Bacary Sagna to leave Arsenal at the end of season?

[StLGooner]

Only a problem if we don't go buy a quality RB now, which is a very real possibility.

[Highbury Hillbilly]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

[defcon2005]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

[StLGooner]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

I think his point is, is not to be blinded by the fact we won a trophy and thinking we don't need to strengthen much. But if you batter a team most likely you're a stronger team and don't need as much strengthening, than a team that scrapes through against lower opposition. Get it?

[Highbury Hillbilly]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

Youre saying you never for a second wondered what would have happened if Ramsey didn't bail us out yet again?

Sent from Galaxy Mega 6.3 using Tapatalk

[Pudpop]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

I think his point is, is not to be blinded by the fact we won a trophy and thinking we don't need to strengthen much. But if you batter a team most likely you're a stronger team and don't need as much strengthening, than a team that scrapes through against lower opposition. Get it?

Only reason we scraped through instead of battered them was because of nerves (maybe tactics if you want).

Either way, Sagna leaving isn't because of financial reasons. I'm fairly certain that the club just weighed up the price with the outcome. Yes Sagna world class etc., but why not buy a replacement and let him develop? Like you said it's only a problem if we don't replace him.

[Arsenal Tone]

Looks like we've lost one of the best RBs in the league to a rival - and there is no proof that Aurier would be good enough to replace him!

So on the progress front our first bit of business is a step backwards IMO.

[Sims]

If we matched City's offer we'd have Bac on 120k p/w for 3 years.

That's 18.7mill over them three years.

After them three years we'd have to spend upwards of 8mill to buy a replacement. Possibly even sooner because Sagna won't live up to the levels of last season.

It makes no sense for us to keep him for that much money, I'd rather us get Aurier who looks to potentially be an ever better Sagna.

I said on Reddit that the Sagna move makes no sense to any party apart from Sagna himself.

[Santi]

Don't think we scraped through against Hull anyway tbh, did you not watch the game..aside from those two early sloppy goals they did 0? We had chances upon chances and shots upon shots. We played poorly in 1 game in the FA Cup and that was vs Wigan but guess what we won so who gives a shit.

Sagna can go, he's not vital like Theo. He's also 31 just like Theo right? Completely different scenario.

[Santi]

If we matched City's offer we'd have Bac on 120k p/w for 3 years.

That's 18.7mill over them three years.

After them three years we'd have to spend upwards of 8mill to buy a replacement. Possibly even sooner because Sagna won't live up to the levels of last season.

It makes no sense for us to keep him for that much money, I'd rather us get Aurier who looks to potentially be an ever better Sagna.

I said on Reddit that the Sagna move makes no sense to any party apart from Sagna himself.

[StLGooner]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

I think his point is, is not to be blinded by the fact we won a trophy and thinking we don't need to strengthen much. But if you batter a team most likely you're a stronger team and don't need as much strengthening, than a team that scrapes through against lower opposition. Get it?

Only reason we scraped through instead of battered them was because of nerves (maybe tactics if you want).

Either way, Sagna leaving isn't because of financial reasons. I'm fairly certain that the club just weighed up the price with the outcome. Yes Sagna world class etc., but why not buy a replacement and let him develop? Like you said it's only a problem if we don't replace him.

Doesn't matter how or why, what matters is that we just aren't a dominant team and we need to improve that's the point that I'm sure you and the majority of fans agree with.

[defcon2005]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

I think his point is, is not to be blinded by the fact we won a trophy and thinking we don't need to strengthen much. But if you batter a team most likely you're a stronger team and don't need as much strengthening, than a team that scrapes through against lower opposition. Get it?

no ones being blinded by the obvious fact that we need to strengthen.
the fact theo didnt play much hampered us but was only one factor of many ..
liverpool battered more teams then we did and won nothing...are you saying they dont need to buy players because they are much stronger??
do you get it?

[gooney]

Looks like we've lost one of the best RBs in the league to a rival - and there is no proof that Aurier would be good enough to replace him!

So on the progress front our first bit of business is a step backwards IMO.

There is no proof of any signing being good enough....every signing is a risk. But Im actually excited to see a new right back

[StLGooner]

Whether you agree with the salary or not, bottom line is we lost a key player for financial reasons. That wasn't supposed to happen anymore, remember?

Agreed.

I remember the forum having the same conversation about Walcott last year...eh, f**k him, good riddance, not worth 100K, etc.

Well, we didn't have Walcott for half a season this year. How did that turn out for us? Fell from 1st to 4th without his goals, and scraped through in the FA Cup against f***ing Hull.

all you have to do in the f a cup is beat the team you play?
so what if we scraped through. where in the rules does it say you have to batter a team?

I think his point is, is not to be blinded by the fact we won a trophy and thinking we don't need to strengthen much. But if you batter a team most likely you're a stronger team and don't need as much strengthening, than a team that scrapes through against lower opposition. Get it?

no ones being blinded by the obvious fact that we need to strengthen.
the fact theo didnt play much hampered us but was only one factor of many ..
liverpool battered more teams then we did and won nothing...are you saying they dont need to buy players because they are much stronger??
do you get it?

I don't get why you think his point was that we need to batter teams, because I don't think that was his point. We are in agreement, I was just letting you know what I think his point was, cause you didn't seem to get it. But I guess I'll let him answer.

But a more dominant team in most cases won't have to strengthen as much by most logic, but having said that each team is different, so it comes down to what you really need.

[Cripps]

Bye to the money lover

Time for the prodigal son to come home.

Eboue