Aaron Ramsey (Out)

[Rex Stone]

Huh?

Barcelona was coming off three straight La Liga titles and was a year removed from a Champions League when they signed Fabregas.

Manchester United had lost the title on goal difference to City and finished 19 points ahead of Arsenal before buying Van Persie.

Adebayor made 34 appearances over three seasons for Manchester City before being sold to Sp**s.

Manchester City finished ahead of Arsenal before buying Nasri. He's now suspended for doping.

City was defending Premier League champions when they bought Sagna, who made just 54 appearances for them over three seasons.

Liverpool paid £35 frickin' million for Oxlade-Chamberlain after finished ahead of Arsenal in the table the year before. Ox started 14 Premier League games for them before blowing out his knee a few games before the end of the season.

None of these players contributed in any meaningful way to any relative changes in fortunes of the clubs. They were just pieces. It hurt Arsenal for one season to lose Van Persie, but they were going to lose him for free the following summer anyway. He had one greatseason helping United to the title, then his career basically fell off a cliff and he ended up being a squad player in Turkey and Holland. So United probably did Arsenal a favor by buying him and Arsenal was certainly better off letting him leave than extending him.

RVP didn’t fall off a cliff after one year he had a better than a one in two goal per game ratio the next year as well as a good World Cup.

If we extended him could have probably won the league in 2013/14. There was a stretch of games we started Yaya Sanogo after Giroud’s infedelity.

No chance Utd did us a favour, they won a title pretty much solely down to RVP in Ferguson’s last season, isn’t that what football’s all about? One of Ferguson’s best signings imo.

Nasri also contributed a lot to City’s title winning year, think it’s unfair to label almost every player we sold a bust for their new clubs.

 

[Slartibartfast]

RVP didn’t fall off a cliff after one year he had a better than a one in two goal per game ratio the next year as well as a good World Cup.

If we extended him could have probably won the league in 2013/14. There was a stretch of games we started Yaya Sanogo after Giroud’s infedelity.

No chance Utd did us a favour, they won a title pretty much solely down to RVP in Ferguson’s last season, isn’t that what football’s all about? One of Ferguson’s best signings imo.

Nasri also contributed a lot to City’s title winning year, think it’s unfair to label almost every player we sold a bust for their new clubs.

He scored 12 goals in the Premier League in 2013-14 after scoring 30 his last year with Arsenal and 26 his first year with United. That's a pretty big drop. And it doesn't matter if he had scored 50 because he had already announced he wasn't extending his Arsenal contract anyway, so he wasn't going to be around for 2013-14.

Giroud, by the way, scored 16 league goals that season, a third again as many as Van Persie.

Also, I didn't say all those players were busts. I just said there's no actual correlation between their sales and the respective fortunes of the clubs. It wasn't as though any of those players grabbed their new clubs by the scruffs of the neck and dragged them to titles. They were already better than Arsenal.

Edit: Oh, and while Van Persie was a key player in United's title season in 2012-13, the fact is that they finished with exactly the same amount of points (89) as they had the season before without him. So they were already a top, top team. The difference was that City dipped from 89 points to 78.

 

[Rex Stone]

He scored 12 goals in the Premier League in 2013-14 after scoring 30 his last year with Arsenal and 26 his first year with United. That's a pretty big drop. And it doesn't matter if he had scored 50 because he had already announced he wasn't extending his Arsenal contract anyway, so he wasn't going to be around for 2013-14.

Giroud, by the way, scored 16 league goals that season, a third again as many as Van Persie.

Also, I didn't say all those players were busts. I just said there's no actual correlation between their sales and the respective fortunes of the clubs. It wasn't as though any of those players grabbed their new clubs by the scruffs of the neck and dragged them to titles. They were already better than Arsenal.

Edit: Oh, and while Van Persie was a key player in United's title season in 2012-13, the fact is that they finished with exactly the same amount of points (89) as they had the season before without him. So they were already a top, top team. The difference was that City dipped from 89 points to 78.

Those 12 goals are still better than two in one, if that’s an example of going off a cliff that’s a pretty big reach imo.

Saying they got the same points as the year before so he didn’t improve them is so simplistic. The quality in the league can up and down in different years.

Also anyone who watched the games could see how revisionist that was. He carried them to that title, it was ridiculous.

You might not say that they’re busts but you were heavily implying in your posts that they weren’t successes.

 

[Dj_sds -]

I was happy to see Ox join Liverpool, knowing full well how limited he is. Wouldn't mind Ramsey either.

The thing is i think ramsey is a decent player. Even when we sold ox i didnt like hearing how well he was playing under klopp. Same with ramsey, once they leave i prefer they go abroad. When we sold sanchez to united something snapped, wont be similar to that tho.

 

[TornadoTed]

Liverpool fans are debating if it's worth bidding for Ramsey in January and the consensus seems to be, yes he would be a decent squad player, which seems to tie with the consensus of opinion on here.

I don't think they realise he wants £200k+ per week! I just don't think he has a hope in hell of getting that from anyone. He isn't good enough to start for the big clubs and they aren't going to pay £200k+ to a squad player and clubs that could start for don't pay those sort of wages.

