Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Barclays Premier League- 2016/17 Season Thread


Ja  Rhule

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, ARSEN said:

Arsenal fans are fuming... They want Kroenke to sell the club ASAP.  Thierry Henry spill the beans today...  He said Arsenal is ran like a business instead of soccer club.  The main goal of Kroenke is to make money, not to win.  He said Kroenke does not care about trophies..  The players are not thrilled at all... Looks like this will not be a good season for Arsenal.

I always had this suspicion when Arsenal's board would talk about how much money they had, but make like 1 splash in the transfer window and that was it. A lot of people blamed Wenger, but I always thought there were two sides to that story. That can be a toxic situation. Hopefully he does what is best for the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

You pied that?? Man, that's friggin COLD bro... lol

 

 

I'm not stressed. We'll definitely miss him, but Vorm is a very serviceable backup, and if it's only four weeks, we should be ok. Hopefully, he makes it back 110% healthy before that predicted timeframe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Raskle said:

^^^

You pied that?? Man, that's friggin COLD bro... lol

 

 

I'm not stressed. We'll definitely miss him, but Vorm is a very serviceable backup, and if it's only four weeks, we should be ok. Hopefully, he makes it back 110% healthy before that predicted timeframe.

I've always rated Vorm. Very solid keeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On August 16, 2016 at 7:15 AM, DirtyMagic97 said:

I always had this suspicion when Arsenal's board would talk about how much money they had, but make like 1 splash in the transfer window and that was it. A lot of people blamed Wenger, but I always thought there were two sides to that story. That can be a toxic situation. Hopefully he does what is best for the club.

Rumors is Arsenal 30% shareholder Usamov is ready to dump Arsenal stock and invest in Everton because Stan Kroenke is running the club into the ground.  I see many Arsenal fans switching club very soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just can't believe that we miss Dembele so much. We look absolutely flat, no spark whatsoever. Granted, we've had plenty of chances to score this game, and we haven't capitalized at all. But to play so.. ho hum... is weird to me. Well, that, and the fact we're a 4-4-2 - I haven't seen that in a year and a half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Raskle said:

Not such a good start for your guys... Is Wenger trying to go out in "sabotage" style?

From what I read is Kroenke installed US business model where Arsenal can only spend surplus on transfers...  So even tho Arsenal has around £300M in cash on their books back in June.  Their debt is £260M.  So they spent £35M on Xhaka and now brake even.  Wenger is a scapegoat...  He is not given the $$$ to build his team so he's using surplus midfielders and plays them all over...  Striker, defense, attacking winger...  Kroenke has no business to run a soccer team... Let alone Arsenal.

Chelsea, MU, City have aggressive revenue approach.  Kraonke have an option to follow their footsteps but  it would require to sacrifice returns for few years which clearly he's not ok with.  Kraonke is the guy who organized Arsenal financial approach and research showed he severely misjudged soccer market.  He focused on increasing revenue from ticket sales (like NFL).  But PL cash flow is generated by TV deals and player sales.  So he forced Wenger to sale all Arsenal best players to payoff his fug up stadium idea.  Now he operates Arsenal in safe state with zero debt in case he decides to sell Arsenal shares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...