Wishlist Olivier Giroud

[English Freak 456]

Wigan is not prepared to sell Moses under 8m, even asking 10m.

For that price, what use will Chelsea have to see him sitting on the bench ?

Posting about Moses on the Giroud page?

Wrong transfer talk page.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Podolski's best season came eight years ago in the 2.Budesliga. He failed at Bayern Munich only to return to Koln, I feel he will fail at Arsenal to return to Koln. I don't want him to fail, I quite like him as a player but any Gooner expecting die Mannschaft Podolski will be greatly disappointed.

Still a great buy for the price of £11M. He's not a star, but he could be a good player for Arsenal (and I think he'll fit into their system well). Obviously not an Arsenal supporter, but you can't help but admire the way they do their transfers. You look at their starting XI from last season and they were almost all ridiculous value (RVP- £2.75, Song £1M, Walcott £5-12M depending on performance, etc....) Even someone like Gervinho who was a bust last season cost millions less than Lukaku did for us. It's just so simple. They look around for players who are good value and make an offer for them if what the club wants is more than they value the player, they move on to someone else. It shows that you don't have to splash massive amounts of cash around to compete. I suppose we looked for value with Marin, but generally our transfer policy is backwards. It's just identifying the player RA is obsessed with regardless of how they'll fit into the team and then just spending how ever much it takes to get them. It's not about being cheap, it's about value.

[Spike 12,049]

Still a great buy for the price of £11M. He's not a star, but he could be a good player for Arsenal (and I think he'll fit into their system well). Obviously not an Arsenal supporter, but you can't help but admire the way they do their transfers. You look at their starting XI from last season and they were almost all ridiculous value (RVP- £2.75, Song £1M, Walcott £5-12M depending on performance, etc....) Even someone like Gervinho who was a bust last season cost millions less than Lukaku did for us. It's just so simple. They look around for players who are good value and make an offer for them if what the club wants is more than they value the player, they move on to someone else. It shows that you don't have to splash massive amounts of cash around to compete. I suppose we looked for value with Marin, but generally our transfer policy is backwards. It's just identifying the player RA is obsessed with regardless of how they'll fit into the team and then just spending how ever much it takes to get them. It's not about being cheap, it's about value.

Yeah well...Champions League Trophy.

[English Freak 456]

Still a great buy for the price of £11M. He's not a star, but he could be a good player for Arsenal (and I think he'll fit into their system well). Obviously not an Arsenal supporter, but you can't help but admire the way they do their transfers. You look at their starting XI from last season and they were almost all ridiculous value (RVP- £2.75, Song £1M, Walcott £5-12M depending on performance, etc....) Even someone like Gervinho who was a bust last season cost millions less than Lukaku did for us. It's just so simple. They look around for players who are good value and make an offer for them if what the club wants is more than they value the player, they move on to someone else. It shows that you don't have to splash massive amounts of cash around to compete. I suppose we looked for value with Marin, but generally our transfer policy is backwards. It's just identifying the player RA is obsessed with regardless of how they'll fit into the team and then just spending how ever much it takes to get them. It's not about being cheap, it's about value.

Yeh, you can't help but admire Wenger's faith in youth...even though he's been trophy-less for 7 seasons straight.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Yeah well...Champions League Trophy.

Of course. That was obviously tremendous, but I also care about building a sustainable model. If Chelsea went through that same route again 100 times, they'd probably would only win the CL a handful of times. I think the ideal set-up is like Arsenal except being able to spend 20-30M on an individual player if they really fit a need.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Yeh, you can't help but admire Wenger's faith in youth...even though he's been trophy-less for 7 seasons straight.

For me, it's less about faith in youth than it is about consistently good signings. This is one of the big benefits of having a long-term manager who has influence over signings. They sign players they believe will fit into the system. This is why Chelsea need that long-term manager who can start to do that. You get better value on your buys and you can avoid huge mistakes.

[SeB 1,281]

Correct. He tried that with Chamakh but it was a failed experiment (albeit not too much of a failure - he came on a free, didn't he?!). Arsene is looking for another string to his bow, and he's certainly got that in Podolski and Giroud.

