12 Mil. for Walcott!!!

Number 9 · Post by **Number 9** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:11 pm

Okay, now how can Southampton get 12 mil. for Walcott and we only get a couple mil. for Darren Bent? Am I wrong to think this is unbalanced? Or is this another example of ITFC's boardroom inadequacy???

Mork · Post by **Mork** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:19 pm

Number 9 wrote:Okay, now how can Southampton get 12 mil. for Walcott and we only get a couple mil. for Darren Bent? Am I wrong to think this is unbalanced? Or is this another example of ITFC's boardroom inadequacy???

We always lose out here, because Southampton in this example, didn't have to sell. They are financially sound and could have just stuck two fingers up at Arsenal.

We on the other hand, always appear to be standing with a begging bowl, and so get bottom dollar.

Look at M. Bent, we sell for 450k, and 3 years on, he's sold for millions(!) - and he's still crap!

the-mole · Post by **the-mole** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:20 pm

Number 9 wrote:Okay, now how can Southampton get 12 mil. for Walcott and we only get a couple mil. for Darren Bent? Am I wrong to think this is unbalanced? Or is this another example of ITFC's boardroom inadequacy???

Well personally I think the 2.5 million we got for DB was good. 12 million for a 16 year old is purely a fluke - however southampton have done the right thing - they have played the guy and haven't been trying to hide him in fear that someone will come sniffing to buy him.

ITFC's problem seems to have been when Bowditch was on form we tried to hide him in fear that we didn't want to sell him. Seems that has back-fired in the fact that the guy has done p*ss all the past year. If they have the talent stick em in. Yeah we don't want to see our best players going - but if it means getting DECENT money for them then so be it.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:55 pm

Because Walcott is about 5 times the player Bent is perhaps?

toby · Post by **toby** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:58 pm

Cough wrote:Because Walcott is about 5 times the player Bent is perhaps?

How do you work that out?

Bent is scoring regularly at Premiership level where as Walcott (who may well turn out to be better than Pele) has scored 5 goals in the Championship.

Walcott has the potential to be 5 times better than Bent but there's no way he is at the moment.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:19 pm

toby wrote:
Cough wrote:Because Walcott is about 5 times the player Bent is perhaps?
How do you work that out?

Bent is scoring regularly at Premiership level where as Walcott (who may well turn out to be better than Pele) has scored 5 goals in the Championship.

Walcott has the potential to be 5 times better than Bent but there's no way he is at the moment.

Aye, thats what I meant.

Also, the fact that not many people were talking about Bent at 15/16...?

For what its worth, I don't think Bent will go much further with his career...how far Theo goes, is all down to Wenger.

TODD66 · Post by **TODD66** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:35 pm

Mork wrote:
Number 9 wrote:Okay, now how can Southampton get 12 mil. for Walcott and we only get a couple mil. for Darren Bent? Am I wrong to think this is unbalanced? Or is this another example of ITFC's boardroom inadequacy???
We always lose out here, because Southampton in this example, didn't have to sell. They are financially sound and could have just stuck two fingers up at Arsenal.
We on the other hand, always appear to be standing with a begging bowl, and so get bottom dollar.

Look at M. Bent, we sell for 450k, and 3 years on, he's sold for millions(!) - and he's still crap!

Interesting point.

There have been a number of Southampton fans asking where all the money has gone from the players they have sold over the last 4 years (someone said it was a figure of Ã‚Â£40 million all told).

Now I suspect that they are not as financially sound as folks may think - new stadium???

