Jérémy Toulalan

[Ratinho]

I think at this stage, if someone turned up with around £20m, we just can't turn it down, it'd be madness.

Never seen this fella play, but at £3m (only about 1% of our budget in some eyes) I trust Wenger at this kind of price.

 

[Soler]

As do I. Young French player, I'd trust his judgement. It's the older, balder variety that I don't trust him with

 

[asajoseph]

That would be 10% Ratinho (3m is 1% of 300 million!)

Making good transfers in football HAS to be primarily about getting quality first, value second. If we can get both, we're doing well, but if I personally could only choose one of those, I'd go for the former. I get very tired of all the gooners who try to poke fun at Man Utd. for paying 30 million for Rio Ferdinand, whilst we paid closer to 3 for Kolo Toure. Perhaps it's true that Kolo Toure was more of a bargain than Ferdinand, but at the end of the day, it's the quality of the players on the pitch that counts, not the bargain price we paid for them.

I couldn't care less if Toulalan is a bargain. All I care about is whether or not he's actually good enough to play for Arsenal. If he is, I'd be happy to pay 10 million for him. If he's not, we're pissing money down the drain. I've no idea either way though.

 

[KingReyes]

I couldn't care less if Toulalan is a bargain. All I care about is whether or not he's actually good enough to play for Arsenal. If he is, I'd be happy to pay 10 million for him. If he's not, we're pissing money down the drain. I've no idea either way though.

If he wasn't good enough to play for Arsenal then I don't think Wenger would buy him. Since when does a manager buy players who aren't good enough to play for them. It doesn't mean they are a guaranteed success but i'll take Wenger's instincts over anybody elses.

 

[asajoseph]

Managers quite regularly buy players who aren't good enough for the club - and Arsène certainly isn't immune. Arsène might think that Toulalan is good enough for AFC, but that certainly doesn't mean that he is. Quite a few players Arsène has bought/signed haven't been good enough, and I'm not just talking about high profile flops like Franny Jeffers. Here's a small selection:

Alberto Mendez
Lee Canoville
Stefan Malz
Niccolo Galli
Eric Chukwunyelu
Kaba Diawara
Tomas Danievicius
Igor Stepanovs
Juan
Rami Shaaban

Just because Arsène is manager of Arsenal, and you and I are not, that doesn't mean that his oppinion on players is infallible, and it certainly doesn't mean that we fans are not allowed our own oppinions.

When it comes to Toulalan, I have no real idea of whether or not he's good enough. I wonder slightly whether or not we're really showing much ambition, although as I don't know the player well, I couldn't possibly comment. All I am doing is pointing out that just because he's cheap and french, doesn't mean that he's the next Patrick Vieira.

Asa

 

[Ratinho]

That would be 10% Ratinho (3m is 1% of 300 million!)

I was being a little sarcy.

The only reason I trust Wenger in this situation is his feeling for young, french/spanish midfiedl talent at the moment.

 

[asajoseph]

That would be 10% Ratinho (3m is 1% of 300 million!)

I was being a little sarcy.

The only reason I trust Wenger in this situation is his feeling for young, french/spanish midfiedl talent at the moment.

I'm beginning my training to be an accountant in the summer - there was no way I was letting that one go

 

[KingReyes]

Arsène might think that Toulalan is good enough for AFC, but that certainly doesn't mean that he is.

Read what I said in my previous post

It doesn't mean they are a guaranteed success but i'll take Wenger's instincts over anybody elses.

No player is a guaranteed success, especially in our price range. There will always be more failures than successes when it comes to player judgement, none of those mentioed above were proven names but they were within our price range and i don't think Arsenal fell into massive debt by taking a gamble on players who cost 500,000 quid.

All I am doing is pointing out that just because he's cheap and french, doesn't mean that he's the next Patrick Vieira.

Wasn't Patrick Vieira cheap and french? And has Wenger come out and said we're selling Vieira to Juventus and this guy is the next Vieira? no he hasn't and we shouldn't spend 15 million on another midfielder like Essien just so we satisfy some fans who think we lack ambition.

I think you're expecting us to be Chelsea and sign world class players in every position when we both know its not possible. And we don't need to either especially in midfield where we have Vieira, Gilberto, Cesc and Flamini and bringing in another midfielder who's world class would only halt their progress.

