leffe186

See also Arsenal.

That’s kinda my point though - of all that money spent, they weren’t the star performers in the team. They were just good enough (well, Havertz and Werner - Mount was the third starting forward in the final) to get the job done in a CL win that was very much a squad achievement. Which of those players would you consider “great”?

I think this is what’s changed now, in general I mean. I had a quick look at Chelsea’s forwards on Wiki last year - Lukaku 98M, Pulisic 58M, Werner 48M, Ziyech 37M, Havertz 72M. All signed over the last couple of years. Arguably all have been…not great…and you could even say none have been guaranteed starters. That’s a bit of an extreme example, but it does feel like if you want to challenge at that level then that’s the going rate for a rotational forward. It’s nuts, but here we are I guess.

I disagree to an extent because the World Cup in the middle really puts the cat among the pigeons. We really don’t know what the impact will end up being and I can see bad luck with injuries completely screwing over one or two top sides.

Agree with you on West Ham, but they’ve been at that level for a little while now so that’s no surprise. I’ve heard a couple of people try to rein in your expectations and that’s fair, but I think last season showed you have a manager who can help you bridge that gap pretty quickly. Botman alone is a step closer. I don’t think you’ll maintain Top 3/4 form like the second half of last year - the circumstances conspired to help that along somewhat - but I certainly see you in the mix for top six. Home games will be massive for you. Now for Spurs. There’s a couple of key points I think. First, did you just forget Bissouma? They definitely need a RWB but if they get Spence (as seems likely) that looks like enough. If Richarlison comes then really all they need is one or two CBs to be a real force - as you suggest - and it’s obvious that’s where their money is going to be spent as they’ve been trying for Bastoni, Bremer etc. Secondly - do Spurs need Richarlison? I’ve seen a few people say “where does he fit in with Son, Kane, Kulu” or words to that effect. That’s not seeing the wood for the trees, surely? The whole point of Richarlison would be that you could play him instead of any one of those three and see less of a drop off than with most “back-up” players. Spurs will expect to play a million games next season, with an entire World Cup in the middle. You’re going to need every last bit of your squad. Then you factor in the change to five subs. That has the potential to fundamentally change the game - at least in the second half - even when every player is fit. Right now, one injury to Son or Kane and you’re looking at Bergwijn or Moura. Ajax heroics aside, Conte’s no fool, he knows he needs more.

This. £30/40M buys you really good young footballers from abroad who might be great in the Premier League but might not (Botman, Guimaraes). £50/60M buys you those players a year or two later.

I mean, sure, but it’s not like you had a choice between the two approaches. I genuinely don’t think you could have got a single one of those players…at this stage in proceedings. You’re just doing what any team in your position should be doing, just you have more flexibility and money than most have had. Take, I dunno, Leicester seven years ago - signing relatively unknown quality players (Kante, Inler, Demarai Gray, Amartey) putting them with tried and trusted PL players (Huth, Nathan Dyer) and making the most of players already there (Chilwell, Wes Morgan, Danny Drinkwater, Riyad Mahrez). One difference is that your “relatively unknown” quality players and other transfers in are costing about three or four times as much as Leicester paid. And that’s OK, it’s where you’re at. It’s just a bit strange to be pleased about not doing something that you couldn’t do even if you wanted.

Chelsea’s window is going from bad to amazing at a rapid pace. If they manage to get De Ligt, Sterling, Raphinha and Aké - which seems entirely plausible - that seems kinda incredible after how things were looking.

PaddyPower trolling Arsenal hard.

Happier that he went there than to Arsenal tbh. Going to have a quick dekko at Arsetwitter.

Well quite . Not sure what people think is gonna happen. There’s going to come a point when the fans realize that Saudi Arabia buying Newcastle means that you’re actually an elite club with as much money as you want, and no longer an outsider.

Naah. Bottom line - English clubs in general just have so much more money than most other European clubs. If they want to offload a high-earner who’s surplus to requirements, free up some wage bill and balance the books under the new “FFP” then there are a limited number of clubs you can sell to. They’d have sold to you if you were willing to pay and if Sterling was willing to go to you. Arsenal basically had to suck it up and write off Auba, Ozil and Laca to get them out of the league.

If he scores 12 goals and they fail to get Top Five then he’ll have been a failure tbh. For the wages he’s supposedly on too? It’s not just about Jesus, it’s about opportunity cost. If Arsenal could have spent that money better elsewhere (fee and wages) - and I hope that’s the case - then it might not matter. If they spend all this money and then don’t get into the CL then I really don’t know where they go from here.

This is it, tbh. I don’t think it will stop Newcastle at all. Might conceivably slow things down a touch, but I don’t think that’s a bad thing either. Lest we forget, it essentially took Spurs 18 years to get to this point - let’s say 15 accounting for COVID. You might not even need 3. It definitely makes things harder for the next tier though. Probably the one other team with the immediate potential to break through would be West Ham with their big cheap stadium and the subsequent potential for matchday income. It puts Everton in all kinds of trouble, and possibly Chelsea too - although they have an ongoing strategy of buying loads of players, shunting them out on loan, then making money on transfers which will help. Leaves Arsenal in a precarious position too, possibly. Their continued high spending despite poor league position would be even less sustainable under this regime. They do still have the global profile that might bail them out.

They’d be well chuffed. Saka was their top scorer last season with 11. Even Leicester had two players who scored more.

The usual excellent breakdown from Swiss Ramble - this time of the new FFP regs (or whatever they’re called now). Would be really interested to see him analyze what that would mean for you guys going forward (over the next 3/4 years, say). Edit: Sorry, didn’t see all the stuff in the other thread. As you were.

For a team that’s not finished in the top four in the last six seasons, they don’t half spend a lot of money. More in net spend over the last four years than any Premier League club is this is to be believed: https://www.transfermarkt.us/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1

Rumour is that we’ve put in a firm bid for Raphinha, but also that you and West Ham have thrown your hat in the ring. Sounds like a proper old-fashioned bidding war. Except he wants to go to Barca

Just feels like it’s way too early to be having these discussions. A lot of Arsenal and Spurs’ strengthening is just on paper. Arsenal have already spent all their Champions League money and have only actually got in Marquinhos and Fabio Vieira (while losing Lacazette). Spurs have only signed three players, and one’s a backup keeper, plus they need a significantly bigger squad. Chelsea and Man U are bound to spend some money…surely. I’d rather wait and see who’s in place for the start of the season. A week ago Arsenal looked like a disaster area. Now some divvy on Arsenal-mania is posting this: I mean, sure .

Womblemaster says hi.

I’ve never really looked at Arsenal Twitter before. It’s very entertaining.

That phrase is a pet hate . Me and at least a couple of others on here. Only good-humoured