• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Would you sign Ashley Cole?

Would you give him a 1 year deal at spurs?

  • Yes

    Votes: 48 66.7%

  • No

    Votes: 24 33.3%
  • Total voters
    72
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seedy Ron said:
It sounds like Dein had agreed 60, but the board wouldn't OK it. It'd annoy me a bit too, but still it's 55k a week for playing fooking football, keep your eyes on the road you ****.


Really? Cole left in August 06 by which time that clown had only been there 2 years since joining from Belgium, why would they be splurging that much on him?
Click to expand...


Arsenal have a infamous policy of overpaying their 'squad players' - it's how they managed to sign hot prospects from across Europe under the noses of bigger clubs or in some cases directly from bigger clubs (Fabregas from Barca the perfect example)

re the first part - personally i can see Coles point, he was one of their best players, a youth product who cost them no money in transfer fee's and was requesting a wage in line with their best earners - not higher than. to come back with a final offer of such a paltry amount less than what he wanted when it was well within their capabilities to pay it, just smacks of ridicule imo - it's easy to say it's only 5k, just sign it and be happy - it's more the principal of the matter
 
galeforce said:
and they were paying the likes of reyes, eboue and hleb considerably more
Click to expand...
I’m pretty certain that eboue was never on anything near 60k at arsenal. Eboue moved to galatasaray for the money, and he’s still on less than 50k there. I rekon eboue’s last arsenal contract was worth closer to 30k (2011). i highly doubt hleb or reyes were on 60k either. Remember, both of those guys were pre 2010.
billyiddo said:
wasn't the contract thing at Arsenal more to do with the fact they had already agreed a wage of 60k p/w only for Arsenal to come back later and say nah, actually we can only go as far as 55k

that'd **** me off as well tbf
Click to expand...
yh if this is true, it would massively annoy me as well. I could understand cole leaving purely on principle if arsenal pulled this.

billyiddo said:
Arsenal have a infamous policy of overpaying their 'squad players' - it's how they managed to sign hot prospects from across Europe under the noses of bigger clubs or in some cases directly from bigger clubs (Fabregas from Barca the perfect example)
Click to expand...
I don’t actually think arsenal have a direct policy of wanting to overpay for squad players and underpay elite players. I think whats actually happening is: arsenal can’t compete financially (against Chelsea, real Madrid etc) for top senior pros, and as a result when they do buy senior pros, its usually someone like Olivier giroud, and not falcao. But because teams like real Madrid are interested in buying elite senior pros, they do not focus as much on purchasing for their youth team. As a result, arsenal are the biggest fish in the pond in the youth market. They are the richest club in this market and so top young players go there because they pay the best. However, in the situations when arsenal are competing with Chelsea (or any other richer club) for a 17 yr old, arsenal inevitably lose out, because they can’t pay as much.< I read somewhere that Chelsea have a few u18 players on close to 20k p/w, who have little chance of ever playing for the first team>.

This policy then progresses to the senior level, where if a player develops into a worldclass star, ie. Fabregas, nasri, van persie, arsenal are unable to offer them the same salary as Emirates Marketing Project or Chelsea, and so the player leaves. But when the player develops into a top player (but not quite the fabregas level), ie. Theo Walcott, arsenal can hang onto them because they are able to offer him more than clubs like us, Liverpool, Valencia, inter Milan etc can offer him. As a result, the arsenal squad is full of players of the theo Walcott level because this is the calibre of player that they can keep. This is the same with us (Tottenham) btw. We’re just operating at a marginally lower financial level than arsenal, and as a result, our squad is full of players who are marginally worse than arsenal’s. And when we do produce a bale, modric or a berbatov, they leave for much the same reasons fabregas or van persie left arsenal. And on the other hand, Andros townsend, aaron lennon, danny rose, kyle walker stay with us for the same reasons that Walcott, gibbs, giroud etc stay at arsenal. We can offer those guys marginally more than what the likes of everton or Saudi Sportswashing Machine can offer them.
 
Arsenals wage bill has on occasion over the past 5 years been a lot closer to United than it has been to ours (without checking i seem to recall one season being 15m behind them vs 45m in front of us) so the idea they cannot compete wage wise is a little misguided, IMV.

the info i have about their wage bill comes directly from their supporters on a mixed fans message board i post on and is something they are very much split on. pay the likes of Bendtner and co 10-20k a week less and they'd be able to pay their better players a bit more.
 
