YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
Finally

Emile Smith Rowe SIGNS!!!!

GREAT NEWS!!!

I was worried with those Villa bids and nothing materialising with the new contract so bloody relieved we have finally tied him down.

Just happened to be checking Newsnow and saw Emile Smith Rowe name corner of my eye but didnt think anything of it and instead clicked on a story about Maddison.

Then once finished reading scrolled down to be met with the words Smith Rowe signs new deal

GET IN THERE!!!
VILLA DO ONE.....

By the way, has there been any discussion on the forum about the hoops on the socks on the home kit this season? What are they thinking? Usually there's some half-baked nostalgia somewhere in there in a ridiculously pretentious media release about the kit's visual themes, but all I can think of is Nayim from the halfway line. Am I missing something?

In the fifties and maybe into the early sixties Arsenal always played with hooped blue and white socks so I guess there could be some “half baked nostalgia somewhere in there” if I understand your post correctly. And yes before you ask they were indeed blue and white

RE: the links to Tammy Abraham. It is an interesting one because currently our two main strikers, Lacazette and Aubameyang are probably our two highest profile and highest earning players - but in my opinion neither are actually suited to the way I think Arteta wants to play or suited to the idea of the 'modern forward'. Of course both Lacazette and Aubameyang have good qualities but I could easily see a situation whereby the Arsenal hierarchy are actively looking at a way of moving both on sooner rather than later.
We have Nketiah who's time at Arsenal is surely up, and for my money he also doesn't fit in to Arteta's style or fit the 'modern forward' typology.

Then we have Balogun and Martinelli, both fit that 'modern forward' - quick, high work rate, flexible and mobile strikers - its yet to be seen how much Arteta likes them. Abraham would represent a very different type of striker to the two of them. If you move Nketiah and Lacazette on for £15m each and pay an extra £5-10m for Abraham it could be seen as good long term planning. Abraham in 4 years is probably still likely to command a similar fee he's being priced at now as long as he has at least 2 years left on a contract and no major injuries that slow him down.

My reservation is would we be buying a striker who is just that level below elite and who's ceiling is never going to get him to that elite status.

Kane to City for £160m? City are bonkers if they’re paying that. Kane will be 28 next week and has a more regular history of injuries and a habit of taking some time to get back up to match fitness after. You could get Haaland or probably Mbappe for a similar price.

From Spurs side £160m would be huge and could easily facilitate a rebuild in a number of positions. I’m still amazed no big club comes in seriously for Son. He would improve most teams.

Hi Rich,

Great to see FFP working its magic.

A double whammy for us in that it strengthens an already brilliant team and, as you say, gives one of our rivals the money to finance a big rebuild (assuming the money is not used to pay off stadium debts).

One thing about Daniel Levy is that he gets top dollar for his best players when they leave.

Kane to City for £160m? City are bonkers if they’re paying that. Kane will be 28 next week and has a more regular history of injuries and a habit of taking some time to get back up to match fitness after. You could get Haaland or probably Mbappe for a similar price.

From Spurs side £160m would be huge and could easily facilitate a rebuild in a number of positions. I’m still amazed no big club comes in seriously for Son. He would improve most teams.

News this morning saying Son has signed a new contract.

Yep - 4 more years. He's 29, never won a thing but could walk in to more successful sides. As surprised as I am that no one seems to have seriously bid for him I'm equally surprised that he hasn't had enough and wants a new challenge and trophies like Kane has seemingly done

I may be wearing "rose-tinted specs" on this but every article I've read on this says £160m DEAL
In my parallel world that means that the total deal - transfer and contract - is worth £160m
With weekly wages of £400k, the contract takes up £83.2m, which would leave c£80m for the transfer - more reflective of the current market.

I may be wearing "rose-tinted specs" on this but every article I've read on this says £160m DEAL
In my parallel world that means that the total deal - transfer and contract - is worth £160m
With weekly wages of £400k, the contract takes up £83.2m, which would leave c£80m for the transfer - more reflective of the current market.

In my parallel world that means that the total deal - transfer and contract - is worth £160m
With weekly wages of £400k, the contract takes up £83.2m, which would leave c£80m for the transfer - more reflective of the current market.

Griezmann was sold for 120, 145 for mbappe. Kane falls into this category.

But weren’t they sold pre-depression of the transfer market?

Actually, that makes a lot more sense. A £160m fee for Kane is daft.

I doubt very much if that even comes into it with a transfer of this type especially when the likely buyers are sheiks and oligarchs.

If Ben white is going for 50 don’t expect Kane to go for 80. He’s under contract till 2024. If it happens it Will be another silly transfer fee unfortunately

I have a feeling he will end up staying at spurs as they won’t be able to get the figures to work. Similar with ourselves and Maddison

I suspect that Kane will go because City want him, Spurs are desperate to cash in and, perhaps most importantly, Kane wants to get away from that hole, and who can blame him?

Still struggle to wrap my head around the Ben White price. I hope he is that good!

But weren’t they sold pre-depression of the transfer market?

With Kane leaving, I'd say they have offered him a big contract. A bit like our situation with Alexis and Özil, they couldn't afford to lose the two of them and for it to happen in the same window would be a huge hit.

That makes sense, but doesn't explain why no other clubs have come in for him, particularly Premier League clubs - as a left winger in a front 3 he'd improve Chelsea, City and Man U for me

I can't help but thinking that we need to cash in on Willock and AMN this summer. Both may never be as highly valued as they currently are and both are attracting attention from a number of premier league clubs. It all adds up to being able to get a really top price for both of them. We really should be getting £50m minimum for the two combined.

Selling players abroad seems to be having to accept low values or loan with option/obligation to buy clauses. None of which help right now. I think we have a likely £5m from Mavropanos and £12m from Guendouzi coming in next year. That offsets Lokonga's fee and is the way we need to look at transfers.

Nketiah and Nelson could fetch £25m for the pair, the contribution from both last year was very little, and virtually zero post Xmas so in squad terms we simply don't need them and won't miss them. Aouar is meant to be available for £25m.

I know it is overly simplistic to see things this way, but if there are Prem clubs after our players we need to really consider every offer with a stance towards selling - it does seem the only way to make decent money on a player in this window.

For the life of me I can never understand why people put together these "Welcome To Arsenal" clips until a player has actually signed for us.

Willian.....still no takers


https://www.teamtalk.com/news/genuine-r ... -continues

Kane to City for £160m? City are bonkers if they’re paying that. Kane will be 28 next week and has a more regular history of injuries and a habit of taking some time to get back up to match fitness after. You could get Haaland or probably Mbappe for a similar price.

From Spurs side £160m would be huge and could easily facilitate a rebuild in a number of positions. I’m still amazed no big club comes in seriously for Son. He would improve most teams.

Arsenal not willing to extend Lacazette's deal, want to invite offers in the region of £15m and find someone to take on his big salary.

If we can't sell Lacazette you have 2 options, new contract or keep him 1 more year and lose him for free
A new 3 year deal for Lacazette at £200k per week would cost us £31m and we have a player for 3 more year who is probably on the decline.
Losing him for free next year means we lose any potential fee (£15m)

I lament us losing players for free but in Lacazette's case it would be preferential to lose him for free than to give him a new deal in my view