I never thought Chamakh was a failure, I seem to remember that he was doing OK and scoring till RVP came back from injury and he was completely dropped by Wenger, never gave him a chance since.

I think the Podolski signing is much more likely to turn into a total waste of money for Arsenal. He only plays well when surrounded by the likes of Ozil, Sweinstiger, Klose...etc. At Koln, he's average at best.

Giroud, on the other hand, I think will prove to be an important signing for the gunners, though they will still be a weakened side without RVP.

That's why Wenger wanted Baines or Downing (lol), he already wanted to change the style of play of his team by bringing variation. He expected crosses for those 2. Chamakh was mainly a failed experiment because he never played in 4-4-2 with RvP and because he has no goalscoring instinct, he'd pass back even when on the goalline into the goal. And he's far to kind, especially for a player playing back to goal, he hasn't any vice in his game. But he's an excellent mentality though

Podolski keeps his place with the NT thanks to his performances... with the NT. And he only scores goals in qualifiers against Moldavia & co. Never decisive in a big game. And all his play depends of his shoots from distance, even that he didn't managed for months with Germany, all his shots goes wide.

Giroud has the goalscorer instinct, I don't worry for him, if he follows his career plan he'll score a dozen goals the 1st season and 20+ the second season

[The Skipper 20,593]

You can admire Wenger's transfers, he buys good players yes, but most of them are just about good, not world class. The only player in the Arsenal team that would get into our team is RVP. At the end of the day, money talks, and tbh, we're quite well run as a club, getting closer and closer to breaking even every season.

Also, it's not having a long term manager that will make the club be run more effectively. It helps yes, but majority of it is down to the board. Gourlay et al seem to be doing a decent job ATM, I'm personally eager to see the latest financial figures.

Giroud and Podolski are both decent players but tell me, would you really have that pair over Hazard and potentially Hulk? The difference in quality is there for everyone to see.

It's that difference in quality that wins you trophies. You can admire Wenger's and Arsenal's shrewdness but in my opinion football clubs should strive to win trophies. For example, instead of them signing Giroud and Podolski, they could add a couple of million and purchase Jovetic, which would definitely help more in the hunt for silverware. Winning silverware also brings more revenue in potentially, so the extra millions they spent on Jovetic would be covered.

You look at today's Arsenal team, then you look at the Invincibles. The contrast is quite outstanding. Will Giroud and Podolski really give them that extra quality to win trophies on a regular? I don't really think so.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

You can admire Wenger's transfers, he buys good players yes, but most of them are just about good, not world class. The only player in the Arsenal team that would get into our team is RVP. At the end of the day, money talks, and tbh, we're quite well run as a club, getting closer and closer to breaking even every season.

Also, it's not having a long term manager that will make the club be run more effectively. It helps yes, but majority of it is down to the board. Gourlay et al seem to be doing a decent job ATM, I'm personally eager to see the latest financial figures.

Giroud and Podolski are both decent players but tell me, would you really have that pair over Hazard and potentially Hulk? The difference in quality is there for everyone to see.

You're not listening to anything I'm saying. Of course, I'd rather have Hazard and Hulk over Podolski and Giroud. but it's about value. I'd rather have Torres than Chamakh, but Torres was 50M and Chamak was free. Hulk and Hazard would be about 70M and Podolski and Giroud would be about 23M.You can't just discard the transfer fee. And Chelsea are not being run well. We had the second highest debt in the Premier League last season. Chelsea's in the transfer market in the last 2 years has maybe been the worst any club has been in transfer history. We spent about 117M pounds on 5 players and only one is an elite player and seems like a definite starter for Chelsea for the next few years (Mata). For that kind of expenditure, Chelsea should have been able to buy 3 or 4 excellent players.

