It wouldn’t be the first online poll that Arsenal fans have wrecked.
Bukayo Saka
- Thread starter davidmichael
- Start date
- Status
Daddy want want want 
How realistic is this?
He's so fecking good.
He's worth Antony money.
He's not very quick.
Should be starting over Foden.
Very good player. Decision making and execution for a guy so young is very impressive
I assume this is a joke
For me he gives us way more balance on the right. Foden is too accustomed to the City way of playing. Always holding on too long and going down blind alleys as he's probably used to having more movement and options around him. Saka is more likely to beat players, he's great in duels against a full back and simply plays better in an England shirt. England are always going to rely more on individual moments than a drilled club side.
He should start ahead of Foden 100%
I should start ahead of Foden. He's utter shite on the right.
If Antony cost 85mil then this guy has to be upwards of 200mil!
You have a curious thing with Antony.
It is his hair you dont like, isnt it
Saka?
Why is this thread in the Transfer Forum?
If B Silva cost around 44 million and Haaland cost 50-60 million then Saka should cost around 25-30 million.
Good luck with that one
Thank you, not even good luck will help Arsenal if they are looking for upwards of 200 million.Good luck with that one
Saka is a good player, the sort you'd be delighted with if he came through your youth team, but he'd cost way too much now to justify the fee.
The fact we've signed Anthony for big money makes this transfer a non starter. I can see Saka staying at Arsenal for the bulk of his career.
The fact we've signed Anthony for big money makes this transfer a non starter. I can see Saka staying at Arsenal for the bulk of his career.
I don’t think Arsenal want to sell him, so everybody’s happy.
Silva cost £44m before he smashed it in the PL. That figure is pretty irrelevant to what he’s worth now. And Harland’s fee was dictated by his release clause. Once again, pretty irrelevant.
That would be like me saying that Saka vastly outperformed Grealish last season and is therefore worth £175m.
Follow the conversation, you will see the point of the post.
Reeks of Man City in 2-3 years.
Nailed on.
He’s not worth 175m because no-one would pay that. Players are worth what someone would pay.
Saka gets over-rated massively because he’s English. He’s not better Kuluveski for example.
I will admit that I’ve never seen it with him. I don’t see the player that people rave about when talking about Saka.
Saka has too much emotional depth to join 'Man City'. bedsides Pep likely wont even be at Man City in 2-3 years.
There is also the stumbling bock of the transfer fee. Will Man City stump up the 150m+ for Saka? Because they won't be allowed to get away with paying 100m for Grealish and thinking they can sign better players from bigger clubs than Villa on the cheap
So what value would you put on him then?
I agree. My entire point is that he not worth £175m.
I rate him higher than Kulusevski because of the amount he does on his own. Our LW tends to have a lot of help due to the way we set up. Saka has a CF that tends to drift the left and a RB who tends to invert and stay home.
Kulesevski is a good player, though. I have no idea why Allegri let him go.
Kulsusevski is a good player but I agree that Saka is a better player and he has genuine pace as well.
When it comes to his valuation I posted (tongue in cheek) that if Antony was worth 85mil then Saka would have to be north of 200mil and that seems to have run a lot further than I expected
There is no doubt that if Saka became available then all the top clubs would be on alert and it would be hard to guess where the bidding war would take his price to.
Oh come on you don't really think he only cost £51m like the British Media suckers do
If he lets his contract run down to the final year, which he should, he’ll be in line for a massive pay day. Either from Arsenal, who I’m sure will pony up as best they can to keep him, or - if he keeps his current trajectory - he’ll get a big club/big pay day move to someone like City, PSG or Real. He’s a top player and I think he’ll go to a title challenging side, as he’s just going to keep getting better. City would be perfect for him unfortunately.
He may have an affinity or loyalty to Arsenal that keeps him there, but if he prioritises personal ambition I think he’ll probably end up at City or one of the big continental clubs.
He may have an affinity or loyalty to Arsenal that keeps him there, but if he prioritises personal ambition I think he’ll probably end up at City or one of the big continental clubs.
Not the point of that post, change 51 to 100 and still the point remains same.
Them and Newcastle will never get exposed because people haven't got a deathwish
The transfer fee was indeed £51m. The exact figure paid to agents / family / Haaland himself etc is unknown. But it’s likely similar to £30m-£40m rumoured for both the Neymar and Pogba deals.
Pogba deal is very straightforward.
We paid 89 million to sign him, Pogba and his agent had 25% transfer fee clause when Juve signed him as free agent, so Juve paid 25% of the transfer fee they received.
He got few millions for brokering the deal, far from what happened with Neymar deal.
Agreed. I wasn't saying the structure of the deals was the same. They are, as you mention, all different.
Haaland had a intentionally low release clause which generous fees would be added on top of. Pogba and his reps negotiated a slice of his subsequent transfer fee. And Neymar's deal was allegedly straight up fraud that was investigated for years afterwards. (Then Sanhelli, one of the architects of that deal, rocked up at Arsenal and paid a suspicious £72m for Pepe. Our owners brought a lawyer onto our board, conducted an internal investigation and sacked Sanhelli).
Totally different deals. I was just pointing out the ballpark figures City are likely to have paid in addition to the transfer fee.
- Status