12/13

Emirates Marketing Project: £233m
Manchester Utd: £181m
Chelsea: £179m
Arsenal: £154m
Lverpool: £132m
Tottenham: £96m
QPR: £78m
Aston Villa: £72m
Fulham: £67m
Everton: £63m
Saudi Sportswashing Machine Utd: £62m
Stoke City: £60m
Sunderland: £58m
West Ham: £56m
West Brom: £54m
Norwich City: £51m
Swansea City: £49m
Southampton: £47m
Reading: £46m
Wigan: £44m
 
billyiddo said:
the info i have about their wage bill comes directly from their supporters on a mixed fans message board i post on and is something they are very much split on. pay the likes of Bendtner and co 10-20k a week less and they'd be able to pay their better players a bit more.
Click to expand...

people put too much value on overall wage spends. and not put enough importance on how it is spread. i remember watching a billy beane interview where he was talking about how his team/organisation couldn't take on players who demanded a salary beyond the limits that they had set. it wasn't because they couldn't fit it into their wage bill. but it was because they couldn't justify the risk that would come from having to pay that salary.

basically, arsenal cannot afford to buy a £50m striker and put him on 250k p/w and have him be a dud (torres, shevchenko) or get injured. if they have 2 players on this kind of wage, and they both don't work out, they will be in trouble (relatively). however, they can sustain a lot more 50k p/w players not working out. ie. bendtner, eboue to name a few.

if you look at a team like leeds, they took this gamble (of having a few superstars on massive salaries). and when it went wrong, they absolutely collapsed. if arsenal were to do it, and a number of the big players underperformed, they would be in massive risk of falling out of the top four (and that’s a negative spiral that arsenal do not want to enter).

at the moment, when arsenal get injuries (like they often do), all that is happening is; a 50-100k p/w player is getting injured, and is then replaced by another 50-100k p/w player. this season, arsenal have had long term injuries to the likes of oxlade chamberlain, Walcott, Wheelchair, ramsey. When these guys have been missing, rosicky, flamini, podolski have stepped in. The difference between these two sets of players is minimal. And both sets of players are capable of challenging for a top four spot.

However, instead of having 50k/w rosicky to replace the 80k p/w Wheelchair. If arsenal had 20k p/w leon brittain to replace a 110k p/w juan mata, you can see the risk that arsenal would be taking on. Sure, the chances of winning the league are higher with having the mata-brittain combination. But imagine if arsenal took a number of chances like this in a few positions, and the key players were to get injured, they would be massively risking losing the champions league money. And thats a risk arsenal simply cannot afford to take.

For arsenal, getting into the champions league is their league title. The wage structure that they have has been successful at ensuring this. As long as abramovic and mansour are around, they won’t be able to compete for the title long term, and so they are doing what they can to make sure that their “minimum target” of top four is achieved.

Aside from all of that, you can’t just take off 20k from bendtner’s salary and add it onto fabregas’ salary anyway. Bendtner got 50k because at the time he signed it, he was probably valued at around that (ie. If arsenal didn’t want to pay it, someone else would’ve). The secret footballer talks about how bendtner’s career trajectory reflected that of ibrahimovic’s at one time. Bentdner was a very highly rated youngster at one point, hence his 50k. In hindsight, he hasn’t worked out, but who was to know that? Some work out, some don’t.
 
Rossi22 said:
12/13
Chelsea: £179m
Arsenal: £154m
Click to expand...

instead of having a torres on 250k p/w, arsenal have 3 players on 80k p/w. if torres doesnt work out, the solution for chelsea is very simple. they just go and get etoo and put him on 250k next season. if etoo doesnt work out, they do the same with diego costa. chelsea have been doing this for years in every position.

arsenal can't afford to do this at the 250k level (due to the "risk of ruin"). but do it at the 80k level. and in doing so, arsenal do actually have a slightly larger first team squad than chelsea. the reason for this is due to the registration rules of the premier league. arsenal have a lot of home grown players in their first team and so they can fill their rota. chelsea have purchased a lot of players from outside and so they can't carry as many first team players.

also arsenal don't have massive transfer fees, so it makes sense that their wage expenditure may be a bit higher relatively.
 
but this is my point Neymar - within that 154m they could quite feasibly spread their pay better than they did.

their wage bill is high, and they could quite easily have had several top earners around the 100k mark (when 100k was a relevant wage) if they had curtailed the wages they gave to 'average' squad players. United have a wage bill around 10%-20% (?) higher than Arsenals yet manage to pay their top players inline with the likes of Chelsea and City - Rooney on 300k p/w ffs :lol:

they are at a disadvantage to those above, admittedly but imho they mismanage the finances available to them


another point is that they are OVER paying their squad players - no one else would be taking these players on at these inflated wages Arsenal decide to pay them the amount they do - they don't need to be signing Leon Britton or whoever for 20k pw they should be paying their current squad options in that ball park - but because they sign them up on high wages in the first place to snare them from rivals they are effectively tying one hand behind their backs.
 
