarious. 'Why should I throw fifteen million euro away when it is already mine? At the moment I signed it was in fact my money, my contract. Both sides agreed wholeheartedly (...) Few people will ever earn so many. I am one of the few fortunates who do. I may be one of the worst buys in the history of the Premiership, but I don't care.'
Yeah, long-term contracts work both ways. I'm sure most clubs have had problem players like that. How much of it was actually true, I guess we'll never know, but Bale's last season at RM is often brought up as an example of a player who was simply demotivated and decided to just spend more time on his hobbies, and happily receive his paycheck. It isn't quite as "scandalous" as Bogarde doing it for 4 years, but a player not working out, but meeting his contractual obligations is a risk clubs take with a long-term contract, just as players take the risk that they will improve drastically and not be able to renegotiate/move clubs (easily).
|
Bale wasn't demotivated, he wasnt being played by the coaches for whatever reason
|
Oh dear... Top footballing stars held captive by long-term contracts and unable to unleash their full footballing prowess due to the cruel boardroom and coaches. Poor sods need some labour unions to defend their rights and not be left at the mercy of ruthless agents!
They are a lot of victims of abuse in football or any sport, of course. But it's hard to believe that the ones at the top lack agency in charting their own careers. If they can't reach their full potential, then it's on them.
The only time that it's maybe worthwhile speculating whether the what ifs of a player's potential peak is when a player is hindered by external causes beyond control. Like injuries, I'll-health, or some personal disaster. Otherwise, we'll all be arguing whether Messi or Pato is GOAT (just a random example).
Anyway, it's funny how Potter admits that he has "no idea in terms of how it's happened". The "it" being the Mudryk deal. He's probably referring to the transfer financial details and being misquoted by the media. But it does suggest that he had little part to play in the choice of Chelsea's recent transfers.
|
who here is claiming that a top player being unable to fulfill his potential is anyones fault but his own? if you agree to be shackled to a club for over 5 years and the club holds you to your contract, its no ones fault but your own for agreeing to the term in the first place. hence the criticism that kane was an idiot and so is mudryk.
|
Norway28873 Posts
I have the impression it is in many ways preferable to have a club buy you out of your contract rather than get you as a free agent. Means clubs will only get you if they plan on starting you. Besides, maybe there's a reasonable release clause in the contract. Or maybe Chelsea is his dream club and he's perfectly content the way it is.
|
On January 16 2023 17:53 RKC wrote:Perhaps the secret sauce to Arsenal's success is more to do with their solid midfield spine (eg Odergaard and Partey). Fanboys can speculate and fantasise about what-ifs all they want, but the fact is that very few British players are actually considered by top European clubs as worth the hype (eg Beckham, Owen, Bale). And Kane is not one of them
I was thinking the same about Arsenal midfield, it's very competitive and skilled. Partey was already very good in ATM back in days, now even more experienced. Mid lane is their spine and arguably the strongest lane of all
|
Except that Mudryk (or his agent) has been in talks with Arsenal first before Chelsea swooped in with a sweeter deal. At least that's what I'm getting from the media. Maybe Chelsea went out of the way to roll the red carpet and charm him and his family. But everything happened so quickly that it's reasonable to question the player's true motivation (money? footballing reasons?).
Any player who is truly world class and wants a move will eventually be bought up by another club who will make an offer the current club is unable to refuse. While a club may hold on a player out of spite till the contract runs out, this is financially unsound and bound to get the board kicked out (a rare example is Dortmund stubbornly holding onto Lewandowski till he moved for free to Bayern). The point here is that a top player is rarely held captive in a club that he doesn't really want to be for a long time (eg Lukaku at Chelsea). If you're truly top dog, top teams will roll out the red carpet for you.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
On January 16 2023 04:58 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2023 03:55 Pandemona wrote:
He was offered 50k a week from low balling Arsenal and Chelsea gave him 100k a week is the report....why wouldn't he agree to that. If he becomes world class in 2 years and is stuck for another 6 years with only 100k he will shoot himself lol
You think if he turns into Eden Hazard after 18 months we wouldn't improve his contract terms? Also the new owners love to add in bonus clauses, so im sure there is big money to hit if he scores goals or wins stuff etc.
|
On January 17 2023 06:23 Pandemona wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2023 04:58 sharkie wrote:On January 16 2023 03:55 Pandemona wrote:
He was offered 50k a week from low balling Arsenal and Chelsea gave him 100k a week is the report....why wouldn't he agree to that. If he becomes world class in 2 years and is stuck for another 6 years with only 100k he will shoot himself lol You think if he turns into Eden Hazard after 18 months we wouldn't improve his contract terms? Also the new owners love to add in bonus clauses, so im sure there is big money to hit if he scores goals or wins stuff etc.
Why would you improve a 8 year long contract? Lengthen it to 16 years?
|
Norway28873 Posts
make sure he wants to stay and play for the club? most players turn toxic if they're kept against their will (for more than one season - players are often okay with staying for 1 season even if they'd prefer leaving), regardless of contract length, so that's just poison for the club.
And again - maybe there's a release clause, which could then be renegotiated to be set higher, etc.
|
But then the club binds the player for over 10 years as every contract improval is combined with lengthening the duration. When you increase his wages to 200k for 10 years thats insane from the clubs POV.
|
In Australian football a few years back, a team gave Alastair Lynch, a player with chronic fatigue syndrome, a 10 year contract and everyone laughed at them. They weren't laughing when at age 36 he retired having been the key forward in 3 premierships. The average contract length is 2-3 years for context.
More recently another team gave a 7 year multi-million dollar deal to another forward, Lance Franklin. Again everyone laughed. It cost them a penalty to their maximum salary cap and they got no silverware for it.
Mudryk's deal is just high risk vs high potential reward for Chelsea. I don't think you can argue that it is either good or bad, it's a calculated gamble on their part. Only time will tell.
|
I dont think 100k a week for 8 years is a huge risk for a club like Chelsea. Thats peanuts to them.
Its a huge risk for the player
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
