Mikel Arteta continues to get away with washing his hands of talent the moment he thinks a player doesn’t suit his ethos.
A manager’s role is to get the best out of the resources he has.
Yet where the loan market used to be part of a youngster’s development at Arsenal, the club now mainly use it to get an asset off the wage bill while their contract runs out.
This can happen a couple of times at a big club. In the law of averages not every signing is going to work out, and then you find yourself with an individual on too big a salary to expect others to pay.
If you think if you have read this article before you have because it’s got to the point where I could write a whole team in terms of how much talent had their contracts ripped up or loaned out until, they become free agents.
The latest two are Nuno Tavares and Sambi Lokonga. Of course, the Gunners have failed to get a transfer fee for either with incredibly now about to experience their third move away while being employed by Arsenal.
That’s approx. 25 million just wasted.
The reason moves to Sevilla and Lazio respectively took a while to finalise was because Edu tried for a while to insist both clubs agreed on an obligation to buy.
Their employers haven’t even pretended that the youngsters had a future in North London.
Both held firm and called our bluff.
Sevilla got their way with only the option to make the switch permanent while Lazio will only be contractually obliged to invest if certain targets are met.
This is the problem we have created ourselves.
Why would a potential suitor meet any asking price when they know if you hold firm enough Arsenal will eventually be willing to give players away if it means cutting costs?
Even if our manager occasionally pretended, he would be willing to keep anyone if their value wasn’t met, you’d be more likely to get a fee.
I can’t tell you how unusual it is for how many players our boss has given up on.
It’s not his fault. I blame the Kroenke Family for not making it part of the job criteria to manage the tools you have, and making the Spaniard think that discarding assets worth millions is not normal procedure.
Willian, Aubameyang, Lacazette, Ozil, Mustafi, Kolasinac, Sokratis, David Luiz, Chambers, Bellerin, Maitland Niles, Pepe, Elneny, Cedric all left the Emirates for nothing. That doesn’t happen at most clubs.
Taveres and Lokonga will have only 12 months on their deals when their loans are finished.
Dan
<hr />
<strong>ADMIN COMMENT</strong>
So <a href=”https://www.justarsenal.com/justarsenal-comments-rules-for-subscribers/313188″ target=”_blank” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>here are some simple rules</a> which I must insist commenters follow….
You agree not to give any personal abuse to other Arsenal fans. Everyone is allowed to hold their own opinions even if you disagree with them. It COSTS NOTHING TO BE POLITE TO OTHER ARSENAL FANS.
<hr />
<strong>CALLING ALL ARSENAL FANS!</strong> Anyone who would like to contribute an Article or Video opinion piece on JustArsenal, <em>please <a href=”https://www.justarsenal.com/about-us” target=”_blank” rel=”noopener noreferrer”>contact us through this link</a>…</em>
Arsenal bought them cheaply, so the losses aren’t big
Tavares joined Lazio on loan with an option to buy that will become mandatory if certain sporting conditions are met, so Tavares’ departure could still generate some money
Lokonga’s case is similar and Arsenal could still sell him if the loan isn’t successful since his contract will only expire in 2026
But they all add to Arsenal’s overall loses which are big and getting bigger. The idea is to cut those loses by actually selling players for reasonable fees. That, on the whole, seems to be beyond Arsenal hence writing off players for less, little or nothing or sending them out on loan with “indeterminant” prospects of any fee at the end.
The problem with Arsenal is that they want to sell players that, mainly, other clubs are not particularly interested in and for fees that are almost always too excessive. A surefire combination for not selling in my opinion.
I believe Arsenal’s total financial loss due to player transfers is still smaller than Chelsea’s in the last five years, but I could be wrong
However, Arteta and Edu surely need to do better
By being marginally better than worst team does not mean we are good. This is just an excuse.
True, but I think you’ll find that’s because Chelsea have spent a lot more on players than Arsenal.
When it comes to selling players or not as the case may be (which is what we’re talking about here) Chelsea have raised quite a lot more than Arsenal. The reason is that, on the whole, Chelsea buy better (players that will be in demand etc.) so if needed they can sell better.
