Turn on thread page Beta
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Thoughts on Chelsea also wanting Mustafi

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sr90)
    Thoughts on Chelsea also wanting Mustafi

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Chelsea have a habit of "stealing" players that were about to sign for other clubs, so i wouldn't read into that. Wenger must now be smart and look in other places at the same time if he wants to avoid deploying an 18-year-old at CB
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James.Carnell)
    Mustafi is fluent in English.
    Well that's good news! Sign him up

    (Original post by ClockEnderAFC)
    Like I said it's hardly ideal but we may not have a choice. As it stands we have 2 fit CB's and a youth player who can play CB even though he was signed as CDM.
    I would guess that we'll play Debuchy or Monreal at CB vs Liverpool and try to bring in a cb before the window shuts
    (Original post by drandy76)
    He spent 3/4 years at Everton


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I completely forgot about that. At least that solves one potential problem
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    #WelcomeJonnyEvans
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diego Costa)
    Lol, there's missing the point and there's this.

    When did I give all the credit to Giroud? The point was clearly to counter the other guy suggest he was sh*te.

    On to your comment: Ramsey wasn't the focal point of that season. Arsenal play(ed) a narrow formation so they needed Giroud to hold the ball up and act as an aerial outlet to create space for the midfielders (INCLUDING RAMSEY). Remember you didn't have Sanchez or a firing Ozil and played a far more possession oriented and less incisive system with Arteta dictating play.

    I don't care if some naïve Arsenal fans had pitchforks for Giroud. The fact is unless they changed their system - one which led to their best season in years and relied on Giroud and replaced several players with many before Giroud they wouldn't have won the title.

    It also sums up the lack of intelligence of some of the Arsenal fans if they had pitchforks for Giroud. Wouldn't Wenger be at fault for relying on him despite his limitations and not purchasing another striker?
    Depends on how you define shite then. 16 in 36 that season doesn't seem so bad on paper, but his performances over the second half of the season were poor. The pitchforks weren't just out from a handful of "naive fans" they were out from pretty much everyone.

    But we didn't win the title, so did not replacing Giroud really do us any favours?

    Wenger is the one at fault here, no one's denied that. The point that most people make is that Giroud is perfectly fine to be a backup striker, but evidently not good enough to lead the line. Said pitchforks were out due to his slump that season when we most needed him to perform.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AR_95)
    Depends on how you define shite then. 16 in 36 that season doesn't seem so bad on paper, but his performances over the second half of the season were poor. The pitchforks weren't just out from a handful of "naive fans" they were out from pretty much everyone.
    He had a very good first half of the season and a poor second half. I don't see how that makes him shite. Pitchforks should have been out at Wenger, we know Giroud's limitations so they should be directed at Wenger for not buying a better striker.

    We didn't win the title, so did not replacing Giroud really do us any favours?
    Giroud played a key part in a system which led to Arsenal's best season in a decade (13/14). I never disagreed that there were better strikers, I said that its knee jerk to call him a bad player.

    Wenger is the one at fault here, no one's denied that. The point that most people make is that Giroud is perfectly fine to be a backup striker, but evidently not good enough to lead the line. Said pitchforks were out due to his slump that season when we most needed him to perform.
    I agree mainly, but as mentioned above, there shouldn't have been pitchforks for Giroud when Wenger was the problem. It shows naïvety blaming Giroud.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diego Costa)
    He had a very good first half of the season and a poor second half. I don't see how that makes him shite. Pitchforks should have been out at Wenger, we know Giroud's limitations so they should be directed at Wenger for not buying a better striker.



    Giroud played a key part in a system which led to Arsenal's best season in a decade (13/14). I never disagreed that there were better strikers, I said that its knee jerk to call him a bad player.



    I agree mainly, but as mentioned above, there shouldn't have been pitchforks for Giroud when Wenger was the problem. It shows naïvety blaming Giroud.
    Tbf we've literally signed/missed out on a striker every year for the past few years, so clearly wenger is trying. It's just we couldn't convince the world class ones and the ones we signed to rotate with giroud flopped/are permanently crippled (see welbeck)


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I think Giroud was a problem, but I don't think he is to the same extent anymore. Giroud of today, is capable of winning the golden boot, his shooting metrics suggest that is not at all unreasonable. Its not quite as likely as Aguero or Kane, but that is not a purely Giroud issue. Aguero is a top tier striker putting away chances to a better degree than you would expect with consistency, but other than him, someone like Kane is mainly just getting more shots and shots from which you would expect more goals.

