ok is anyone worried about henry? andy grey from foxsports recently wrote a reminder that henry may leave the squad if arsenal does not qualify for CL next season. what are anyone's thoughts on the matter?
Re: ok is anyone worried about henry? To be honest yeah im scared. I think he may leave, but then he said he would stay so idk. I really hope that he stays. No one on this board knows whats gonna happen, only Theirry does.
IMO, the main reason why Titi wants out is the lack of big players in the squad, which certainly doesn't help the club's "instant" success. I would tend to think that if Wenger promises him big signings, then Titi will still be willing to stay even if we don't quailify for CL. But this is unlikely. Alas!
Henry shd just get the hell out of Arsenal. He is not interested in playing for Arsenal anymore and he is showing it. This guy is a hypocrite despite his skills, he forgot who showed faith in him and brought him here. All the badge-kissing and 'I love Arsenal' from him are bullshit. Its so easy to show loyalty to the side when we were the Invincibles, any1 could do that, even Luis Figo. When the side is down and needs him, he refuse to sign a contract despite being offered fantastic terms. Is that showing loyalty to the club. People would do ANYTHING to be paid 120k a wk. If we can get 20m for this guy, I would be more than happy as long as Wenger use the full 20m to bring in a quality replacement(eg. Tevez).
Re: Why might Henry leave? I absolueley agree. Arsenal have no ambitions or ar atleast they dont' match that of henry's. Henry wants to win the Prem, UEFA and many cups. player like Ljungberg don't give a shit. Wenger's persistance with him, Cygan, Senderos and other players who walk out leaves him Fabregas, RVP and Bergkamp the only players who want to suceed. Wenger has only bought Vela(sum borgetti wannabe) and loads o strikers which leaves holes in spots that need to be filled like the right wing and centeral Midfield (i believe we no longer need a Vieira replacement but rather a Gilberto replacement (DIABY!!)). I miss the joly old days when we had Vieira, Willtord, Kanu, Parluor. now it will take us 2-3 years before our current youth can match those greats. GO HENRY. I've always loved you and loved what you've done for Arsenal. by wanting you to stay in a club which does not match your ambitions i would be selfish. You can do great thing with Barca, more than you'll ever do with Arsenal. we're holding you back with your career and ambitions. In any case we are too dependant on Him and when he goes we will NO DOUBT STRUGGLE with our strikers the same way we struggled in mid when Paddy left. that will only teach us not to be too dependant on players. after Chelsea the next two years in 2008/2009, Walcott will be the new Thierry, RVP will be the new Bergkamp, Adebayor the new Kanu, Diaby the new Vieira, Djourou the new Campbell, Gilbert the new Lauren. a Reministcent of our famous unbeaten 2003/04 squad.
Re: Why might Henry leave? Hurray, it's time for a "Wrong,wrong wrong" If Arsenal have no ambitions, why are they building a new stadium, why are they offering Henry a great contract, why haven't they just sold him ? They're doing this to make the club more successful. Ljungberg doesn't give a shit ? maybe Pires, but Freddie still tries. Wenger persists with Cygan as a backup. Cygan has never been a 1st team player in Wengers eyes. Senderos however is a player worth persisting with, but again if Campbell and Toure are fit, he's not a 1st team player. Fabregas, RVP and Bergkamp only players who want to succeed ? Toure Lehmann Clichy Flamini all look extremely motivated to me... Loads of Strikers ? We have Henry and RvP as 1st choice, Bergkamp and Adebayor as 2nd. Reyes, Walcott can be used but it looks like their preferred position is wide. So 4 strikers, with one going at the end of the year is not overflowing, its exactly right. The jolly old days when we had Vieira, Wiltord and Parlour and Kanu had as many people claiming that Parlour had no skill, Wiltord was useless and gave the ball away and Kanu was lazy... Not necessarily... I would like to think that from next season, we'll start seeing some of Wengers plans bearing fruit
"ARSENAL star Cesc Fabregas last night raised further doubts over Thierry Henry's future by claiming it would be "spectacular" if he joined Barcelona." [http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/tm_ob...e=henry-will-be-fab-for-barca--name_page.html] He basically said that 'everyone' wanted to see Henry at Barca because it would be spectacular to see him with the players they currently have. The comments were made on Catalan station Barcelona Radio. I've no idea what he actually stated and whether the translation is correct or not. Probably not, but meh.
Re: Why might Henry leave? I'm just curious, on what basis is this said? Over the past 10 years Barcelona have won fewer league titles than Arsenal, fewer domestic cups and have reached as many CL finals as Arsenal has. (Its a very round number.) Given that Barca has won the CL only once in its history, why is that statement true? A few years ago Barcelona finished 6th!
What I didn't think we were letting facts get in the way of this discussion since you brought up the Daily Mirror
After our pathetic TEAM performance at Blackburn, including TH14, I started going back through these threads and was surprised that no one has brought up how Henry's attitude toward the club has shifted as our fortunes have worsened. I understand completely that football is a business, and that clubs and players alike are self-interested. That said, no one puts a gun to Henry's head in August of last year when he said "I'll stay at Arsenal as long as they want me" (http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/arsenal/article303699.ece). He's made similar comments in prior seasons as well. Now we need to match his "sporting ambitions?" I would have no problem with Henry's more recent comments had he not about-faced so quickly. For a man of his word, it's a fairly rapid change in stance.
