Theo Walcott

[kev776]

I think Walcott would be a decent signing, but I think he'll end up costing at least £8m. He would add goals from the wide forward areas which we don't have at the moment. The problem I see is his wages, I'm not convinced he's worth £100k a week.

As a current England International and only 23/24 years old he is also worth a damn site more than 8m even in his last 6 months. Van Persil went for 20m.

If we continue to think cheap we will get a Dempsey situation and lose out.

[Alex]

No way is he worth 100k a week. He doesn't score enough goals to earn that.

[Vermilion]

No way is he worth 100k a week. He doesn't score enough goals to earn that.

If we can get Walcott at a good price due to his contract, then he's worth it. imo.

It's not easy to find good players, with a good attitude, and a consistent level of play in this league almost guaranteed.

He doesn't score enough goals now, but in BR's system maybe he will ? Is'nt his problem for Arsenal getting in goal scoring positions, he seems to stick them away when the chance comes ?

If we pay in wages some of what we've saved on price, i don't see a problem.

[Alex]

He isn't consistant though. I work with an Arsenal season ticket holder, and he said he has never put a run of games together for them apart from 8 or so last year at the start.

[Vermilion]

He isn't consistant though. I work with an Arsenal season ticket holder, and he said he has never put a run of games together for them apart from 8 or so last year at the start.

Always thought he was in and out of the side a lot, coming off the bench mostly, and then playing in a position he doesn't like ?

[dww]

He isn't consistant though. I work with an Arsenal season ticket holder, and he said he has never put a run of games together for them apart from 8 or so last year at the start.

I honestly think he would be perfect with Suarez. As Suarez drops deep he would effectively be a striker even if nominally wide in the 3. I suspect that was the idea with Borini but Walcott did that job excellently in the PL with van Persie and I'd expect him to pick it up quickly for us.

I'd rather him that Huntelaar. Although at this stage I would probably take anyone who has scored more than 1 top level goal in their career.

[Vermilion]

He isn't consistant though. I work with an Arsenal season ticket holder, and he said he has never put a run of games together for them apart from 8 or so last year at the start.

But he might be wrong.

Or bitter just now.

[Alex]

He isnt bitter, he has moaned about him for a few years now.

Very in and out, and poor through games.

I agree Id rather him than no one. But I really would like to see a higher level of consistency from him. There has to be something behind why Wenger never gives him a full 90.

[dww]

He isnt bitter, he has moaned about him for a few years now.

Very in and out, and poor through games.

I agree Id rather him than no one. But I really would like to see a higher level of consistency from him. There has to be something behind why Wenger never gives him a full 90.

He did last season didn't he? I think Wenger is trying to change tack in his handling of players. He's appointed Bould and he's now using tough love type tactics on Walcott. My feeling is that he sees a need to alter what he's been doing in recent seasons while maintaining his principles. I think he needs Walcott to commit long term or he has to look to have someone else in that role.

[Carras_Shin_Pads]

He isnt bitter, he has moaned about him for a few years now.

Very in and out, and poor through games.

I agree Id rather him than no one. But I really would like to see a higher level of consistency from him. There has to be something behind why Wenger never gives him a full 90.

Agree with that, seems like we'd be adding to the driftwood if we bought Walcott in?

[RichC]

Walcott would be a good signing for us IMO and would certainly improve what we have available in the squad at the moment. Is he worth a £100k a week? I don't know at present but if him and say Huntelaar came in and pushed us on and in with a shout of 4th by the end of the season I'd say most certainly.

[Vermilion]

He isnt bitter, he has moaned about him for a few years now.

Very in and out, and poor through games.

I agree Id rather him than no one. But I really would like to see a higher level of consistency from him. There has to be something behind why Wenger never gives him a full 90.

Fair enough, still doesn't mean he's right though, you'll find plenty of Arsenal fans desperate for him to stay, and get more game time.

At the right price because of contract running down, i'd give him a try, and if he doesn't perform to lfc's expectations then imo we'd get a good price if we moved him on, and for where we are now as a club and where we want to be, he can be part of getting us there or closer imo, then we can look again.

[Norbs]

[Paddy]

We aren't gonna sign him. If we bring in a striker like Huntelaar then it's gonna be a line up of Suarez-Huntelaar-Sterling.

No point in stifling Sterling's development by bringing in a player that has been outshone this season by our own one. At a ridiculous fee, and even more obscene wage demands.

No brainer. **** off Walcott.

[Norbs]

We aren't gonna sign him. If we bring in a striker like Huntelaar then it's gonna be a line up of Suarez-Huntelaar-Sterling.

No point in stifling Sterling's development by bringing in a player that has been outshone this season by our own one. At a ridiculous fee, and even more obscene wage demands.

No brainer. **** off Walcott.

Quite. If the question is, would you rather see Sterling in the side or Walcott then the answer has to be Sterling.