Arsenal should always have at least 5 players on loan, that we think can come into first team. If they are not from the academy, buy them young and cheap. We cannot afford to buy a 100mil Saliba, then invest in a 20mil youngster and send him on loan. For every such 3-4 players, one will come good to play for the first team, one can be squad player or sold for profit, others will lose value. Chelsea/City model works – but not at that scale. We cannot manage a loan army without investing a lot there – but surely we can have 5-6 players going?
Not every player works out.
Martinelli cost £7m and is worth ten times that amount
Odegaard was £35m and is worth five times that amount
The only way to judge is to look on it a whole
Agreed
Now now, you’re not properly selling the narrative. All those facts and things.
It doesn’t make good reading but not all cases were like Sambi and Tavares. These players haven’t been good enough, Willian clearly was unhappy and was happy to walk away and Cedric at least, was at the end of his career on a silly pay day and appeared not to want to move on.
You may be right that Arsenal are dab hands at giving players away and other clubs don’t, but I wouldn’t bank on it being only Arsenal. Players have all the power
SPOT ON, Dan. Oh, Mari and Runarsson should on the list too. Arteta’s talent id criteria: faintest of Citeh connection; Chelsea surpluses; Spanish preferred; and buy high. Academy players are for preseason only.
What do you suggest Jack?
Become a club that operates like Brighton- why is laudable of course – but won’t bring them sustained success, or more like a big 4 club that attracts the best (within reason)and maintains that level?
When it came to extending Aubameyang’s contract it was a case of pay him whatever it takes
Some people are never happy
Arteta out ! 😂
Thought I’d say it before some idiot does😉
@Jack
🎯
Problem with that is, the wages they were put on to join us in the first place were inflated, because we were pony at the time. That creates a false narrative in the players head that they can demand that from their next club, so the next club says we can only offer you X amount in terms of transfer fees if we’re gonna pay them this much, and the players in no rush to leave as they know they’ll be getting a pay cut when they do. Basically creating the Babayaro saga all over again with MULTIPLE players! So the end result is a loan to remove the wages, while the player happily waits for his contract to run out knowing he’s been stealing a wage for 5 years.
Blame the people offering the contracts, not the manager.
Tavares is understandable but Lakonga had a fairly successful season with Luton and received plenty of plaudits especially towards the end of the Season.
Unfortunately…Edu doesn’t really seem to be capable of getting good fees for anyone who Arteta wants removing from the squad .
At this time we are presumably looking at bringing in top quality players who can take this team to the next level….A Centre Forward,Central Midfielder and Winger will.not come cheap and these fees need to be mitigated by those we receive for players going in the other direction.It will be interesting to see exactly how much Edu gets for Kiwior,Zinchenko,Partey,Nelson,Nketiah and ESR should we manage to sell them…rather than meekly send them off on loan with the hope that their value might just increase as a consequence.
Excellent article Dan, but one that won’t go down well with those who see nothing wrong in the way the club operating at the moment.
I really cannot think of any other club, in my 70 odd years of following football, who give players away, devalue them by their actions, or reward mediocrity with outrageous salaries.
Ken1945
Who do you believe to be responsible for the salaries? Several players have been offered deals that make little sense and the years since the Bosman ruling, they been have been able to stick around and leave on a free quite legitimately
Dan has levelled the blame at Arteta, but I genuinely doubt that he has that level of influence or responsibility.
SueP, we are told that, even more than Wenger, Mikel has control over what goes on at the club.
The Kronkies have publicly backed his vision, so we know know that they are fully behind him (as are 99.9% of our fans, I would suggest).
To suggest or think that Mikel would not have control over contracts, or at least the final say, is stretching the imagination in my opinion.
Would he have accepted losing out on Rice, due to a salary issue? I doubt that very much.
Is MA to blame for the mistakes Dan highlights? In my opinion he is… but he’s also to “blame” for some tremendous signings, the positive state of the club at the moment and the way the players and fans have come together….. I’m just commenting on the article by Dan as I see it.
So are you saying that Edu and Tim Lewis and Garlick are below Arteta in the pecking order?
