If we can get them to negotiate the sale of one of their own too (Sterling or Iheanacho 
) then I’m for that, otherwise keep him for the final year.
Is it possible we could offer Sanchez a short extension on his contract and pay him 20m for a season, then if he doesn’t want to stay we can still get 50m or more next season?
If he doesn’t sign a new contract it’s going to cost us around a million pound a game, if he goes for nothing after next season.
If he signs a one season deal and we pay him a 20m signing on fee, he gets a load of money and we save a load.
I just think it’s a big mistake to keep hold of a player that doesn’t want to be here, that could also be a very disruptive influence, as well as watching him walk to Man City, Chelsea or Man U, for nothing.
I don’t blame Sanchez for any of this, it’s all Wenger and the boards fault but there is no reason to force him to stay,
I personally would prefer to keep hold of Sanchez at all costs.
First and foremost we should ensure he doesn’t leave in the summer, especially to Man City, a direct rival to the Premier League.
Have a read of my blog post today to see my thoughts on Alexis and a few other attacking players at the club.
https://woolwichmemoirs.wordpress.com/2017/06/29/thursday-29-june-2017/
1 Like
Really Sterling? Aguero was one thing, and the more I think about that swap deal the more I like it even though they rarely happen, but Sterling? He’s certainly better than any English player we have but I don’t value him anywhere near the 50 million they paid for him and feel we’d need quite a lot of money coming our way as well to even begin to think about the trade.
2 Likes
If he cant be replaced then keep him. Anything to avoid a weakened squad next season when everyone else is strengthening.
1 Like
I’d take marez over sterling 
3 Likes
Well, i would fine with this move only if we swapped him and Aguero.
I think Sanchez is a different player to Aguero so even if we done a swap deal we would still need to replace Sanchez
Not sure but I think I’d prefer to take ianacho of city if we were going to do a swap deal
Mahrez?
2 Likes
Sterling? Iheanacho? Jesus, some people are easily pleased! Iheanacho is being chased by clubs like Southampton and West Ham! I rate him but not enough to want him at Arsenal. If they were giving us Iheanacho as part of a deal with Sanchez, it wouldn’t be a swap deal as I’d still want £45m/£50m to go with it!
1 Like
Obviously it wouldn’t be a straight swap, I’d prefer a nice chunk of money and ianacho than a straight swap for aguero, it’s not as if his injury problems would improve if we signed him and very likely they would get worse
Where as ianacho looks like one of the best young strikers around, Don’t think it’s that crazy to be honest with you
I more meant it wouldn’t be worth Man City’s time giving as Iheanacho as they’d still have to give us a large chunk of money. Whereas they could probably get £25m for him if they sold him to West Ham or Everton or Leicester - you know, one of the clubs he’s more suited for! He wouldn’t improve our team much.
I’m still on the keep Sanchez for another year side. I haven’t seen any deals that work for me yet.
Because City won’t deal without a buy back.
If it was possible with no buy back, I’d sign Iheanacho instead of Lacazette.
4 Likes
I’d rather us sign both and let Giroud go.
Iheanacho could be our Rashford, a young proper striker with potential.
Iheanacho is a fantastically talented young striker.
We would be lucky to have him on our books imo.
1 Like
I agree.
Iheanacho is a great prospect but not ready to walk into our first team.
I would prefer to keep Giroud and let Perez or even Welbeck go, but if we get Iheanacho and Lacazette then Giroud is effectively third choice with Welbeck and Perez struggling to make the bench.
Sanchez for Iheanacho and 30m with no buy back clause should do it because, like with RVP, we will be making one of our rivals favourites for the PL title.
2 Likes
Bye bye!
4 Likes
Haha yeah that’s the end of that then.
Yeah, he is leaving for sure. Laca in, then.