Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Arsenal' started by icemike49uk, Jul 4, 2005.
I think chelsea should get essien and get ripped like they did when they got drogba
The difference is that although Essien is over-priced, he is still a much better player than Drogba was.
If getting ripped means finishing first in the EPL with the most points ever and just missing out on the CL final - OK.
yea look at pascal cygan at arsenal, u cant call him a flop because he played for a team who went unbeated for a whole season, won the league and just missed out on the CL finals. LOL alright mate
get a grip
fuck me but do you always have to mention the bit about chelsea breaking the record season points?
i mean it's not that big of a deal, if arsenal didn't get complacent the season before we would of smashed it easy sunshine, pffft.
It's inconsequential if Drogba ever fulfills the price that was paid for him. The money that was paid for him has no effect on short term spending and wages. If Arsenal buys a dud at that price then it means something as they don't have the resources to buy a replacement.
I'd rather not ******** you (a universal sentiment), but its a nice statistic.
And if you'd lost the game to 'Pool you might have collapsed again instead.
If you aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle.
You didn't just miss out on the CL finals - you were beaten by a better team in the quarters. But I digress.
If Cygan was a starter for Arsenal, you'd have a point. But, of course, he's not. True, Drogba could be as bad as Roque Jr. was for Brazil. But he wasn't. He was only poor relative to his price. And since the price is irrelevant to Chelsea, so is your post.
nope im just saying that didier drogba had about as much influance on u having a good season as pascal cygan had on our great season of 03/04, irrelevant of price
but it's relevant to the rest of the football world.
sorry, but wrong.
it's really silly to compare an attacking midfielder and a striker, but a fit Drogba will score 20+ goals for Chelsea next campaign.
You can easily do it, particularly when the main consideration is value for money.
If you didn't watch us play, you probably shouldn't make such silly statements.
When Chelsea is not concerned, perhaps. But they are. So the money spent is, once again - I R R E L E V A N T.
So Essien is overated. Is that why Wenger didn't sign him and signed this Help from Germany? My bad, he also signed the new Pele.(Robinho)
August is coming fast, You haven't done any significant signing.
It will be same old Arsenal, shuffling keepers while depending on old school Bergkamp with Henry stealing free kicks on the side.
which cave did you crawl out from?
No shame. I just threw up a little in my mouth reading that. I can't wait till Roman gets thrown in the dock for crimes against the Russian people, Mourinho deserts you and you lot are on your knees begging Ken Bates and Claudio to come back.
Sigh. Good luck with that "crimes against the Russian people" ********. I'm not going to bother pointing out yet again that 99.9999% of people who make that claim don't have a ********ing clue about what Roman did or has done.
As for your post - its even more irrelevant than the first one in this thread. Because the point is that it doesn't matter how much money was spent on Drogba relative to his market value, because $$ isn't a constraint for Chelsea at the moment. You may dislike that, but its true. Feel free to whine about it if you like. But realize that judging Drogba as a "bust" because we "overpaid" is stooopid.
And now that ZANI's here, I'm out.
this is just not true
Essien is good, but there is no way that he is worth more than 26 million pounds. Lyon is trying to rip off as much money from Chelsea as possible; however I question whether their tactic will work because there is a limit to how much Chelsea is willing to get ripped off by. So, chances are Chelsea is not getting Essien, at least not this year.
You're right. 99.99999 was excessive. 99.999 is a much more accurate number.
Saying that money is irrelevant to Chelsea is not entirely true. Any excessively large transfer fee will have knock on effects. A player who sees himself going for 25 mill when in reality he's 1/2 that may well see himself in the 25mill player bracket and demand the appropriate wages for his contract. Other players in the team will then want equivalent wages to that player. Other clubs selling players to Chelsea will look at Drogba and say "hey we can sell xxx to them for double his worth too", and then they too may demand larger wages. Now this isn't a problem for Chelsea at present because they're basically a bottomless pit, but remember they have a 5 year plan (how Russian) to become financially viable, and if this is what they want to do, spending huge sums on overpriced players will have a knock-on effect for the future.
What difference does it make if money is a constraint for Chelski or not? If when buying Drogba, Chelski expected him to score less than 20 goals last season, then he wouldn't be a bust. They certainly expected more than that, so he has to be viewed as somewhat of a bust, for last season anyway. Calling a player a bust overall after one year in a new country is pretty unfair.
Game, set, match.....excellent point! Arsenal coasted during the later part of the season.