Post by **loudnproud** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:03 pm

This is a battle of financial wits with the big boys!!!! 12 million for an untested 16yer old is football gone mad again!!! When Rooney hit the Prem stage,here was a kid mixing it with the best,in the best league in the world!!! This woolcott kid looks good,and thats all at this stage,can he take the pressure of having that sort of tag around his shoulders?? I think not!!

hallamblue · Post by **hallamblue** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:12 pm

loudnproud wrote:This is a battle of financial wits with the big boys!!!! 12 million for an untested 16yer old is football gone mad again!!! When Rooney hit the Prem stage,here was a kid mixing it with the best,in the best league in the world!!! This woolcott kid looks good,and thats all at this stage,can he take the pressure of having that sort of tag around his shoulders?? I think not!!

dare I say there are similarities with a certain Mr Bowditch bursting onto the scene as the new "wonder kid" - now look at him !!

Arsenal have gambled big money on young starlets in the past - only for the player concerned to fizzle out like a damp squb !

John · Post by **John** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:13 pm

i think the arsenal have jumped in too soon and he will to qoute loudnproud be under to much pressure to perform.

don't get me wrong he's a good player and all that, but think players go too soon these days,a few more years at saints might have set the lad up,but i could be wrong

Riviera · Post by **Riviera** » Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:17 pm

well personally i think its a good move for him, hes obviously got his head screwed on, he turned down chelski for the arse, ive seen a bit of him and he looks real class, and after hearing him interviewed today i really think hes got his feet firmly on the ground

and at 16 hes earnt the club thats helped him through his 1st steps as a footballer to 12 million, cant say fairer than that

Shed on tour · Post by **Shed on tour** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:15 am

Another factor is that the big clubs were interested in Walcott and therefore that obvously pushed the fee up.
Still think it is a huge gamble for Arsenal. It was not so long ago that they signed Jermaine Pennant from Notts County as he was going to be the next wonder kid and look what happened there.

Mork · Post by **Mork** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:07 am

Shed on tour wrote:Another factor is that the big clubs were interested in Walcott and therefore that obvously pushed the fee up.
Still think it is a huge gamble for Arsenal. It was not so long ago that they signed Jermaine Pennant from Notts County as he was going to be the next wonder kid and look what happened there.

It was lucky timing for Walcott, because Arsenal and Wenger are under pressure following Henrys public statements asking the board to put their money where their mouth is.

What a better way to show that, than to sign a player Henry has said he thinks has huge potential, and who just happens to Henrys biggest fan

stu · Post by **stu** » Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:46 pm

You can't even put Bent in the same league as Walcott...

Theo is a gem, and will be playing for England by the end of next year, he has absolutely everything, pace, skill, control and a great finish.

If anything we were unlucky only to get Ã‚Â£12m... the only reason we got that amount was that he was out of contract in March and a tribunal would have settled the fee.

If Theo had stuck to his word and signed pro in March he would have been worth double that.

ATB · Post by **ATB** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:22 am

stu wrote:You can't even put Bent in the same league as Walcott...

Theo is a gem, and will be playing for England by the end of next year, he has absolutely everything, pace, skill, control and a great finish.

If anything we were unlucky only to get Ã‚Â£12m... the only reason we got that amount was that he was out of contract in March and a tribunal would have settled the fee.

If Theo had stuck to his word and signed pro in March he would have been worth double that.

I think you may be a tad biased there.. either that or you're just talking out of your as*...

I'm not saying Theo isn't a good player but saying that Darren Bent isn't in the same league as him is a bit rich.. Last season Darren Bent scored 19 goals and had the 2nd highest amount of assists in the league. So he proved himself at Championship level..
He now is playing for Charlton where he is the leagues 5th highest goal scorer, making him Englands most prolific striker, as all the other players ahead of him are foreign or in Lampards case, a midfielder. So he has more than proven himself in the Premiership now..
He made the England squad for world cup qualifiers, and if Ericsson wasn't such an as* he would've started ahead of Crouch who couldn't score a goal at the time.
Bent can run the 100m in about 11 seconds, so pace isn't exactly a problem for him, and if you saw some of the goals he scored last season you'd know that he can finish.....

but given all that, apparently Darren isn't in the same league as a kid who's played only 21 games in the Championship, 8 of those being a sub, scoring 4 goals and with 1 assist, in a team that's below half way in the league...

go figure..

stu · Post by **stu** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:22 am

How come Bent went to Charlton then and not one of the big clubs if he really is rated that high?

