Willian

[tcahill]

Could be an astute signing, allowing us to strengthen while focusing our finances on other areas.

At the same time, I am concerned about the message signing a older Chelsea reject sends. It shows fans, our current players and potential future signings that we are lacking in ambition.

 

[GDeep™]

Could be an astute signing, allowing us to strengthen while focusing our finances on other areas.

At the same time, I am concerned about the message signing a older Chelsea reject sends. It shows fans, our current players and potential future signings that we are lacking in ambition.

First game of next season and we’ll have Luiz and Willian both starting.

Horrendous. Chelsea fans will be having a giggle.

 

[OnlyOne]

Could be an astute signing, allowing us to strengthen while focusing our finances on other areas.

At the same time, I am concerned about the message signing a older Chelsea reject sends. It shows fans, our current players and potential future signings that we are lacking in ambition.

How can you put these in the same paragraph?

 

[tcahill]

How can you put these in the same paragraph?

Because they're different arguments that we should consider? And each point is in a different paragraph.

Willian would come free and could potentially fill a hole in our squad with a proven league player. Or he could flop and give us more deadwood on high wages.

Arsenal and Chelsea are both (supposed to be) champions league contenders. Yet one keeps signing old players that the other club no longer wants. Which club looks like it has more ambition?

 

[yybecause]

Because they're different arguments that we should consider? And each point is in a different paragraph.

Willian would come free and could potentially fill a hole in our squad with a proven league player. Or he could flop and give us more deadwood on high wages.

Arsenal and Chelsea are both (supposed to be) champions league contenders. Yet one keeps signing old players that the other club no longer wants. Which club looks like it has more ambition?

bs

 

[field442]

Because they're different arguments that we should consider? And each point is in a different paragraph.

Willian would come free and could potentially fill a hole in our squad with a proven league player. Or he could flop and give us more deadwood on high wages.

Arsenal and Chelsea are both (supposed to be) champions league contenders. Yet one keeps signing old players that the other club no longer wants. Which club looks like it has more ambition?

Didn’t Chelsea recently sign Giroud from us when we no longer wanted him?

 

[Tir Na Nog]

Didn’t Chelsea recently sign Giroud from us when we no longer wanted him?

Conte had a big time target man fetish that window, they were linked to Crouch at one stage. In fairness tho he's done alright for them in his role. Helped them reach the FA Cup final, scored against us in the EL and was top scorer if I'm not mistaken?

 

[tcahill]

bs

Care to elaborate? Seems a little harsh.

Didn’t Chelsea recently sign Giroud from us when we no longer wanted him?

Very true, but wasn't Giroud was only signed as a backup to Morata? We also got 18 mill for him.

 

[TornadoTed]

I don't necessarily agree that just because Chelsea don't won't Willian we shouldn't touch him. They seem to have a change or direction with the type of player they are going for and the type of squad they want to build, that doesn't reflect on Willians ability.

However I don't want him because I am happy with our forward players apart from Özil so I don't see the point. If Özil were to leave this Summer maybe but I think he will see out his contract.

 

[OnlyOne]

Because they're different arguments that we should consider? And each point is in a different paragraph.

Willian would come free and could potentially fill a hole in our squad with a proven league player. Or he could flop and give us more deadwood on high wages.

Arsenal and Chelsea are both (supposed to be) champions league contenders. Yet one keeps signing old players that the other club no longer wants. Which club looks like it has more ambition?

What if he comes and scores 25+ goals and wins us the PL? Is he deadwood then, have we lacked ambition then?

You can't base the signing off what he may do. You have to look right now at our squad, and right now at the circumstances and make a decision.

Personally, I wouldn't make this signing and I don't believe we will.

 

[Makingtrax]

Everyone including Orny last year said we didnt have 40 or 50m to buy Zaha.

We then ended up :

Signing the second highest goal scoring winger in Europe only behind Messi in Pepe for 70m.

Signing one the most coveted CBS in Europe for 30m in Saliba.

A very highly rated LB in Tierney for 25m.

Yeah, we splashed £92m overall after sellers, but some of that will be paid later so I don't think the £50m estimate at the start of the window was way out.

 

[truth_hurts]

Because they're different arguments that we should consider? And each point is in a different paragraph.

Willian would come free and could potentially fill a hole in our squad with a proven league player. Or he could flop and give us more deadwood on high wages.