 

[asajoseph]

It doesn't mean they are a guaranteed success but i'll take Wenger's instincts over anybody elses.

What about your own? Even as Arsenal fans, aren't we allowed our own oppinions?

Again, it's not about falling into debt, or about winning trophies for the biggest bargain. It's about putting together the team/squad. If Toulalan helps us do that, great. But Wenger, like every other human being currently walking on our planet, makes mistakes.

What exactly do you think our price range is? If we really do have the 30 million to spend, that many say, I wouldn't say that signing one or two players around the 10 million mark is impossible.

Wasn't Patrick Vieira cheap and french?

Er yes. But not everyone that's cheap, french, and plays in the center of midfield is Patrick Vieira.

I think you're expecting us to be Chelsea and sign world class players in every position when we both know its not possible

Don't put words into my mouth. I'm not expecting anything of the sort. What I WOULD like, is Arsène Wenger to make the most of the sizable transfer he's been given in the summer, which means signing the best players he can get hold of, not the biggest bargains. Of course, we can't feasibly go and sign every single one of the likes of Cassano, Joaquin, Ayala, etc, and that does mean that sometimes he'll have to sign the likes of Toulalan who are completely unproven, and relatively unknown.

But if our summer signings consisted of Knut Borch, Toulalan and Carraciolo, I'd definitely wonder whether or not Wenger has spent the money as wisely as he might, or with ambition. Of course, nothing but results on the pitch could prove that right or wrong, but as a football fan I believe I'm entitled to my oppinion, even IF that just so happens to be in contrast to what Arsène Wenger might think. We're looking to build a team capable of winning the Champions League, and securing sustained success domestically. Anything less, is a lack of ambition in my eyes. I don't see how many of the players we've been strongly linked to tie into that in any way. I might be wrong. Only time will tell.

 

[kissmyface]

I pretty much agree with asajoseph.

Wenger must think a bout Quality first. Fee second. He seems to make mental valuations on players. If the fee wanted doesnt match his own valuation, he'll look around for a bargain basement buy. Sometimes youve just got to bite the bullet and get the player beause theyre **** hot, not because theyre cheap.

 

[tbbosa]

I get very tired of all the gooners who try to poke fun at Man Utd. for paying 30 million for Rio Ferdinand, whilst we paid closer to 3 for Kolo Toure. Perhaps it's true that Kolo Toure was more of a bargain than Ferdinand, but at the end of the day, it's the quality of the players on the pitch that counts, not the bargain price we paid for them.

Let me hope you do not imply that because Toure was a bargain and Ferdinand cost a fortune, it would mean Ferdinand is of higher quality. Let’s look at what both players have achieved or not as of now:

1. Toure went the whole season unbeaten, Rio Ferdinand did not

2. Toure could not stop Arsenal going out of the CL, so was Ferdinand who is also out of the CL.

3. Toure is second in the EPL, Ferdinand is Third!

4. Toure is playing in the semis of the FA cup, so is Ferdinand

5. Toure is an Established international in his country so is Ferdinand

6. Toure has won the EPL once, so has Ferdinand

7. Toure has never won the CL so is Ferdinand

For me I don’t see where the Ferdinand advantage is compared to Toure, ofcourse Ferdinand cost a fortune, but what has he actually archived more than Toure. On achievements alone, Toure edges it and he cost a whopping 27M less. And my friend those are facts!!!

 

[KingReyes]

asajoseph,

What about your own? Even as Arsenal fans, aren't we allowed our own oppinions?

I never said you weren't entitled your own opinion, its just that I'll take Wengers over anybodies. Hope thats clear.

If Toulalan helps us do that, great. But Wenger, like every other human being currently walking on our planet, makes mistakes.

Wenger makes mistkaes yes, show me where I said he's perfect.

What exactly do you think our price range is? If we really do have the 30 million to spend, that many say, I wouldn't say that signing one or two players around the 10 million mark is impossible.

I agree, on a keeper, defender, a creative winger or two. Not a central midfielder who would only stop the progress of Cesc and Flamini. We after talking about Toulalan a central midfielder.

Er yes. But not everyone that's cheap, french, and plays in the center of midfield is Patrick Vieira.