Real Madrid, Monanco, Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd, Liverpool and Spurs all wanted Theo Walcott, that would suggest that Theo is rated alot higher than Bent... or do you know better than 7 of the biggest football clubs in the world?

You will also see a player called Nathan Dyer in the press over the next few months who in many peoples opinion is even more promising than Walcott... ahhh it's a hard life having the best academy in the country!

Go figure,,,,,

Riviera · Post by **Riviera** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:31 am

stu wrote:How come Bent went to Charlton then and not one of the big clubs if he really is rated that high?

Real Madrid, Monanco, Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd, Liverpool and Spurs all wanted Theo Walcott, that would suggest that Theo is rated alot higher than Bent... or do you know better than 7 of the biggest football clubs in the world?

You will also see a player called Nathan Dyer in the press over the next few months who in many peoples opinion is even more promising than Walcott... ahhh it's a hard life having the best academy in the country!

Go figure,,,,,

stu, without a doubt theo is a very promising player, hes has all the attributes to become an england player for many years to come, but then so did Kieron Dyer, Richard Wright, Titus Bramble to name just 3, all brought through our youth academy, which by the way is rated as one of the best in the country, this doesnt mean they will go on to fulfil this potential, all it takes is a few injuries and bit of bad form and things can change very quickly

Darren Bent was and still is very good and with any other england manager in charge would of been playing for England by now, of course we're a bit bias, but we've been watching his rise through the ranks to become a top championship striker and now a top premiership striker, at this moment in time id take bent over theo simply on experience, give theo a few seasons at arsenal and maybe i'll change my mind

ATB · Post by **ATB** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:46 am

stu wrote:How come Bent went to Charlton then and not one of the big clubs if he really is rated that high?

Real Madrid, Monanco, Arsenal, Chelsea, Man Utd, Liverpool and Spurs all wanted Theo Walcott, that would suggest that Theo is rated alot higher than Bent... or do you know better than 7 of the biggest football clubs in the world?

You will also see a player called Nathan Dyer in the press over the next few months who in many peoples opinion is even more promising than Walcott... ahhh it's a hard life having the best academy in the country!

Go figure,,,,,

Well I'll ask how come he is in the England squad if he's not rated that high??

All those clubs you mentioned all had an abudance of strikers.. and who knows.. If Bent scores more goals this season he may be off to a bigger club..

The way you're going on about Walcott is as if he's the next Pele or Ronaldinho

stu · Post by **stu** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:57 am

I have also seen players such as Shearer, Le Tissier, Bridge, Wallaces etc come through the ranks at Southampton, all playing in the Saints team at a similar age to Walcott.

Bent is a good player yes, however IMO and obviously most of the larger clubs he doesnt have that extra little bit, but he is promising yes. Walcott is a player who comes around "once in a blue moon" to quote the England Youth Coach.

I and all Saints fans really do feel agrieved we lost Theo for only Ã‚Â£12m, had he signed a pro contract and stayed he would have been worth more. It sounds crazy but Walcott really is that good.

Riviera · Post by **Riviera** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:01 am

stu wrote:I have also seen players such as Shearer, Le Tissier, Bridge, Wallaces etc come through the ranks at Southampton, all playing in the Saints team at a similar age to Walcott.

Bent is a good player yes, however IMO and obviously most of the larger clubs he doesnt have that extra little bit, but he is promising yes. Walcott is a player who comes around "once in a blue moon" to quote the England Youth Coach.