    I think if Arsenal are looking at winning the league considering all the factors (the market for, the clubs prowess in the market, the attractiveness of the club, ability to drop $, and the big one of the direction of the PL at present) as a team you'd be better off looking at building a league winning team to feed Giroud than you would be looking for an Aguero who will allow you to win the league without deserving it, pretty much. Getting a more clinical striker than Giroud is just a waste of time tbh, margins are so fine and also so unpredictable season to season that considering the market you'd be dropping crazy money on anyone proven, to get best case a little bit better. Lacazette for example, you'd be looking at 17 goals to Girouds 15 off the same chances, considerations aside.

    When you look at predictors of good teams, of chances created and goals scored. I would look at two things, one being the speed of Arsenal's play which is sluggish (genuinely only slightly better than LVG) and your increasing reliance upon Ozil the last couple of seasons (if he's out long term, I would think you are genuinely ****ed). In that sense you'd be better off improving elsewhere. The only time I would think Arsenal should be 100% looking to ditch Giroud would be if you could get a player who could either carve out chances for themselves to a significant degree or flash them away like Aguero. However if one of them stands out, you'll probably face some serious competition and again questionable how repeatable/predicable this is.

    I'd be looking at your midfield set up, no more Ramsey Flamini combinations, and your right wing considering Walcott is out of form and ill suited to your current style. Perhaps having another look at someone like Draxler and letting Alexis work off the right, or Lacazette playing as a wide forward. All this is assuming Wenger can get the team playing to a league winning standard which is something I doubt more than ever.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drandy76)
    Tbf we've literally signed/missed out on a striker every year for the past few years, so clearly wenger is trying. It's just we couldn't convince the world class ones and the ones we signed to rotate with giroud flopped/are permanently crippled (see welbeck)
    They could get Bacca for £30m or Lacazette for £40-45m. They could have even tempted Aubameyang for £60m in August. Not having another striker lies at the feet of Wenger.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diego Costa)
    They could get Bacca for £30m or Lacazette for £40-45m. They could have even tempted Aubameyang for £60m in August. Not having a world class striker lies at the feet of Wenger.
    Bacca isn't world class, Lacazette is an option however last year many scouts, not just ours were a bit sceptical, may still go back in for him later. Not entirely sure we could attract Aubameyang tbh, nor am I convinced he's particularly suited for the premier league so I don't mind that too much


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fizzel)
    I'd be looking at your midfield set up, no more Ramsey Flamini combinations, and your right wing considering Walcott is out of form and ill suited to your current style. Perhaps having another look at someone like Draxler and letting Alexis work off the right, or Lacazette playing as a wide forward. All this is assuming Wenger can get the team playing to a league winning standard which is something I doubt more than ever.
    Xhaka is in to replace Flamini, as a result Ramsey will have more creative freedom.

    I see Sanchez on the right, Ozil in the hole and either Iwobi or Campbell on the left. Both of them showed more than Walcott last season.

    (Original post by drandy76)
    Bacca isn't world class, Lacazette is an option however last year many scouts, not just ours were a bit sceptical, may still go back in for him later. Not entirely sure we could attract Aubameyang tbh, nor am I convinced he's particularly suited for the premier league so I don't mind that too much
    I didn't mean to type world class. You're right.

    Aubame did demolish Spurs, so I think he could cut the mustard in the PL. When you consider that Arsenal could pay £60m and treble his wages, it would certainly give both parties something to consider.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    On the bright side, at times our man oriented pressing looked really good against city, long may it continue


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diego Costa)
    I didn't mean to type world class. You're right.

    Aubame did demolish Spurs, so I think he could cut the mustard in the PL. When you consider that Arsenal could pay £60m and treble his wages, it would certainly give both parties something to consider.
    How much are his current wages, I think he has his heart set on Madrid if his interviews are to be believed. He's got the quality to play well in the prem, I'm just sure how well he'd mesh within or side etc, then again that's the scouts job to judge, not mine



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diego Costa)
    Xhaka is in to replace Flamini, as a result Ramsey will have more creative freedom.