Who said this guy is the next Vieira? Its The Sun a newspaper. These words haven't come from Wenger's mouth have they.

Don't put words into my mouth. I'm not expecting anything of the sort.

Not putting words in your mouth, its just that everyone's entitled to their own opinion. And thats what i feel you're doing, i could be wrong of course like you could be about Wenger;s judgement.

 

[Gunner4Eva]

I get very tired of all the gooners who try to poke fun at Man Utd. for paying 30 million for Rio Ferdinand, whilst we paid closer to 3 for Kolo Toure. Perhaps it's true that Kolo Toure was more of a bargain than Ferdinand, but at the end of the day, it's the quality of the players on the pitch that counts, not the bargain price we paid for them.

Let me hope you do not imply that because Toure was a bargain and Ferdinand cost a fortune, it would mean Ferdinand is of higher quality. Let’s look at what both players have achieved or not as of now:

1. Toure went the whole season unbeaten, Rio Ferdinand did not

2. Toure could not stop Arsenal going out of the CL, so was Ferdinand who is also out of the CL.

3. Toure is second in the EPL, Ferdinand is Third!

4. Toure is playing in the semis of the FA cup, so is Ferdinand

5. Toure is an Established international in his country so is Ferdinand

6. Toure has won the EPL once, so has Ferdinand

7. Toure has never won the CL so is Ferdinand

For me I don’t see where the Ferdinand advantage is compared to Toure, ofcourse Ferdinand cost a fortune, but what has he actually archived more than Toure. On achievements alone, Toure edges it and he cost a whopping 27M less. And my friend those are facts!!!

The facts are......

1. ARSENAL went the whole season unbeaten.

2. ARSENAL couldn't stop themselves from being eliminated from the Champions League.

3. ARSENAL are 2nd in the Premiership - and only on GD.

4. Whats the point of mentioning it if you're trying to say Kolo is better than Rio.

5. Read No. 4

6. ARSENAL won the Premiership with Kolo in the squad.

7. ARSENAL have never won the Champions League, with Kolo in the team.


I'd jump at the chance to have Ferdinand instead of Kolo. Just because ARSENAL have achieved more when Kolo has been with Arsenal, doesnt mean he is the better player. Its a team game, and there are more than 11 players to consider.

 

[asajoseph]

What an absolute load of crap.

I certainly don't think that Ferdinand is a better player than Toure because he cost more money. What I do think though, is that Ferdinand is a hell of a lot better at playing as a central defender than Kolo Toure, and that when it comes down to playing on a football pitch, the transfer fee paid for a player means absolutely nothing.

Do you think Kolo Toure is in the same league of player as Rio Ferdinand? Because proper analysis of any one of those points wouldn't prove that.

1. Toure went the whole season unbeaten, Rio Ferdinand did not

Stephan Guivarch played in a world cup final, Thierry Henry did not. Who's the better player?

2. Toure could not stop Arsenal going out of the CL, so was Ferdinand who is also out of the CL.

Kolo Toure was one of the main reasons we lost to a good, but not amazing Bayern Munich team. Rio Ferdinand was possibly Utd's best player against the worlds best team.

3. Toure is second in the EPL , Ferdinand is Third!

Including today, that's been true for 5 days. 6 days ago, was Ferdinand the better defender?

4. Toure is playing in the semis of the FA cup, so is Ferdinand

So is Titus Bramble. Is he on the same level as Rio Ferdinand too?

5. Toure is an Established international in his country so is Ferdinand

Toure plays for the Ivory Coast, and has the likes of Arthur Boka, Cyril Domoraud, Blaise Koffi Kouassi, Abdoulaye Meite and Marc Zoro to compete against, in a team that has never qualified for the world cup.

Ferdinand on the other hand has to compete with the likes of Sol Campbell, Terry and Carragher for his place, in a team that regularly qualifies for the world cup, even if they underperform when they get there.

6. Toure has won the EPL once, so has Ferdinad

7. Toure has never won the CL so is Ferdinand

Same points as before - the quality of an individual player can usually not be measured by the quality of the team they've played in. Plenty of great players have never won major trophies, or have few medals in their cabinet. Doesn't make them bad players.

