Let's see what numbers we get out of whoever plays left wing this season before continuing to crap all over Raheem Sterling ...

At the moment it is no goals and one assist in 5 games ... 

1 hour ago, Simplymo said:

What I've read so far is that sterling and sancho actually took small paycuts before moving. They were both on 300k+ before.

We're paying 100k still for sterling (arse paying the rest) and 50k for sancho (man utd paying the rest). It really does get on my tits that we are paying anything for sterling but according to finance ppl this isn't a bad thing as its better than other options. Mehh but...

I also read we've managed to reduce the wages by 20+mil pa. And the net spend this transfer window was around 47mil (still some markets open to sell players so that number may change).

Unfortunately most media will only report one side of the narrative like how much we spent, but not how much we gained.

It's Chelsea, the media will never write anything positive about us. They never have. 

Have you got anything definitive on those figures anywhere?

4 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Have you got anything definitive on those figures anywhere?

Sterling dropping £75,000 a week is the only figure I've seen but it's unsubstantiated.

1 hour ago, bisright1 said:

Well because they think signing a 24 year old Sancho for 20-25m is good financial sense. So it's irrelevant what is happening with Sterling. 

And yes in their "warped" minds they think that if sterling has a good year for arsenal he is more likely to be sold than if he has a good year playing for the U23 team. 

We can sh*t on the owners all day. The mistake was signing sterling. The mistake may have been not being faster to get him out the door. But the mistake definitely wasn't giving him to arsenal instead of letting him rot here. 

I get what you are saying, but i am not sure that any of these moves were football motivated. Well maybe, but only as a by-product.

I think in a number of these cases they were looking for straight trades to reduce our wage bill but once the rumours started flying a three way trade could still work. Whether we got Osimhen was immaterial, providing it was on our terms, and providing he moved to fund their purchase of Lukaku. Napoli messed up royally cos they couldn't shift him and went all in for Lukaku to appease Conte. And we did as well because we didn't get the money we wanted for Lukaku and we didn't get the No 9 within that financial saving (maybe it should have been Duran at the death. Not Sure).

I think that the Sancho thing happened purely to try to sweeten up the Sterling to United deal but when that looked dodgy for rapidly approaching window's close and Arsenal became a thing then it could still work if it were all done on the same basis. But we ended up with a loan with obligation and they ended up with just a straight loan. Sancho might come good and the Sterling can has been kicked down the road for another year. Feels like its going to come home to roost next year.

Also where it doesn't seem to stack up is where the fees have been mentioned. I have heard that we are paying half of Sancho's wages and we are still paying £225k of Sterling's. If that is the case we have gone from £325k pw to £375k. Granted we have the savings from Lukaku to put against that, but we still have Sterling to shift next year, along with Chilwell.

Oh, my head.

We just seem to be getting more and more players, and paying bigger and bigger wages and agents fees yet everyone seems to be saying "Don't worry about it, this time next year Rodney we'll all be gazillionaires".

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

Have you got anything definitive on those figures anywhere?

Oh no sorry. Its all the articles in the media. Also any positives are normally at the bottom, after an advert or in fine print. Lol

Tbh, unless we see any documents all the media and we can do is speculate. Unless the ppl actually involved (players, agents or clubs) say something then everyone is just guessing. And to my knowledge none of them have shared anything. So just what I read in the media bud, sry.

The Guardian and BBC mentioned the 20mil pa and the 47mil (Guardian had 50mil). The payments for sancho and sterling came from both above and social media. "Itk" idiots that know bo**ocks all, lol

Even those websites with salaries is just speculation with a bit of "educated" guessing unfortunately.

Edited September 2, 20241 yr by Simplymo

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

 

Also where it doesn't seem to stack up is where the fees have been mentioned. I have heard that we are paying half of Sancho's wages and we are still paying £225k of Sterling's. If that is the case we have gone from £325k pw to £375k. Granted we have the savings from Lukaku to put against that, but we still have Sterling to shift next year, along with Chilwell.

Oh, my head.

We just seem to be getting more and more players, and paying bigger and bigger wages and agents fees yet everyone seems to be saying "Don't worry about it, this time next year Rodney we'll all be gazillionaires".