I'm starting to get the same feeling that I did with PV4 either say your going or sign the bloody contract. All this **********footing and posturing is ridiculous. Everybody is a god damn pre-Madonna.
The argument about ambition is a bit complicated. It certainly isn't about long term ambition, which Arsenal has in droves, its more about the short term ambition of Arsenal as Henry plays out his prime years. Wegner's recent transfer history leaves little to question. He's been stockpiling younger talent like RVP, Flamini, Hleb, Adebayor, Walcott, and Eboue while shipping out the backbone of Arsenal's success in the late 90's and early 00's. The wisdom of this philosophy is easily questioned when you look at Arsenal's current standing. Consider that the Viera money was splashed on one player who has been hugely disappointing (Hleb) and one who likely won't contribute for a few years (Walcott). Does anyone really think that the contributions of Hleb and Walcott will even approximate what Viera could have brought to the club this year? The truth is that as it stands Arsenal look like a mid-table team with bright prospects for the future and one superstar in Henry. I don't think anyone doubts Cesc's potential, but he is too young to be asked to control the midfield. Arsenal is in serious danger of losing the big Champions League payday not only this year, but if Henry leaves perhaps for the extended future. IMO there is no reason that Arsenal should have shipped out Viera if they didn't need the money (which they clearly didn't if they were willing to turn around and splash on Hleb and Walcott). I think Henry sees that Wegner has gone youth crazy and doesn't want to spend the rest of his productive years on a team which in the middle of a disappointing season splashes its transfer kitty on a 16 year old with no top flight experience along with 19 and 22 year olds from France instead of more vetern reinforcements. If Arsenal really does miss out on the CL cash there will be serious questions to be answered on why that money wasn't spent elsewhere.
But is it so rapid? I mean Henry was ready to leave if Vieira had left LAST season - but since he didn't it never came to light till months later. That tells me that as soon as Patrick left and we didn't replace him straight away that Henry was re-thinking his place at Arsenal from August. In fact he said so then. I think he WANTS to stay, but he also wants to WIN, and let's face it unless this club changes its recent play on the pitch and/or or personality in the transfer market, do you see us winning again any time soon? I don't think Henry does right now either. That could well change even before the end of this season, but doesn't look like changing now. I think this has been agonized over all season by him to be honest. And if he leaves ultimately because the club HAD to cash in on Patrick Vieira it would be a real shame and a real case of the "Arsenal Way" getting in The Arsenal's way...
Then he needs to start looking at himself and starting taking responsibility because his attitude and lack of commitment on the pitch is on of the big reasons why we've been so bad this year. This all goes back to this "match Henry's ambition" crap which is a joke IMO. We shouldn't have to bend over backwards on the field or in the transfer market for any player, they should stay because they want to stay for the love of the club and everything associated with it, nothing more or less. AW has done the right thing by buying players that the CLUB needs, not players that'll appease Henry or make him happy. Maybe TH14 should start meeting ARSENAL'S ambition instead of acting like a whining and pouting spoiled brat all of the time.
The club needed Theo Walcott? Like the club needed Francis Jeffers? The club needed Hleb? A player who really doesn't have a position in a 4-4-2 and had no Premiership experience? The club needed these two more then say, Edgar Davids in midfield? Listen, you can back Wegner's transfer strategy, but the odd thing about it is that much like Manchester United's (Evra and Vidic for example) it has been based much more on luxury players (players that don't come in and contribute markedly right away) then need players. Saying Arsenal "Needed" Walcott is a bit disingenious in my mind, especially considering the presence of RVP, Henry, Adeynbor, and Lupoli up front and with Reyes, Hleb, and Pires all "name" players on the wing.
Pre-Bosman that's spot-on but post-Bosman as we see in every pro sport here now, it just doesn't work that way. Whether it should or not is another debate for another day. Today its irrelevant as Henry can decide where he wants to play as can any other top player. The result is that if you want to sign and retain top players you have to accomodate them too. Now we're not talking Terrell Owens here, not some destructive negative force in this team, as we weren't with Vieira even. Less so perhaps. Indeed for all the complaints, Henry is scoring a greater percentage of our League goals than any previous season. That seems to me to be assuming responsibilty in large part. Where would Arsenal be right now WITHOUT those goals? Seriously, think about that. Think where we'd be with only 24 goals scored in the Premiership. Given how the last two years have gone in the wake of an Unbeaten Premiership season that with a little more luck or another player or two could have seen even an Arsenal Treble, maybe supporters who love this club come hell or high water and back that love with their money should be asking Arsenal Football Club just what their ambition is, as Henry rightly is for my money....