So, before we carry on this conversation any further - do you ACTUALLY think that Rio Ferdinand and Kolo Toure are as good as each other?

 

[weelip]

Man, just because a player seems top notch quality in other leagues doesnt mean he will definately play well in the England.

Although this is the first time in like 3 seasons where the board declares that we have money to spend, we still cannot compete with the likes of Man U and Chelsea. Probably not even Liverpool or Newcastle too.

Every player that comes here is a gamble. And that definately include players like Essien. There is not guarantee that a player will do well here.

i definately feel it is better to gamble on 3-5 players that amounts to 15 million? than just put all the eggs on a single basket. This issue isnt just only about settling. What happens if the "quality" player gets injured after a few matches. (Just like Cisse)

We have also seen too many players that fails to settle here that is just immerse elsewhere now (Hernan Crespo is an good example maybe Folan too).

 

[asajoseph]

Kingreyes,

I actually think we're pulling in the same direction. Your priorities for what we need I agree with entirely, and I don't think signing Toulalan would be a bad move by any stretch. As I've said before, I know too little about him to say any such thing.

Who said this guy is the next Vieira? Its The Sun a newspaper. These words haven't come from Wenger's mouth have they.

I never said you, or Wenger did, sorry if you got that impression. I was talking more to the Arsenal fans who seemed to think that he automatically was, just because he was young, french, and cheap, being signed by Arsène Wenger.

And hey, I don't think Wenger's made any errors of judgement when it comes to the summer yet - he's not signed anyone after all! I just pointed out what sort of summer I would find disappointing. When it comes to individual players, I guess that no single signing could be considered disappointing - it would be the group of players we sign as a whole that would indicate how well Wenger's done. If he (rightly, in my eyes) decides to spend most of the cash on a CB and goalkeeper, and only has a couple of million left which he spends on Toulalan, I'd think, provided he got the players were up to scratch, he'd have done a great job. But the only way of finding out is watching the 2005-06 football season.

Asa

 

[tbbosa]

What I do think though, is that Ferdinand is a hell of a lot better at playing as a central defender than Kolo Toure, and that when it comes down to playing on a football pitch.

Why would you say that, how did you make your comparisions...atleast I have a basis on which to say that Toure is better since he has had more success than Ferdinand...you my friend because the media says Ferdinand is great you too belive it...may be he is, but given the amount he cost compared to Toure, he is no all that!. Football is not played with words, you have to reason things out. it also a business, when it comes to ROI( return on investment), Toure has been a far better investment than Ferdinad.

, the transfer fee paid for a player means absolutely nothing

And thats why some managers are better than the others, Leeds would be playing in the CL if just buying expensive players was the solution! And thats why you my friend will keep to "managing" championship manager...and those my friend are facts!!!

 

[weelip]

Just a note, if Ferdinand cost 10 million, i will definately go for him over Kolo. However, i dont think there is a defender that can carry our defense, proven, experience enough, in mid 20s that cost 10 million or less.

 

[brianfrance]

Stephan Guivarch played in a world cup final, Thierry Henry did not. Who's the better player?

The big laugh of the day

Toure plays for the Ivory Coast, and has the likes of Arthur Boka, Cyril Domoraud, Blaise Koffi Kouassi, Abdoulaye Meite and Marc Zoro to compete against, in a team that has never qualified for the world cup.

Ivory Coast are a great national team, they would give a hard time to england, especially physically

 

[asajoseph]

You're right. Football isn't played on paper. Or Championship Manager for that matter - it's played on the pitch. If you want to see WHY Kolo Toure is not as good a defender as Rio Ferdinand, I suggest you watch what goes on there. It's really not that hard to see. Your so called 'basis' is the most flawed 'basis' I've seen in a long while. It makes absolutely no sense, and proves absolutely nothing.

You want to know WHY Rio is a better player than Kolo? Try these...

1 - Positional sense
2 - Tackling
3 - Distribution

Not that Kolo's awful at any of these (other than positional sense), just that Rio is a whole lot better. But without watching both play football, there's absolutely no way I can 'prove' it to you.

And again, there are no prizes won for return on investment in football - prizes are won by winning football matches. And Rio helps Man Utd. do that a lot more than Kolo Toure helps us.