I’ve no doubt that he is responsible for who he wants and how that translates on the pitch. The finer details and policy I’d expect to be dealt with by others. I definitely don’t think he has the last word in all matters. He isn’t nearly experienced enough and it would make a mockery of the other senior roles
I don’t disagree that certain decisions have been baffling (AMN) and some were made much earlier on in his career when he was finding his way and there was upheaval at board level with Mislintat, Sanhelli and the contracts guy All have now departed. If players are marooned at Arsenal and it is still happening on a regular basis going forward, then I’ll hold up my hands
Some of the players on the list were difficult to offload in no small part to the Covid situation. Players that might have moved on stayed put due to parlous financial circumstances at other clubs. Others like Cedric were happy with their pay cheque and “wanted to fight for their place “
You have a very different perspective to me on his decisions regarding Ozil and his chums. The same applies to PEA. That is unlikely to change. You mention Lacazette below but he would have held all the cards, wouldn’t he? Isn’t it what happens throughout football in a player’s later years?
I have to add to that, that Arteta could not promise a career – that seems to be over egging it. Who are you referring to specifically in your post to HD?
Thanks
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying, especially as all those you mentioned arrived after MA and would be part of his team.
Why does it make a mockery of their positions?
Mikel would identify a player he wants, what he thinks he’s worth, what he’s willing to pay him and then let Edu, Lewis and Garlick do the jobs they’re being paid to do… remembering, of course, that Lewis and Garlick are not involved in the playing side of the club, unlike MA and, to a lesser extent, Edu.
I’m not talking about pre covid, as Dan’s article was produced with Tavares and Lokonga in mind.
That has nothing to do with Sanhelli etc, so there you have two players marooned at the club, along with Tierney, Ramsdale, Marquinhos, Nketiah and Nelson for differing reasons (salaries, loan after loan, playing abilities).
Of course players were happy to stay, they were given lucrative salaries that prevented, or made it very difficult, for other clubs to match.
Surely the club was happy when they persuaded the player (s) to sign the contracts as well?
Are you blaming the players for accepting a contract that gave them such a vantage point when discussing their futures?
I didn’t realize Ozil had chums, rather the opposite, as he was, supposedly, one of only three (the other two remaining a mystery to this day) who refused to take a pay cut – out of the twenty five first team squad, “chums” seems to be an odd word to use – but of course you know I believe it wasn’t footballing matters that Ozil was involved in.
I am also puzzled as to why Aubameyang was offered roughly the same reported salary as Ozil, when one would have assumed the club would have learnt it’s lesson, but it’s even been repeated again, with Havertz and his reported salary.
You say that Lacazette held all the cards, yet wasn’t it MA who dropped him and didn’t offer him a new contract?
In fact, before any contract is agreed, it’s the club that decides if anything is to be offered wouldn’t you say?
Regarding your final point and question, the club was, reportedly again, offered £30 million for AMN, but he was told he was part of the club’s plans and was persuaded to stay… the rest is history and he left for nothing, after playing just a handful of games and being sent out on loan.
Of course, another example of a player being persuaded to stay by being promised to further his career at the club, was Xhaka and, in this instance, the promise was kept.
Perhaps I should also mention Ramsdale? When Raya was signed, MA said that he didn’t have a No. 1 and would like to substitute keepers, as he saw no difference with doing that as he did with outfield players… to date, that hasn’t happened once.
Hope that answers your points SueP and let’s remember I’m agreeing with this particular article from Dan. Cheers.
“Mikel would identify a player he wants, what he thinks he’s worth, what he’s willing to pay him and then let Edu, Lewis and Garlick do the jobs they’re being paid to do…”
I highly doubt Mikel has a say or should have an educated opinion on what a player is worth, and I actually didn’t understand the “what he’s willing to pay him” part. I think and this is from a pure personal speculation as there is no disclosure from the club regarding how extensive Mikel’s responsibilities are, what Mikel does is identify the players he would like to get, how important their roles would be, are they a short-term fix or a long-term solution, which players he thinks don’t have a big role in the season, or are surplus to requirements, which players aren’t good enough and require upgrades, and suggest which players the club can acquire to do that, how to train, develop, and nurture the players, work closely with them to understand their mentality, attitude, flaws and strengths, work with the academy players and plan a path to the first team, if it’s possible, talks with players regarding their roles and futures and the roles they would be playing in a particular season, what can they expect in terms of game time and minutes, and so on and so forth. That’s just my speculation, because that’s all we can truly make at this point.
Daulat, sorry for the late reply, but I was in a discussion with SueP and HD and wanted to digest your post properly.
You make some good points that I would like to answer and if I miss anything out, I apologise.