As for only RVP making our starting XI, that's just nonsense. Arsenal finished above us in the league and beat us head to head. They have a lot of talent. Song is a fantastic defensive midfielder and he is actually very creative as well. He would certainly start for us. So would Walcott (who gets a lot of stick from fans who don't see Arsenal play much. He might be the fastest player in the Premiership, and he creates a tremendous number of chances..8 goals and 11 assists in the Premier league last season.) A few other players would have a regular rotation spot and would challenge for playing time (Wilshire, Vermaelan, Oxlade-Chamberlain, and others). Even if we were infinitely better than Arsenal talent-wise, why would that be a source of pride? Our starting XI cost about 4 times more than theirs. It damn well should be better. I know I am in the minority among Chelsea fans, but I want to see reigning in of spending. What has happened in the last decade in football-led by Chelsea, Man City, and the Spanish clubs, has been an absolute disaster for football. It really does need to be addressed.

[The Skipper 20,593]

You're not listening to anything I'm saying. Of course, I'd rather have Hazard and Hulk over Podolski and Giroud. but it's about value. I'd rather have Torres than Chamakh, but Torres was 50M and Chamak was free. Hulk and Hazard would be about 70M and Podolski and Giroud would be about 23M.You can't just discard the transfer fee. And Chelsea are not being run well. We had the second highest debt in the Premier League last season. Chelsea's in the transfer market in the last 2 years has maybe been the worst any club has been in transfer history. We spent about 117M pounds on 5 players and only one is an elite player and seems like a definite starter for Chelsea for the next few years (Mata). For that kind of expenditure, Chelsea should have been able to buy 3 or 4 excellent players.

As for only RVP making our starting XI, that's just nonsense. Arsenal finished above us in the league and beat us head to head. They have a lot of talent. Song is a fantastic defensive midfielder and he is actually very creative as well. He would certainly start for us. So would Walcott (who gets a lot of stick from fans who don't see Arsenal play much. He might be the fastest player in the Premiership, and he creates a tremendous number of chances..8 goals and 11 assists in the Premier league last season.) A few other players would have a regular rotation spot and would challenge for playing time (Wilshire, Vermaelan, Oxlade-Chamberlain, and others). Even if we were infinitely better than Arsenal talent-wise, why would that be a source of pride? Our starting XI cost about 4 times more than theirs. It damn well should be better. I know I am in the minority among Chelsea fans, but I want to see reigning in of spending. What has happened in the last decade in football-led by Chelsea, Man City, and the Spanish clubs, has been an absolute disaster for football. It really does need to be addressed.

Without getting too financial on this thread I recommend anyone who has major doubts about our financial situation to read this (written by a United fan, so no bias):

http://andersred.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/income-up-costs-down-chelsea-getting-in.html

You'll soon come to realise that the club are making steady improvements, and you'll see that we're quite comfortable financially.

In the last two years (without the Hazard and Marin signings) we've spent around a net of £140m on 13 players (estimate), but you take away the Torres transfer which is obviously an anomaly and we've spent £90m on 12 players, which is on average £7.5m per player, which isn't too bad. Considering we got Mata, Luiz, Ramires, Romeu, KDB, Cahill and others (mostly youngsters like Lukaku, Courtois, Bamford, Davila) for around £90m you can't say the club haven't brought in quality. Perhaps the Meireles and Benayoun buys were unneeded but it's negligible considering we got 6-7 quality players out of it. So CFC have bought quality, which we are building upon with the signings of Hazard and Marin. If we buy these guys at a young age the need to replace them and bring in quality lessens over the years, which will obviously allows us to make more profit again.

As for Theo Walcott and Alex Song getting into our first eleven alongside RVP... I don't think so. Walcott has a case as our right side of attack is basically non existent, but I wouldn't have Song in over Lampard, Mikel or Ramires.

As for the other players you've mentioned, they would definitely get games under squad rotation, but not as a guaranteed starter, which was the point I was putting across. Bar RVP and potentially Theo, none of their players would make the first team XI here IMO.

Giroud wouldn't either IMO. He'd be a good squad player but I wouldn't have him here over Torres or Sturridge.

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

Close.

http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/olivier-giroud-agrees-deal-to-join-arsenal

[Jase 43,479]

Think we can close this thread now.

http://soccernet.esp...cc=4716

EDIT: Bah. Late by seconds!