Reports are circulating that Jack Wilshere could be set to leave Arsenal for as little as £9m, with Italian side Sampdoria the interested party.
In the current market place, when the likes of Kyle Walker is going for £50m and Arsenal look set to spend £45m on Lemar, £9m for Jack Wilshere seems a bad a deal.
With a year left on his contract, should Arsenal follow the Jeremy Corbyn mantra of a bad deal being better than no deal, or follow Theresa May who is happy to take no deal rather than a bad deal
Wilshere’s contract is set to expire in 12 months time. This leaves Arsenal with three obvious options:
1. Sell him this summer
2. Keep him and release on a free in 2018
3. Offer him a new contract to stay
Working backwards, we will start with point 3. Offering Jack Wilshere a new contract.
There has never been doubting Wilshere’s talent. England’s most naturally gifted midfielder since Gazza. But he is now 25 and has never fulfilled the potential he showed all them years ago as a teenager against Barcelona.
Wilshere has been hit by a horrendous run of injuries.
Since his breakthrough season in 2010/11, when he played 35 league games, his league appearances record reads:
2011/12: 0 league games
2012/13: 25
2013/14: 24
2014/15: 14
2015/16: 3
2016/17: 29
Last season he went on loan to Bournemouth in an attempt to prove that, in less intensive conditions, he could stay fit. He ended up breaking down mid-April.
There is no doubting Wilshere, when fit, is a wonderful player. But he is simply not a player Arsenal can rely on. With up to 60 games next year, Arsenal need players capable of playing in every single one of them.
When you look at the last 3 Premier League Champions, Chelsea, Leicester and Chelsea (again) they all had one thing in common – they played the same starting XI for most of the season.
Wilshere go’s in the same box as the likes of Jamie Redknapp and Darren Anderton. Talented midfielders who just could not stay fit.
Arsenal would be crazy to offer him a new contract.
I see some people saying “give him a one year deal, pay as he plays”. Get your heads in the real world lads. Why would he sign this is he has a 4 year deal on decent money being offered elsewhere?
Wilshere is currently coming to an end of a £90,000 a week contract. Even if we encourage him to take a 20% pay cut, that is still £72,000 a week. Over a new 4 year contract that is £15m.
I have always found it interesting that many of those who slated Arsene Wenger and the board for giving Abou Diaby his last contract at 25 are demanding Wilshere get one. Hypocrites.
To tie up £15m over 4 years in a player who has averaged 17 league games a season over the last 4 season is bad business.
Giving Jack a new deal is something that should simply not be considered.
We then come to the “no deal better than a bad deal”.
There is a school of though that maybe, like some argue with Alexis Sanchez and Mesut Ozil, Arsenal should roll the ride, take the risk, let his contract run down to have him one more season.
For starters he is no where near the ability as the aforementioned. He doesn’t even get into our strongest 11.
Secondly, letting Jack Wilshere’s contract run down would actually cost the club £14m as we would miss out on any potential transfer fee, and have to pay out £5m in wages to Wilshere.
Over the next 12 months, that money can be put to better use elsewhere. Like going into the pockets of Ozil and Sanchez, or offsetting the majority of the salary demands for Lemar – a player with a great injury record.
With Wilshere not fully fit, there is no guarantee how many games he would play next season.
Arsenal could end up giving him one more year and him not actually playing.
Letting Wilshere’s contract run down would be another case of us making a player very rich without him actually contributing much.
The final option is selling him – no matter if it is a bad deal for Arsenal.
The immediate impact of selling Wilshere is it frees up wages. Close to £5m. Add on any transfer fee we might get for him, Arsenal would be looking to make just shy of £15m by selling him. This is money that could be used elsewhere, as already explained.
Arsenal could try and protect themselves but adding a buyback clause to his contract, ensuring that if he has a good, fit 2 years, Arsenal could get him back in.
Wilshere is a player who now offers nothing to Arsenal. When fit, he does not start. When injured, he does not start. Arsenal would be best off shot of him, and use whatever comes in to invest in someone new.
Jack Wilshere might be one of our own, and often you hear fans talk using their heart rather than their head when it comes to him, but this summer he needs to be sold on. A
Even if it means Arsenal accepting a bad deal.
Keenos
Whilst be no means are we trying to make the case that Theo Walcott is better than Thomas Lemar, it supports the view that Walcott is overly criticise for the way he plays, his style, his technique, yet his end product is actually very good.
I am always sceptical about with and without statistics, as often the without statistics do not contain enough data to make a true assessment.
One thing is for sure, every year Lemar has improved as a player. Whilst he might not yet be as good as Alexis Sanchez, the signs are good, and as long as he continues to improve every year, he will be a world class player within a couple of years.
18 degree’s with clear blue skies over Sydney Harbour today and 1st port of call was the Fortune of War on the Rocks, where quite a few of the old seasoned Warrior’s from The George were gathered.
She Wore A Yellow Ribbon 