1. Arteta not knowing a players value in the market place and doesn’t have a say in his transfer figure.
That is not correct, as Mikel has said he would not go above the price that he set and I give you the Mudryk situation as a prime example of that. The same goes for Declan Rice, inasmuch as he was willing to outbid city115 in order to get his man
“What he’s willing to pay for him” was meant to show his salary and I worded that wrongly, but, as an example again, he thought Havertz was worth the reported £300k plus a week and, despite the lessons from Ozil and Aubemeyang, was prepared to make him the highest paid player at the club.
Regarding Mikel’s responsibilities, he started as a coach, which I suggest covers all your examples and then became the manager, which increased that role – much as Arsene Wenger’s role was – something the club stated would not happen again.
Such has been the rapid learning curve that Mikel has shown, the owners have put everything behind his vision and we have seen the fruits of that decision.
I have no doubt that Mikel would not accept a player he didn’t want, or allow a player to improve his contract, without his say so and neither do I think he would tolerate any of the above to happen.
Of course he listens to the likes of Mertesaker and Wilshere, who would be planning the future of the players they have, but the bottom line is that Mikel Arteta controls the club under the watchful eye of Mr Kronkie Junior.
Is the above speculation and /or opinion? Yes it is, but I base my opinion on the examples I have given you.
After all, that was the recognised role that Arsene Wenger was given and I see no reason to think that Mikel Arteta hasn’t been given the same role.
Thanks for your reply and I enjoyed the debate as usual.
In a previous post Ken1945 I made it clear that Tavares and Sambi have been disappointing signings. The next best thing is to sell or loan out, which it looks as though Edu has been trying to achieve albeit for a smaller fee.
The article, although about them also mentions a list of other players that he has failed. I don’t understand your point about Lacazette at all. It reached a natural end and in many cases, a player receives better personal terms at the next club. Chambers kept going out on loan but was not sold. Did he have a contact that would give him more than he’d get elsewhere? It’s a recurring theme. David Luiz looked as though he was offered a short extension and left at the end of it. What sort of fee was he going to attract at his age?
The trouble as far as I’m concerned is that we didn’t have a squad of players that had much in the way of resale value – apart from Maitland Niles which was a real cock up and Willock who we did get a fee for.
As for Havertz, he is being paid a king’s ransom and one that seems to be paying dividends. We shall see how it goes next season and whether Arteta was justified.
The contract extension of Auba was heralded in most quarters. Pay him what he wants was the cry. I didn’t foresee a crisis looming – did Arteta?
The other names on that list were mostly not Arteta signings and with your superior background knowledge would know who gave out the enhanced salary packages and contracts making it almost impossible for them to get shifted later on. Pepe was an unmitigated disaster. Brought in for a fortune. It’s unfair on Arteta as per Dan’s article to expect him to always get the best out of every resource provided. Emery didn’t want him either so who was to blame for that?
Putting personal preferences aside, Raya was brought in on loan and Ramsdale played initially if I recall. He lost his place and never regained it and subsequently Arsenal sanctioned the Raya option to buy. You may disagree with his opinion about Raya but Arteta made up his own mind and made him his number one. Tough on Ramsdale but it’s a brutal business. We are yet to discover his or the club’s future plans on Ramsdale and what his value will be
The area that has always puzzled me is Nketiah and Reiss Nelson. Hardly featured in RN’s case but given better terms than were unjustified. The transfer window will see what offers come in and whether any transfer fee is lower due to said salaries. I was also unsure of giving Elneny a contract extension but in the scheme of things it was only a year and not a lot in football speak.
I was answering your post directed to me SueP and you mentioned covid etc.
Tavares and Lokonga, as Dan put it in his article, were another example of players, since MA’s arrival, that will see the club lose money on it seems, bought but not good enough, on high salaries that other clubs baulk at and, in other cases, has seen the club actually paying to let players play for other clubs.
When we signed Havertz, he was down and out at a club in crisis – and yet, he was offered more money, making him the highest paid player at the club, than he was earning at chelsea.
I actually rate this transfer as one of MA’s best and I don’t need to wait until next season to see that – but the salary was ridiculous, especially after the debacle surrounding Ozil and Aubemeyang.