Second part yes, they seem to be gambling we become richer. It's chaos and it's not what I'd do. I'm worried next summer we need to keep buying and selling players just to keep us afloat on FFP

On the former you are missing that we've still managed to acquire an asset. That's worth something longer term. Sancho could be sold in 2 years for a profit. 

Ideally we sell Sterling for 25m next year to Arsenal and he takes whatever wage they offer. Then we sell Madueke for 40m to accommodate Estevao joining. 

It irritates me to be listening to the radio and hearing Stirling's name playing for Arsenal when he's a Chelsea player. bonkers move regardless of what you may think of him as a footballer. 

I don't get loaning players to a rival, we made a silly decision giving Yossi Benyaoun to Arsenal years ago and he literally won them about 9 points on his own and they just scraped top 4 while we finished 6th. Luckily we won the Champions League but the move itself didn't make sense all it did was help Arsenal. 

This was seems even worse because Sterling for how overrated he is still has his moments and wins the odd game now and then, he'll only help Arsenal and they're not even paying all his wages... 

Not sure how loaning him to Arsenal is any issue. Even if he plays outstandingly for them it won’t stop City winning the league again and they’ll finish above us with or without him. So nothing changes really. Best that can happen is he plays well enough there that someone is crazy enough to actually buy him off us.

2 minutes ago, Snedger said:

Not sure how loaning him to Arsenal is any issue. Even if he plays outstandingly for them it won’t stop City winning the league again and they’ll finish above us with or without him. So nothing changes really. Best that can happen is he plays well enough there that someone is crazy enough to actually buy him off us.

A hefty points deduction might stop them.

18 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

A hefty points deduction might stop them.

I really don’t see that happening, unless anyone at the FA is ok with meeting an ‘unfortunate accident’. 
 

And in the unlikely event City are deducted 20 odd points, then I’d doubt it’d be Sterling that was the difference. After Arsenal there’s only Liverpool and they’re not that great post Klopp, as was evident this afternoon.

Good to see he is keeping up his standards

https://www.justarsenal.com/pundit-says-arsenals-summer-arrival-has-been-a-massive-disappointment/380856

55 minutes ago, POCH OUT said:

Good to see he is keeping up his standards

https://www.justarsenal.com/pundit-says-arsenals-summer-arrival-has-been-a-massive-disappointment/380856

We're only about 12 rounds unto the season, he needs to settle and he's still young so inconsistent.

Wait, which thread is this?

Gave it the biggun when he made the loan move. You need to back it up Raheem.

I had sort of hoped him going into a team that was meant to be a few years ahead of us was going to get him to fluke his way to a few goals this year and some subsequent summer interest.

Turns out he’s still just sh*te.

Is anyone surprised?

He started playing regularly at 16, debut at 15. Needs pace along with trickiery to play well, needs 10 chances to score.

Lot of miles in his legs, at the top level he is past it but will Milk his huge wage here and end up playing at Everton, Palace or Fulham when he leaves here permanently.

 

Let’s be honest - Sterling’s underwhelming spell at Arsenal shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone. The idea that a player suddenly “switches on” and becomes consistently great just because they’ve moved is pure fantasy. Sterling has been a limited footballer for a while now, and his recent performances are just reinforcing that.

Yes, he thrived for a bit under Pep at City, but let’s not kid ourselves: he was part of a perfectly drilled system where his deficiencies were masked, and his strengths were maximised. At City, he didn’t need to be the guy who unlocked defences or carried the team—he was one cog in a well-oiled machine. And credit to him, he played his role brilliantly there.

But the cracks started showing before we signed him. His finishing has always been inconsistent, his decision-making suspect, and his overall game patchy. We saw glimpses of what he can do here, but “glimpses” don’t justify the wages we’re paying him.

Now he’s at Arsenal, and the same story is playing out. Without Pep masterplan to carry him, he’s being exposed for what he is—a player who can’t consistently produce at the top level. We gambled big on him, thinking he could be a leader for us, but it was a naïve move.