    I see Sanchez on the right, Ozil in the hole and either Iwobi or Campbell on the left. Both of them showed more than Walcott last season.
    Well Flamini has been released so I didn't actually expect them to continue player for player. I was talking set up, as in whether or not that midfield combination will improve the speed of the transitions. An aspect which imo, someone like Wilshere would simply do a better job in, with Ramsey probably not featuring in the starting line up. Xhaka is better DM than Flamini defensively but his main job in that partnership is not an offensive one.

    As for the others, Campbell isn't good enough. Iwobi I can't fully comment upon but its another season of maybe. He'd need a big breakthrough year becuase right now he's not even the type of player who is a known hot prospect. If he was another Sane or Sterling then perhaps I'd be more confident. Ideally Arsenal should be going into the season with a balanced 3, so Ozil, Sanchez, and a name of the same caliber, or at the very least someone you could entertain looking like it as the season went on.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Support the movement lads Name:  ImageUploadedByStudent Room1470688905.009155.jpg
Views: 75
Size:  96.9 KB


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Elneny is ****ing trash man :rofl:

    Egyptian Jordan Henderson.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by swirly)
    Elneny is ****ing trash man :rofl:

    Egyptian Jordan Henderson.
    I actually rate the guy highly.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fizzel)
    I think Giroud was a problem, but I don't think he is to the same extent anymore. Giroud of today, is capable of winning the golden boot, his shooting metrics suggest that is not at all unreasonable. Its not quite as likely as Aguero or Kane, but that is not a purely Giroud issue. Aguero is a top tier striker putting away chances to a better degree than you would expect with consistency, but other than him, someone like Kane is mainly just getting more shots and shots from which you would expect more goals.

    I think if Arsenal are looking at winning the league considering all the factors (the market for, the clubs prowess in the market, the attractiveness of the club, ability to drop $, and the big one of the direction of the PL at present) as a team you'd be better off looking at building a league winning team to feed Giroud than you would be looking for an Aguero who will allow you to win the league without deserving it, pretty much. Getting a more clinical striker than Giroud is just a waste of time tbh, margins are so fine and also so unpredictable season to season that considering the market you'd be dropping crazy money on anyone proven, to get best case a little bit better. Lacazette for example, you'd be looking at 17 goals to Girouds 15 off the same chances, considerations aside.

    When you look at predictors of good teams, of chances created and goals scored. I would look at two things, one being the speed of Arsenal's play which is sluggish (genuinely only slightly better than LVG) and your increasing reliance upon Ozil the last couple of seasons (if he's out long term, I would think you are genuinely ****ed). In that sense you'd be better off improving elsewhere. The only time I would think Arsenal should be 100% looking to ditch Giroud would be if you could get a player who could either carve out chances for themselves to a significant degree or flash them away like Aguero. However if one of them stands out, you'll probably face some serious competition and again questionable how repeatable/predicable this is.

    I'd be looking at your midfield set up, no more Ramsey Flamini combinations, and your right wing considering Walcott is out of form and ill suited to your current style. Perhaps having another look at someone like Draxler and letting Alexis work off the right, or Lacazette playing as a wide forward. All this is assuming Wenger can get the team playing to a league winning standard which is something I doubt more than ever.
    Regardless of whether Giroud is capable of the golden boot, we still need to buy a new striker. Welbeck and Walcott as our back up options simply won't cut it. Giroud is turning 30 next month, so I'm against the idea of building a team around him when at tops I can only see him leading the line for us for another season, maybe two at most. It's the perfect time to buy a new striker. Lacazette is a gamble and he may not be a huge improvement, but any improvement is good..
    Either way, Lacazette turns out to be the striker we've needed for a long time, or he's a replacement for when Giroud needs to step down. The price is steep but we have the money, and I'd rather buy an established striker now then a new prospect.

    Our reliance of Ozil hasn't really been increasing over the years, it just spiked last season. We've played plenty of games without Ozil, or Alexis in which people didn't favour us to cope but we've been fine. I think with the right system, we have enough to cover the quality of these two.

    Campbell put up some pretty big performances last season but Wenger decided to bench him only after his form picked up. Probably not good enough to start every game but he's perfectly fine for squad depth.