Aubameyang? Did MA see a disaster happening? Well, it was common knowledge that Auba was already breaking the rules, but that’s not the point – he was a golden boot winner, probably at the top of his game (hence the four year contract) who was allowed to negotiate his next club, while the club paid part of his salary and let him go for nothing.
You said that Lacazette held all the cards, but he didn’t.
MA, rightly or wrongly, chose not to play him and he wasn’t offered a new contract, as is the perogative of the club.
I’m not putting out personal opinions regarding Raya and Ramsdale, I’m just quoting what MA said and the fact that it hasn’t happened.
I agree that Pepe was a disaster, but was he ever really wanted by UE and MA?
Why don’t you expect MA to get the best out of the players he has identified as being up to the level of what is required and consequently signed?
So what standards do you think he should be judged by with regards to buying players?
Of course ALL managers make mistakes, every single one of them, but they are then judged and questioned on them – why is it deemed anti Arsenal to do that with the best young manager out there at the moment… in my opinion?
We have always agreed with reference to Nketiah and Nelson, while I think Elneny was given that extra year for what he was doing off the pitch, rather than on it and again my opinion, he deserved it.
Ken1945
This conversation is going round in circles.
Clearly both Sambi and Tavares were errors of judgement, and as things stand, Vieira hasn’t set the heather on fire either. However, personally speaking I do trust MA to get the most out of his players most of the time but some were just not good enough for a team that needed a reset. I don’t care who signed them, they were Arsenal players who over time were not required/aging and due to inflated contracts were immovable until the bitter end when they moved off to the less exciting teams in Europe for peanuts or nothing.
The Lacazette argument is weak imo. He got dropped as you say but how often do players these days, on big salaries, ask to be transfer listed to earn less? Did anyone try to force him out? He got paid up in full until the day his contract ended. Willian was on big bucks, but has since said he was unhappy at Arsenal and was prepared to leave and an accommodation was made.
What I disagree with in Dan’s article is that he is blaming Arteta for letting players go for nothing. I am saying that some of those listed were hardly worth a bean anyway, but I am now in danger of repeating myself.
Dan naming players that Arteta HADN’T signed undermines his argument. He should have named the ones who he HAS signed that have been let go to emphasise his point.
Just two points to finish off this discussion SueP:
1. The Lacazette debate.
I don’t see how he held all the cards, when the club had dropped him and not offered a new contract.
What was he supposed to do?
He didn’t hand in a transfer request, but waited until he became a free agent and then negotiated a new contract with his agent.
2. I assumed that Dan mentioned the players he did, because they left after Mikel took over as manager and had nothing to do with who signed them, just that he sold them and how they departed. I don’t think that weakens his point whatsoever.
Not sure why you would even debate with fans that admit they are “massive Arteta fans “Ken
But each to their own buddy ,for me you won’t get anything worthwhile but cringey excuses .
Because they are Arsenal fans DK, with an opinion just like you and me.
We’ve had our differences over the years as well, don’t forget.
What I don’t understand, is this brick wall regarding critiquing Mikel and the lengths some go to defend him.
HD, who I always follow due to his knowledge of the club, has tried to compare players like Pires’s exit from the club with that of giving players away and I really just don’t get it!!
I’m 100% behind MA, but refuse to brushline out his mistakes and the fact that Mikel himself has admitted he’s made mistakes, makes it even more difficult to understand.
Giving away players for nothing is hardly a new thing at The Arsenal or under the Kroenkes. I can remember players leaving for free at Highbury.
Can you name them ?
Lehmann, Wiltord, Edu, Pires, Campbell, Stepanovs, Jensen, Kiwomya, Juan, Danilevicius, Grimaldi, Seaman, Luzhnyl, Kanu, Parlour.
Enough for you, lol.
don’t forget Bobby Gordon in 1956, crazy stuff
Now name the 1s that weren’t at the end of their career that were recently bought that Arsenal hadn’t got the best years from already 🙂
Can you give me some examples HD?
Not ones who’s contracts had run out anyway, but those like AMN, who the club turned down a offer for and then let them leave for free, or Aubemeyang, who had just signed a new four year contract at a reported £300k plus a week?
Dan actually says that Mr Kronkie should take the blame by the way and can you think of another club with a list like the one produced by Dan?
GAI, you say we got them on the cheap, how much did we pay out on their salaries?
