Hmmm over the past 1.5 seasons he's scored 18 goals from probably less than half Arsenal's matches, we've only one player who can match that (can he) ? That's 14 less than RvP scored and he started every match he was fit for.
I'd love that sort of pace through the middle.
Rumours of 10m I've seen plus sales
Rumours of 10m I've seen plus sales
Yep, me aswell. Can also see Gerrard playing a bit on the right.
The only issue for me would be, I always imagined at this hypothetical 'lesser' side, he'd be playing for a team that other teams didn't feel the need to drop deep against, and so he'd get space playing off the last man. Would he get that here? Perhaps not. Would he still be able to offer something? Well, he seems to have done okay at Arsenal, even if he hasn't reached the potential some thought he would.
Eto'o was a ruthless winner. Walcott would be another nice guy to add to our stable of nice guy losers.
Eto'o was a ruthless winner. Walcott would be another nice guy to add to our stable of nice guy losers.
Tongue in cheek, I'm sure, but Henry, Pires, Viera, ljungberg, Wiltord, Fabregas, Petit, etc, etc. were all winners.That's a good point. For all his finishing ability, somehow Walcott doesn't strike me as ruthless. Or a winner.
To be fair, it's hard to become a winner at Arsenal.
Tongue in cheek, I'm sure, but Henry, Pires, Viera, ljungberg, Wiltord, Fabregas, Petit, etc, etc. were all winners.
Do you remember how Eto'o played in Barcelona? Getting on the end of every through ball, getting at least a couple of clean 1 on 1 chances with a keeper in almost every game, and by the threat of his pace, keeping defenders' line closer to their goalkeeper, thus pushing the whole opponent's team back, where they can only defend. That's the type of player Walcott can be for us.
Being a winer is about mentality, not about whether you've lifted a trophy or not.That was in a different era. When was the last time they won any trophy?
Walcott is fairly injury prone, a bit lightweight, not actually shown himself to be a striker BUT.... fast as fuck and definitely more dangerous than what we have and would give us more options... a no brainer for me... unless of course Rodgers and the scouting team have spotted an unheralded diamond we dont know about somehwere
So we're back to the "he's better than what we've got" argument. Walcott would undoubtedly come in and improve our team and if we had a better team to begin with I wouldn't necessarily be against it... but I reckon we can get better value for money.
Might sound weird in this day and age but, is there any possibility we could possibly play 2 strikers in the same game?
He'll be 31 in december but great signing none the less, he'll want a big wage packet though..David villa is doing very well again!
Don't rule it out...