I and all Saints fans really do feel agrieved we lost Theo for only Ã‚Â£12m, had he signed a pro contract and stayed he would have been worth more. It sounds crazy but Walcott really is that good.

take his age into consideration and i think Ã‚Â£12 million is a fooking superb deal

Post by **loudnproud** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:14 am

Stu? Prey do correct me if i'm wrong but your so called best young accademy in the league got beat by us in the youth FA cup final did it not? Oh and was'nt your wallcott in that team too?? Yer right!!!! Enjoy your rebuilding of a once average prem club...

stu · Post by **stu** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:23 am

loudnproud wrote:Stu? Prey do correct me if i'm wrong but your so called best young accademy in the league got beat by us in the youth FA cup final did it not? Oh and was'nt your wallcott in that team too?? Yer right!!!! Enjoy your rebuilding of a once average prem club...

So winning the FA Youth Cup makes you the best team in the country does it?, so Millwall must have been the 2nd best team in England a couple of years ago.... what a crap post.

We finished 1st in the league last year, 23 ( TWENTY THREE ) points ahead of the second placed team... I would say that gives us the bragging rights would you not?, especially as Cranie, Mills, Best, BLackstock, Surman, Ancelat etc etc where on loan most of the season.

Finally, ref Walcott do you think we had an unfair advantage by fielding a 15 year old??? ... again look at the facts.

Try looking at the league tables before you make stupid comments.

Drunken Munky · Post by **Drunken Munky** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:27 am

stu · Post by **stu** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:30 am

Oh and we are top again this year even though we have TEN academy aged players either in the first team or on loan... CASE CLOSED

Drunken Munky · Post by **Drunken Munky** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:31 am

stu wrote:Oh and we are top again this year even though we have TEN academy aged players either in the first team or on loan... CASE CLOSED

stu · Post by **stu** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:40 am

noodlesitfc wrote:
stu wrote:Oh and we are top again this year even though we have TEN academy aged players either in the first team or on loan... CASE CLOSED

Post by **loudnproud** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:51 am

Where did i say that we were the best team in the country "STU"brain!!!! I have no doubt that your accademy produces great tallent,But football is all about winning tropheys aint it? Clubs like ours will always produce great tallent for others to plunder, I am old enough to remember the great games we played at the Dell and at our place,win and loose,Yesterday you were simply well beaten by a side that is starting to come together.Accept your defeat with grace and have faith in Burley to rebuild soton.Wallcott playing for england in a few years time is way off the mark.....made me laugh though!!! enjoy your season

Luke · Post by **Luke** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:37 am

stu wrote:
loudnproud wrote:Stu? Prey do correct me if i'm wrong but your so called best young accademy in the league got beat by us in the youth FA cup final did it not? Oh and was'nt your wallcott in that team too?? Yer right!!!! Enjoy your rebuilding of a once average prem club...
So winning the FA Youth Cup makes you the best team in the country does it?, so Millwall must have been the 2nd best team in England a couple of years ago.... what a crap post.

We finished 1st in the league last year, 23 ( TWENTY THREE ) points ahead of the second placed team... I would say that gives us the bragging rights would you not?, especially as Cranie, Mills, Best, BLackstock, Surman, Ancelat etc etc where on loan most of the season.

Finally, ref Walcott do you think we had an unfair advantage by fielding a 15 year old??? ... again look at the facts.

Try looking at the league tables before you make stupid comments.

the WINNER was scored by a fifteen year old

Gaz · Post by **Gaz** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 10:02 am

The redcurrant of Arsenal suits him well, don't you agree Stu?

Post by **Dazza** » Sun Jan 22, 2006 10:35 am

stu wrote:So winning the FA Youth Cup makes you the best team in the country does it?, so Millwall must have been the 2nd best team in England a couple of years ago.... what a crap post.

Course winning the FA youth cup doesnt make us the best club in the country, just means we're better than you as proved in the final

Tractor-Boys.com

12 Mil. for Walcott!!!

12 Mil. for Walcott!!!

Re: 12 Mil. for Walcott!!!

Re: 12 Mil. for Walcott!!!

Re: 12 Mil. for Walcott!!!