I’ve given a list to Dan. Doesn’t matter if there are free transfers or not, as it shows that there was bad transfer business matters even decades ago at the club
Of course it matters!!
You are trying to defend the indefensible by switching the argument.
No one has d said that bad business didn’t occur decades ago – what Dan is saying, quite clearly, is that players are being sold or let go of, simply because they don’t fit into MA’s style of play and for peanuts, for free and / or subsidising their, wages…. just to get them off the books.
Do Lehman, Wiltord, Edu, Pires, Campbell, Seaman, Kanu Parlour, Grimaldi compare to Aubameyang, Ozil, Lacazette, AMN etc in the way they exited the club?
Of those you mention, how many were loaned out and had their salaries subsided by the club?
How many were given four year contracts, only to be given away six months later?
How many sat on the bench for months, while their value plummeted, only to be let go, after the club gave them a golden handshake?
How many were promised a career at the club if they stayed and then let go when their contracts expired?
Chalk and cheese HD and you know it – stop defending the indefensible.
Football has been a business for many a decade Ken, and it doesn’t matter if players are at the end of their contract or if they have fallen foul of the clubs rules, letting them go for free is bad business. We can’t have it both ways !
HD, if they were at the end of their contracts and they wanted to go elsewhere, how could the club stop them?
The same goes for the club if they didn’t want to re_sign them of course doesn’t it?
We’re talking about ripping up contracts, paying for players to play at other clubs, giving golden handshakes to get them off the wage bill, persuading players to stay then ignoring them… are you saying that the above was good business sense for the club?
Your lack of knowledge scares me
Pires , Lehman , Wiltord , Kanu , Seaman and Parlour were bad transfer business ?
Think allot would say they justified their fees and wages by winning things and then contract run down
Wenger played them till the end
Letting them go for zilch is bad business, considering everything they had won !
Your lack of an IQ is comical 😂
How many had their contracts ripped up ?
Or loaned out to get of wage bill?
Or did they just get old and run contracts down
I think deep down you can see the difference
How many of them had won the PL, the FA Cup ?
When you talk about Wenger’s era, your dishonest never cease to amaze me. Sad it comes from an old supporter like you.
When you HH, can’t face facts, it says a lot about you !
Not every player will work out and that’s not a problem at all, it’s just reality.
What frustrates some fans is the lack of “making a plan” once the player isn’t wanted. Procrastination and kicking the can down the road so to speak. Loaning out while subsidising wages until contracts run down is simply not good enough.
If there’s zero plan for a player just sell, selling for a low price is still far cheaper than subsidising wages for years and leaving for free
Plus, don’t promise players they have a future at the club and then let them stagnate!!
reading this nonsense sounds like Edu and Arteta are the worst thing to ever happen to Arsenal
get a grip
I’ve checked and no one has written anything of the sort.
What is being written, is that the club have an awful record when it comes to selling and/or managing contracts under MA.
If you can’t see that, then read Dan’s examples again and dispute them – in other words, get a grip and stop making things up.
Reflection on you mate
What you mean is we can’t question Arteta at all ?
It’s almost been impossible to generate good transfer fees given what Edu inherited – yet more convenient memory loss for his critics.
This the first real summer, where Edu will be tested, and I expect of him to generate some solid sales.
In regards to Tavares, we’ll get back what he paid for him, which is actually good work from Edu considering Tavares has not improved.
Lokonga is the frustrating deal as he was having a decent season. If he had not got injured, or Luton had stayed up, I think we could have got some decent money.
It’s another loan, and that’s another loan fee chipping away at we paid for him, and playing for a club like Sevilla is a fantastic market opportunity should he do well.
It’s not about generating a good fee mate ….any fee would have been nice lol.
Yes but can you imagine the anger amongst fans for accepting a low fee, if there even was an offer?
Go out there, create a market for himself, and hopefully a decent fee next summer, or even in Jan should he really excel.
What Edu inherited has nothing to do with the players he’s trying to sell now, apart from ESR ( if that rumour is true) and Tierney.
There’s no other player left, who hasn’t been signed or re-signed since MA and Edu got together, aoart from Saliba and I’m sure you don’t want him out.
So let’s see what money we make from MA’s and Edu’s signings.
You missed my point completely. I refenced what he inherited, because Edu has wrongly been given this reputation for under selling, whereas my point is that he was in an impossible situation for a very long period.