billyiddo said:
but this is my point Neymar - within that 154m they could quite feasibly spread their pay better than they did.
Click to expand...

yeah i agree with this. as does gazidis, who spoke about this last year. but i don't beleive there are massive improvements that could've been made. every club could be a bit more efficient, but perhaps arsenal could've been that bit more.

billyiddo said:
their wage bill is high, and they could quite easily have had several top earners around the 100k mark (when 100k was a relevant wage) if they had curtailed the wages they gave to 'average' squad players. United have a wage bill around 10%-20% (?) higher than Arsenals yet manage to pay their top players inline with the likes of Chelsea and City - Rooney on 300k p/w ffs :lol:
Click to expand...

arsenal and man utd have had different models over the past decade. the structure of their teams were totally different.

arsenal were promoting a lot of players from their academy over the past decade: gibbs, jenkinson, Wheelchair, ramsey, denilson, djourou, bendtner, vela, clichy, senderos etc. in contrast, man utd were buying a lot of senior players rather than promoting youngsters. and so the average man utd player was on a higher salary, but arsenal had more players. ie. man utd had £16m antonio valencia on 60k, whilst arsenal had ramsey and denilson on 30k each.

arsenal's squad and wage structure meant that their risk of ruin was a lot lower than it would have been (had they used man utd's model), and so they could spend more on wages than they otherwise would have.

on the point of arsenal's top players being paid the same as chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project, i dont agree. obviously, its hard to get exact figures, but from quickly googling around, this is what i have found. ozil is on 140k, and then walcott, podolski, cazorla, ramsey are on 100k. with Wheelchair and mertesacker on 80k. vermaelen, sagna, arteta, koscielny, szczsney are in the 70-60k range.

kompany, aguero, silva are all on over 150k. nasri is on 140k. javi garcia and dzeko are on over 100k. fernandinho, zabaleta, clichy, lescott, hart, milner, navas, jovetic are all on between 100-80k. negredo, nastasic, demichelis, richards, kolarov are on 70-60k.

lampard, torres, hazard, terry are on excess of 150k. cech, etoo, cole are on between 150-100k. demba ba, cahill, willian, mikel are on between 80-100k. ivanovic, matic, luiz, schurrle are on 80-60k.
 
Ashley Cole is to be questioned by Los Angeles police over claims he assaulted a female TV presenter in a nightclub.

The former England left back, 33, is on holiday in LA after being left out of Roy Hodgson's World Cup squad.

Cole allegedly poured champagne over MTV presenter Donatella Panayiotou, shouting: 'You know what this is for!'

Cole is on a lads holiday with Shaun Wright-Phillips and about a dozen others, and was at a VIP party at trendy Hollywood nightclub Lure to celebrate LA Lakers star Nick Young's 29th birthday - other guests included rapper Drake and R&B singer Brandy.

'The whole bust up came out of nowhere,' according to an eye-witness in the Sunday Mirror.

'Ashley’s group were spending a fortune knocking back the drinks. At one point Ashley and Donatella were at the same table and drinking happily.'

Donatella, 29, reportedly once had an affair with Emirates Marketing Project winger Scott Sinclair, and claims that Cole suddenly confronted her and poured champagne over her head.

'Donatella was stunned by his outburst,' added the witness. 'They went at each other and had to be separated.'

She is also believed to have slapped Cole in the face and was heard to be shouting: ‘I’ve never done anything to you. Who the f*** do you think you are?', as the row spilled out onto the streets.

Donatella has now contacted the police, telling officers she was pushed and shoved during the row as well as having her throat piercing ripped out.

She refused to comment about the alleged incident but told the paper: 'There was an incident and it is now in the hands of the police authorities following a formal complaint of assault against Ashley Cole.'

Cole, who left Chelsea after the club decided not to extend his contract, is thought to be chasing a move to the US and Major League Soccer.

LAPD confirmed they are investigating the incident, which has been listed as a 'simple battery'.

However the offence includes strict penalties, with up to six months in prison, a maximum $2,000 fine, community service or three years of probation.

If charged and found guilty, potentially Cole could be banned from getting a working visa - leaving a move to the MLS out of reach.

MailOnline has contacted Cole's agent and is awaiting a comment. A spokesman from Chelsea FC has said it would be inappropriate to comment at this stage.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2651979/Ashley-Cole-questioned-LAPD-alleged-nightclub-assault-MTV-presenter-Donatella-Panayiotou.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back