Well considering that Pires and Ljungberg (and quite possibly Henry for that matter) aren't going to be around forever, I'd say that investment in Waclott was well just...esp. with the immense talent and potential he has, sorry but sometimes that supercedes "need". And yes I do think that buying Walcott and Hleb was a better move than buying an Edgar Davids, esp. considering we already had Gilberto in the center of midfield and Wenger had Diaby earmarked all along to buy to put him there as well. It's not like Davids would've made that much of a difference this year anyways...if we were going to buy him, we might as well have kept PV4. Wenger is looking towards the future, this isn't about this year...I think he knew that we were going to have to deal with a setback this year and go forward into the new stadium and he's bought players with that mindset. I think we're one or two quality players short yes but those players just weren't to be found in Jan. or even in the summer and if they were, it was at astronomical fees (thanks in large part to Chel$ki) that they were not worth and even when Wenger tried for a player, something went wrong with it (Baptista, SWP, Diarra, etc.) so I can see why he's a little gunshy about trying to make a huge splash in the transfer market. I have no problem with the route he's taking, I think we have enough of a mixture of quality in the side now and great youth coming up to get back to the top in the coming years. I guess it's just me but I'd rather have a Walcott at an initial 5m as opposed to a Torres at 30m or Diaby at 2m compared to Ballack at 15m. In the day where Chel$ki can outspend everyone, you have to be smart about who and how you buy and think about the long term investment...and that's exactly what Wenger is doing right now.
Well, obviously no player lasts forever and Pires is begining to show his age, the only reason that Ljunberg and Henry (both 28 years old) wouldn't have at least five more very productive years with Arsenal would be if Wegner ships them out or they get tired of the "developing" Arsenal team missing the Champions League The thing is that the investment in Walcott was unnecessary. Southampton appeared happy to hang onto him and let him develop before selling him, while his investment to me was a concession of the 4th spot in the league. Well, Davids was avaliable on a free transfer this summer and would have cost Arsenal only his wages (which admittedly are sizable). This is the difference between Arsenal and Tottenham's rebuilding strategies. Both invest the majority of their money in younger players still with quite a bit of room to develop (for Tottenham Huddlestone, Routledge, Defoe, and Carrick jump to mind), but Tottenham supplants that with players proven at the top level (Mido, Davids, and Stalteri in the last year especially). Tottenham had a plethora of midfielders (Mendes, Davis, Carrick, etc.) but it didn't stop them from acquiring a veteran who would add a touch of class to their team and improve the squad immediatley. Davids would have been an immediate upgrade on Gilberto and would have helped soften the loss of Viera. I disagree completley, I think Cesc has held up his part of the bargain in the Arsenal midfield, but isn't prepared to carry the offensive load himself. The big difference between Arsenal from last year IMO is the ability that opponents have to lay off Gilberto as opposed to Viera. Davids would have been a much better match, but he's just an example not an end all be all. The point is that there were options to improve Arsenal immediatley which would have pushed the team into the CL spots as opposed to buying teenagers. As to keeping PV4, considering missing the CL will probably cost the club about his transfer fee I would contend that Wegner should have kept PV4.
Not a chance that Freddie has 5 more years and I worry that Henry, even if he stays, might not have that long. Henry relies on pace more than many top strikers and you have to wonder how long that strength will be there. Could part of the reason for his lack of running at defense be down to a bit of loss in that area already? He's certainly been less explosive this season for whatever reason. You do realize that this was a one time opportunity to get Walcott before he signed his first professional contract. That is why we were able to get him with a transfer that was backloaded and based on reaching certain targets. That makes sense because we'll have more funds available in the future than we did now because of the stadium move. I doubt we'd have bought Walcott in a few years when we might have to pay the entire transfer fee up front. So you think Spurs' "buy every cmid you can" strategy makes sense? Ok if you say so. Only Mido has been an unqualified sucess and you could hardly argue that he was a proven top level performer given his previous club career. Stalteri has been very poor. He's been a weaknesses for them. Davids did better than I expected but much of that was based on his early season exploits. His impact on games has fallen and he's missed time to injury and bans. We'll see if that ends up being a great move for Spurs. I know I like our future much more than theirs. You cite just two of the relevant figures. How about his wages? How about the decline in his transfer fee going forward when we might have had to let him go for little since we certainly weren't going to give him a 5 year deal. Would he have taken even more games off this year? Who knows? I still say that selling Vieira wasn't the problem. We just needed to bring in his replacement (meaning another physical dmid, not necessary to be at Vieira's level). That was Wenger's real mistake.
I think it is rapid. Obviously so. On numerous occasions during the last few seasons, Henry has been linked with Madrid/Barca and has always said the same thing: I'll stay at Arsenal as long as they want me. The last time he said this was reported in August 2005 - nearly 3 weeks AFTER Vieira left. Within a few months, he suddenly doesn't want to discuss a new deal? That's pretty freakin' rapid. While other issues bug me (his moodiness, the way he treats the captaincy, etc.), what has really riled me is his about-face. Like I said before, no one put a gun to his head and told him to declare loyalty to the club - he could've responded like many other professionals ("I want to stay, but who knows in this world," etc.). But he chose to take a dramatic stance and now can't back it up. Say what you will about Vieira, but he never made such promises that I can recall.