And the worst part? His high wages are a noose around our necks. We’ve backed ourselves into a corner here, and we’re going to feel the burn for years to come.

Sterling isn’t a terrible player, but he’s never been the world-beater we hoped he could be.

On 14/09/2024 at 14:48, bluetrooper said:

It irritates me to be listening to the radio and hearing Stirling's name playing for Arsenal when he's a Chelsea player. bonkers move regardless of what you may think of him as a footballer. 

I don't get upset in the slightest when I hear Jorginho and Sterling in Arsenal news stories. In fact it gives me a chuckle.

Don't think I'll be laughing so much next season if the stories are about Chucky at Tottenham and N'kunku at Man United. 

 

Maybe I'm stupid, but it actually came as a shock to me. Not a fan of Sterling by any stretch but he's usually always capable of some moments, I thought he would have those moments at Arsenal but he's been far worse than I thought. So far so good, keep it up Raheem. 

3 hours ago, Victor90 said:

Maybe I'm stupid, but it actually came as a shock to me. Not a fan of Sterling by any stretch but he's usually always capable of some moments, I thought he would have those moments at Arsenal but he's been far worse than I thought. So far so good, keep it up Raheem. 

The sign were already there in his last 2 season at City but we chose to ignore them, focusing on the numbers. 

8 minutes ago, ducavis said:

The sign were already there in his last 2 season at City but we chose to ignore them, focusing on the numbers. 

The numbers were great because he was a great player. Scored a lot of clutch goals for them in his last few years.

Sterling's failure is arguably all on him. He left City because he said he wanted more recognition. Chelsea was the perfect platform for him to achieve that, an experienced player coming into a younger team who had just lost a lot of experience.

At the very least he should have been another Joe Cole, Mata, Willian - best player and first name on the teamsheet in a difficult seasons. 

If anything the writing was on the wall when he didn't leave for Real Madrid, instead ultimately preferring the safety of Guardiola's City.

He has been poor in his limited appearances, however what is more surprising is Arteta's lack of faith in using him. Several times, Arteta has not even bothered bringing him on which hints that Arteta has not been impressed with what he is seeing with him in training. I saw another rumour regarding this too.

He made his last league start for Arsenal against Bournemouth due to Saka being injured and was hard done by as he was subbed off in the 37th minute due to Saliba being sent off so Arteta took off an attacker and he was the fall guy. What was a real surprise was that you would think Arteta would of given him a shot in their next game which was against Shakhtar as Saka was still injured and as his minutes was cut short against Bournemouth for reasons out of his control, but guess what Arteta immediately demoted him to the bench. He came on later in the second half but did not do much in the short space of time he had. I kid you not, since this game Arteta has left him on the bench in every game Arsenal as had excluding the Carabao Cup, however in the significant league/cup games, he has not even brought him on with Arsenal chasing a goal.

Liverpool, drew 2-2 and was looking for a winner, he was left on the bench. Inter, lost 1-0 and he decided to leave him on the bench. Newcastle they were chasing the goal and decided to bring on Zinchenko at LW which was more bizarre.

So yeah, not done much in his limited appearances, however has not been trusted much by Arteta at all.

Its hilarious how they fall for it every time.

We`ve signed Cech from Chelsea, ooh thats worth at least 15 points this season, hes brilliant.....

We`ve signed Luiz Chelsea, ooh thats worth at least 15 points, hes brilliant...

We`ve signed Willian from Chelsea, ooh thats worth at least 15 points, hes brilliant...

We`ve signed Jorginho from Chelsea, ooh thats worth at least 15 points, hes brilliant...

We`ve signed Havertz from Chelsea, ooh thats worth at least 15 points, hes brilliant...

We`ve signed Sterling from Chelsea, ooh thats worth at least 15 points, hes brilliant...

 

Stupid f**kers 🤣

5 hours ago, ducavis said:

The sign were already there in his last 2 season at City but we chose to ignore them, focusing on the numbers. 

The biggest concern for me when we signed Sterling was his mileage. He was maybe 27 but he was already a pl regular when he was 18

Edited November 22, 20241 yr by Bob stark

We laugh now but this twat comes back next July.