Last season he got a good fee for Balogun, which has been more than justified given he only scored 8 goals last season in a weaker league.
This season I would say Edu must deliver some good fees as I expect ESR, Nketiah, Ramsdale, maybe Vieira to leave, etc. Will almost be impossible to give Tierney away, let alone get a fee, so I hope the fans understand that one already.
It appears that we may be attributing too much influence to Arteta in transfer matters. While his role is more significant than Wenger’s, it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s involved in detailed financial analyses such as pantry inventory costs. Arteta, as a manager, has been entrusted with more responsibilities than a typical Head Coach. However, extending these responsibilities to include the club’s financial decisions seems to be an exaggeration. To my knowledge, the club has not officially disclosed the extent of his responsibilities. Therefore, this article appears to be based solely on speculation about what might be happening behind the scenes, and I don’t see the need for further discussion on this topic.
Wenger ran the whole club. What is stupidity is that saying Arteta role is more significant?
Elaborate.
Isn’t that how it is made to look like since he joined? That he exercises way too much influence over the club decisions. I personally don’t believe that, but that’s the very basis of this article, isn’t it?
We might know quite a lot about how much responsibilities and influence Wenger had, but does anyone know for sure, how much influence does Arteta has? Do you?
I’ve read your response HH and thought that Arteta occupies a fairly similar position to AW. Both men had – for various periods in time – a close working relationship with their bosses – as in David Dein and Edu
It’s a typical hatchet job article which fails miserably to provide any perspective.
Saying that the manager’s role is to get the best out of resources is reductive and fails to consider the role the manager plays in setting direction for the club.
The author has made no attempt to consider how these transfers fit into a vision for the club. He has also not presented an alternative viable approach that would also ensure that Arsenal remain competitive amongst the top clubs in the PL and in Europe.
The “giving away” of players (which in some cases is actually factually inaccurate) is neither new nor unique to Arsenal.
Unsurprisingly, the piece is praised as a great article simply because it is critical.
Cringe
Tavares sale has an obligation to buy and a sell on clause included around 25% so I don’t understand how is it a loss or a bad business. For God sake he had one year left in his contract.
Lokonga I understand it’s a loan with an option to buy and also a sell-on included. Lokonga in his case, we had other other teams willing to offer a better deal to Arsenal and Lokonga had his heart set on Seville and he didn’t want to go anywhere else.
For me these two deals were not badly concluded and we need to always consider that some negotiations are not same as the others, facts always defer. Not to say Edu and co have not made some bad decisions before in the transfer market.
In your article @Dan you say Arsenal failed to get any fee for the two which is totally misleading. Please get your facts right
Whenever I see such articles, I am always reminded of Conte’s blasting of Spurs management in his final press conference. How the blame is always on the manager, and players are protected all the time for every issue happening. I loved his assessment of how fans can always find a manager to blame because he represents the players on the pitch. But at the same time, players are paid professional and inability to do what is asked of them is their professional failures. Identifying talent can be the manager’s job, realizing that talent depends on both the player and the manager.
When talent isn’t realized and changes are needed, the manager often bears all the blame, while players escape scrutiny. I believe a balanced and informed approach is necessary, requiring fans to have a deeper understanding of the situation.
I always considered Dan article as a needed critique piece but this really lack substance. I admit that we’ve been poor regarding selling players but mentioning names like luiz, willian, laccazete even Aubameyang and Ozil as bad business is questioning. Players that have crossed the 30 digit in age is about getting the most out of them in performance as they often fetch little or nothing in tranfer fees. The case of Aubameyang is quite complicated, as at the time he was given the contract nobody could question the details and that’s a testament to how important he was as I don’t think any fan would have support selling him then. Then attitude comes into questions coupled with drop in form and he was out of the team. Looking at where we’re now the decision has work fine.
Though we’ve some players decision that’s questionable, personally, the handling of Ozil and AMN shows poor decision and management on the coach and his Co workers part.
Overall, I won’t say we’ve being poor on moving players because of the nature of players we’re moving either they are ageing or they’ve not being good enough and I believe is a phase that will soon pass. Looking forward, we can only improve on this part.
So generally, we’ve not been poor and Arteta and co are not doing as bad as the author have painted.
Hallelujah
Lols