    Agree with your point about buying a winger though, I've been saying this for the past year or so. We can get away with winning the league with Giroud up front, as long as our other squad deficiencies are filled. But at this point I'd much rather take a chance on a new striker than build the team around him, in which we've pretty much done the past 2 or 3 seasons anyway.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AR_95)
    Regardless of whether Giroud is capable of the golden boot, we still need to buy a new striker. Welbeck and Walcott as our back up options simply won't cut it. Giroud is turning 30 next month, so I'm against the idea of building a team around him when at tops I can only see him leading the line for us for another season, maybe two at most. It's the perfect time to buy a new striker. Lacazette is a gamble and he may not be a huge improvement, but any improvement is good..
    Either way, Lacazette turns out to be the striker we've needed for a long time, or he's a replacement for when Giroud needs to step down. The price is steep but we have the money, and I'd rather buy an established striker now then a new prospect.

    Our reliance of Ozil hasn't really been increasing over the years, it just spiked last season. We've played plenty of games without Ozil, or Alexis in which people didn't favour us to cope but we've been fine. I think with the right system, we have enough to cover the quality of these two.

    Campbell put up some pretty big performances last season but Wenger decided to bench him only after his form picked up. Probably not good enough to start every game but he's perfectly fine for squad depth.

    Agree with your point about buying a winger though, I've been saying this for the past year or so. We can get away with winning the league with Giroud up front, as long as our other squad deficiencies are filled. But at this point I'd much rather take a chance on a new striker than build the team around him, in which we've pretty much done the past 2 or 3 seasons anyway.
    Welbecks career is basically over anyway


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AR_95)
    Regardless of whether Giroud is capable of the golden boot, we still need to buy a new striker. Welbeck and Walcott as our back up options simply won't cut it. Giroud is turning 30 next month, so I'm against the idea of building a team around him when at tops I can only see him leading the line for us for another season, maybe two at most. It's the perfect time to buy a new striker. Lacazette is a gamble and he may not be a huge improvement, but any improvement is good..
    Either way, Lacazette turns out to be the striker we've needed for a long time, or he's a replacement for when Giroud needs to step down. The price is steep but we have the money, and I'd rather buy an established striker now then a new prospect.
    In the respect of depth and planning age wise I agree 100%. In terms of team building then by all means by a new striker one of the reasons I mentioned Lacazette was he could be duel purpose with buying a winger and increasing the speed of your attacks due to his pace and counter game ability, plus his age. I said a couple of pages back, I do rate him and for £40m I think he's actually fairly priced.

    Our reliance of Ozil hasn't really been increasing over the years, it just spiked last season. We've played plenty of games without Ozil, or Alexis in which people didn't favour us to cope but we've been fine. I think with the right system, we have enough to cover the quality of these two.
    I would disagree with this, every season since he arrived statistically not only has Ozil's creative output improved, but as a portion of your overall improvement he's even more important than he appears, basically the majority of your improvement in this area for 3 seasons can be attributed to Ozil. Sanchez really just helps to cover up the fact that other members of the team have regressed or stagnated. I think your final point here is hopeful, you've only has 2 season with the pair of them, and that has been warped by one having a career topping season in each. So going forward, yes you'll be fine if one of them deviates, so long as the other produces the best season of their career. As for covering him, I just leave it as I can't see a single way to back up your point beyond saying, "if in Ozi's absence Arsenal decided to be Barca". If Arsenal look and play like Arsenal it cannot be done. It would require an overall improvement to the team, for unknown reasons (I can't see him being a tactical block to other players for example).

    Campbell put up some pretty big performances last season but Wenger decided to bench him only after his form picked up. Probably not good enough to start every game but he's perfectly fine for squad depth.
    As above when you are looking at goal threat and creative outputs, Campbell isn't good enough. Not only that the underlying fact is without significant improvement to his game, he won't be as good next season. As is common with young players with a handful of games, outliers can become all you have to go on. Basically he's either going to regress or he's 50% better than Messi as a goal threat. As a creative threat, he's worse than both your fullbacks. At present he's not even a current Walcott or a Welbeck.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: October 7, 2016

1,086

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should universities take a stronger line on drugs?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.