Arsenal and Chelsea are both (supposed to be) champions league contenders. Yet one keeps signing old players that the other club no longer wants. Which club looks like it has more ambition?

Why let truth get in the way of an argument. Cech wanted to leave Chelsea, whilst Chelsea wanted to keep him. Abrahimovic intervened as he respected the years of service that Cech had given to Chelsea. Yes, Luiz was surplus to requirements. Chelsea are trying to sign Willian to a new contract.

The true narrative isn't as sexy is it?

 

[truth_hurts]

Didn’t Chelsea recently sign Giroud from us when we no longer wanted him?

Perspective.

 

[TornadoTed]

We have a very funny attitude to signing players and managers that have links to rival clubs in this Country, they don't seem to bat an eyelid at it in Italy.

A quick Google search showed that only 15 players have played for Arsenal and Sp**s since 1886 while 26 players have played for both Milan clubs in the last 25 years alone!

 

[truth_hurts]

We have a very funny attitude to signing players and managers that have links to rival clubs in this Country, they don't seem to bat an eyelid at it in Italy.

A quick Google search showed that only 15 players have played for Arsenal and Sp**s since 1886 while 26 players have played for both Milan clubs in the last 25 years alone!

I quite like this about English football. Van Rapist completely undid all of his good work here by signing for United. Sol Campbell couldn't walk within 2 miles of WHL and Carlos Tevez would have to be on his P's and Qs in Manchester.

Meanwhile, r9 would probably get a heroes welcome at Real or Barca (Figo less so!) and Pirlo would be signing autographs non-stop if surrounded by Inter, AC or Juve fans.

 

[RunTheTrap]

I rather trust our scouts to find someone else. I like that Gabriel Veron instead. My boy Reiss Nelson needs more game time actually. Let’s have some faith in him. What’s the point of signing Willian, he’ll be 32 in August and in 18 months we’ll be complaining as to why we signed him in the first place. Let’s move on

 

[Mitch]

I wouldn't be complaining in 18 monrhs time if Willian's age crept up on him and he declined then if Willian up untill then was a consistent performer for us that could or may help us back into the CL or help us win a domestic cup.

Willian might prove to be a shrewd short term stop gap free signing that may have a positive impact for our team.

I just thing some people are too obsessed with a "shiny new toy" mentality when it comes to new signings. Having grown up as a ice hockey fan as well I've never shared this mentality. Seen plenty of times were players would switch to play for rivals all the time and seen how much a player even in their twilight years of their careers could have a positive impact on the team.

There have been many examples of players signing in their twilight of their careers and having a postive impact for teams.

Makélélé - signed for chelsea when he was 30 and had 5 great seasons with them.

Larsson - 32 years old when he signed for Barcelona and as Henry said he was the difference maker against us in the CL final.

Cahill- I have a lot of mates who are Palace fans and they love him. They said that his peformances this season is the reason they have avoided getting into a relegation battle.

van der Sar - Utd signed him when he was 34 years old and he won 4 league titles with them.

Zlatan - has had positive impact on a lot of teams beyond being 30 years old.

 

[zilfy]

I quite like this about English football. Van Rapist completely undid all of his good work here by signing for United. Sol Campbell couldn't walk within 2 miles of WHL and Carlos Tevez would have to be on his P's and Qs in Manchester.

Meanwhile, r9 would probably get a heroes welcome at Real or Barca (Figo less so!) and Pirlo would be signing autographs non-stop if surrounded by Inter, AC or Juve fans.

Yeah it's good isn't it. Nothing is more appreciated by fans than loyalty. Love (of club) over gold and all that

 

[scytheavatar]

Because they're different arguments that we should consider? And each point is in a different paragraph.

Willian would come free and could potentially fill a hole in our squad with a proven league player. Or he could flop and give us more deadwood on high wages.

Arsenal and Chelsea are both (supposed to be) champions league contenders. Yet one keeps signing old players that the other club no longer wants. Which club looks like it has more ambition?

That's the problem, free =/= cheap. Willian is already asking so much wages that Chelsea is telling him to f*** off, what are the chances he will ask for less to join us? Signing free players on bloated wages is way worse than signing expensive players on lower wages, cause if those expensive players don't work out we can always sell them. While we can't if we sign Willian.

 

[yybecause]

Bit fan of Willian, but I did expect not so much love for him cause gosh he will be 32