 

[Tosker]

he won't get £200+ a week but he will get a hefty signing on fee

 

[Slartibartfast]

The thing is i think ramsey is a decent player. Even when we sold ox i didnt like hearing how well he was playing under klopp. Same with ramsey, once they leave i prefer they go abroad. When we sold sanchez to united something snapped, wont be similar to that tho.

I know you're not saying it's simple, but you can't sell a player abroad if he doesn't want to go. They have to have a say in it too, especially when their contract is running out. If Arsenal doesn't sell Ramsey to the team he wants to join in January, he will walk for free and join them anyway. No use being sentimental about it. Get the best deal you can and use the money to strengthen. As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather see Liverpool pay money to Arsenal for Ramsey than see them buy Fekir.

 

[Garrincha]

Any of these clubs can easily find a package Ramsey will be fine with.

I bet Ramsey would be happy with what Mkhitaryan got with us.

His basic £144,000-a-week pay will rise to £240,000 a week if Arsenal trigger an option to extend his deal. There was also an £8.65m loyalty bonus on signing for the London club.

 

[L3T5 PL4Y]

I think he'll do well at Liverpool if he goes there and stays fit as he is very much a Klopp style player. It wouldn't bother me much though. Would be a good move for all concerned.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

 

[Mark Tobias]

People complaining Aaron might go to a rival A) over rate him and B) forget that he'll cost them at least 6 weeks on the treatment table if he does manage to get a move.

 

[Dennis_Bergkamp_10]

Don't think he'll ask for that much at Liverpool. Ox also lowered his wage demands for his new challenge. His wife and newborn twins probably don't want to move too far as well.

He's moving to a rival club come January.

 

[benjamin86]

Don't think he'll ask for that much at Liverpool. Ox also lowered his wage demands for his new challenge. His wife and newborn twins probably don't want to move too far as well.

He's moving to a rival club come January.

According to todays quotes he'll leave at the end of the season. It makes more sense him leaving in the summer, he gets a huge signing on bonus instead of AFC getting any cash and doesn't disrupt his family after just having twins.

 

[al-Ustaadh]

I know people will give me **** about posting it... So believe what you want.

He either resigns or the end of January 31st gives us the answer. Don't see him staying until the end of his contract.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Ramsey actually didn't say he would not leave in January. He merely indicated he wouldn't be pushing to leave. He didn't rule out a move if the right opportunity came along.

“Would I stay for the rest of the season? Of course, yeah.”

"I just have to carry on playing my football and do my best for Arsenal this season and I’ll leave the rest with the club now."

So I figure if, say, Liverpool made a January offer and that's a place he would like to go, he would probably be open to moving then as long as he gets enough of a raise to save face. If not, he'll see what the market holds in the summer.

 

[Toby]

Linked to Bayern now in the german press via english press.

 

[HBL]

Need to sell him in January, currently contributing nothing to the team.

 

[SingmeasongSong]

He scored 12 goals in the Premier League in 2013-14 after scoring 30 his last year with Arsenal and 26 his first year with United. That's a pretty big drop. And it doesn't matter if he had scored 50 because he had already announced he wasn't extending his Arsenal contract anyway, so he wasn't going to be around for 2013-14.

Giroud, by the way, scored 16 league goals that season, a third again as many as Van Persie.

Also, I didn't say all those players were busts. I just said there's no actual correlation between their sales and the respective fortunes of the clubs. It wasn't as though any of those players grabbed their new clubs by the scruffs of the neck and dragged them to titles. They were already better than Arsenal.

Edit: Oh, and while Van Persie was a key player in United's title season in 2012-13, the fact is that they finished with exactly the same amount of points (89) as they had the season before without him. So they were already a top, top team. The difference was that City dipped from 89 points to 78.

That Van Persie wasn't everything to ManU in Ferguson's last leason must me a joke right ? I even remember that it almost never happened that a player saved more points with key goals than Van Persie did that season. Was about 26 points or so just because of his x-factor. It was all him and except Messi, he was the best player around during that time

 

[Slartibartfast]

That Van Persie wasn't everything to ManU in Ferguson's last leason must me a joke right ? I even remember that it almost never happened that a player saved more points with key goals than Van Persie did that season. Was about 26 points or so just because of his x-factor. It was all him and except Messi, he was the best player around during that time

So Rooney, Vidic and the rest were chopped liver? Carrick, Ferdinand and de Gea were all in the PFA Team of the Year. Van Persie had a great season, but United was perfectly capable of winning the title without him. So, no, he wasn't "everything." Football doesn't work like that.

 

[Red London]

Need to sell him in January, currently contributing nothing to the team.

The thing is, its a long season. Özil is suspect to injuries or illnesses. Our other wide AMs like Iwobi and Mkhy are inconsistent players even given their ability. If we wanna mount a EL run and go for top4 then I dont think its a terrible idea keeping him.

I wouldnt mind selling him in Jan for a replacement, but not a rushed one.