I hadn't thought about this. To use an example from baseball, when a rookie comes in and has a lot of initial success, by the following year the rest of the league has adjusted to him and unless he tweaks his game, he won't be as successful as he was his rookie year. I suspect that Wilshire hasn't tweaked his game enough.
So we're not selling JW. He's not leaving England, so there is a market of like four teams for him. And none of those would pay 30+ million for him. It's a silly discussion.
This Jack debate is getting tiresome. No one can doubt his absolute talent. If they do, they are just being obtuse. I wouldn't sell him, period. That's just me.
What? There's literally no doubting his overall talent. If Jack can focus, stay healthy, and just play, he will become an amazing part of the club for years to come. If he shows he can't do that, then yeah, maybe we sell. As someone said earlier, we don't need to sell our best players anymore, or players at all. We can afford to hold onto them to see if they pan out.
Dutch, there's nothing wrong with an IF. You say let's sell because he is an IF. I can say the same thing to the other effect. Let's not sell because he's an IF. Until we know that he won't pan out, we shouldn't sell.
He's been out almost all year. He was pretty damn good in the first half of the season when he was fit. If he can find some consistency and playing time, then maybe we can judge. He was also playing with a first team that was in awful form, and injured.
Wilshere just isn't cutting it. I was amongst those who've been patient but if a £30m offer comes in, why say no? He's injury prone and inconsistent even after Scholes' criticism.
Wilshere is still young. It's hard to say he's injury prone when his last was due to a barbaric tackle. You don't sell, within England, a highly rated, young prospect, with a lot of potential. We've already had our feel of doing that, thanks. We have the ability to wait it out and see if he comes good. No need to sell a player who could later come back and bite us in the ass.
I didn't specify English Dutch. We don't need to sell our top players or prospects anymore. Why is that so hard to get? We let RVP force his way out, we let Fab force his way out, Nasri, et. al.
Different times Jacks irrelevant in the grand scheme at this point and we have resources to replace him internally and via transfer what top 4 team would he make better? Zero so I dont see the big deal unless we dont replace him which we would be able to do a number of ways
I know I sound like a maniac, but imho we have a chance to build a super team for the next 5 seasons can't be sentimental. Also I'd upgrade the leftback if I was in charge. Gibbs has plateaud and Monreal isn't up to par BUT I don't think we'll do it. Cause you can't just up and replace players need chemistry and Monreal provides that.
we cant attack from the left as much we ideally would be able to attack on both flanks imho we tilt too much to the right
Wenger seems to have a preference for a balls out attacking fullback on one side and a more conservative option on the other. He even tilts the midfield/attack to support this, most recently playing a center midfielder on the right and a wide player on the left (which is the inverse of his historical propensity).
I hope that's a choice that Wenger made, because we were getting slaughtered on the counter-attack. Monreal seems to venture into the midfield and no further, which has worked well for us so far.
Generally speaking, the team is much more balanced defensively with Monreal than Gibbs. The Spaniard understanding with Alexis is also a big plus. As I said before, we may have some issues to solve, but LB is not one of them at this point.