I think it is simply that he wanted higher wages and potentially a longer contract than we were prepared to offer. If he was earning £200K p/w, a 1yr contract extension equates to the transfer fee we’re paying for Norgaard. Financially it makes sense.
Paying Partey more, may have also complicated certain other contract extensions and could have left us short of money for attacking signings. Ultimately, IMO we can only judge this move alongside what the clubs does in this transfer window.
This is pure speculation.
We happily paid £60m for Zubi, £5m for Kepa and £11m for Norgaard…
But somehow extending Partey’s contract could prevent us from signing attackers?
No chance in hell.
This is the same club that spent fuck all in January, remember.
They’re loaded.
as is everything else tbh…no one really truly knows whats going on these things.
I think that was the intention with that chain of posts tbf.
Ok and what about the wages we’re paying Norgaard too? Do you think he’s coming here for free? And the bonuses and agent fees that usually come with signings?
I could see him coming on minimal wages tbf, probably on around the same money he was at Brentford which I doubt is much.
Edit: Take this with a grain of salt because I don’t fully trust Capology but they say he’s on 40k pw.
This is all speculation! Unless someone on here has some actual insider knowledge, all we can do is speculate!
Given Partey was on circa £200K p/w he would have been one of the higher earners. Increasing his wages places more pressure in respect of contract renewals for other key players, and raises the wage threshold for new signings. I think these are reasonable assumptions.
Norgaard is apparently on circa £40K p/w at Brentford, so next to nothing compared to most of our players at Arsenal. With the low transfer fee and wages, this makes clear financial sense. Again I reiterate that my preference was for Partey to stay.
Assuming we get the attacking reinforcements we need, the positive I am taking from this transfer is that this is a short term fix, and means we can go out in a future window at sign another top midfielder, preferably a younger prospect like Carlos Baleba.
Ok so £40,000 a week on a multi year contract plus £10m transfer fee and a potential £5m in add ons.
Looking like a potential £20m deal….
No idea if this guy has any clue at all. He is a Nigerian journalist, its not inconceivable that he might have a line into Partey’s camp. Ornstein apparently liked this video on Instagram and followed him after watching, make of that what you will.
According to him:
-Arsenal’s long time plan was to extend Jorginho. They told Partey he wouldn’t get another contract.
-When Jorginho had an offer he couldn’t refuse form Flamengo, Arsenal changed course late this season and offered Partey a one year deal on same wages.
-Partey wanted a raise and guarantees about playing time.
-They had a meeting after the season and it was amicably decided that there wasn’t going to be a fit. Partey is leaving on good terms.
-Has interest from clubs in Italy and England, but thinks Partey is leaning toward a club in Turkey that is offering even more than he was asking from Arsenal.
Again, could definitely be total bullshit. But it doesn’t seem like an unreasonable account to me.
Right off the bat, I call bs. Not like there was a need not to.
Jorginho couldn’t even string 3 matches together last season.
Extend the guy that wasn’t being used much? Also if that was the plan what were they waiting on?
My scepticism is extremely high on this theory.
His claim is that they imagined Jorginho just as an old head who wouldn’t play much but be a good influence in the squad. And that Arteta was very supportive of Jorginho staying in that kind of role. Zubimendi and Rice would assumedly take the lion’s share of the minutes at the position anyway.
I’m skeptical too but Ornstein liking the video gives me a little bit of pause. And it does sort of line up with some things, like us not actually opening talks with Partey on an extension until this spring. Also kind of squares with going for a player like Norgaard to play that role in the squad originally (according to this theory at least) envisioned for Jorginho.
Assuming an increase in his current wages, which seems reasonable, you’re probably right that the deal could eventually cost circa £20m, including all the add ons.
If Partey is on circa £200K currently, a 2yr extension on the same wages would cost us circa £21m.
So the overall package, is likely to be cheaper for Norgaard than to extend Partey.
The club stood by Partey while the whole country threw shade at us for doing so and at the end of the contract he said thanks now pay me more money. 
If your calculations are correct then we’ve let Partey, one of the leagues best midfielders, leave so we could save around £1m whilst weakening our squad in the process lol
We don’t know what increase Partey was after. If he signs for free somewhere else often they get signing bonuses and a nice juicy agent fee as well.
I imagine the total package he’d get moving somewhere else as a free agent is much bigger than what he’s currently on.
It does seem strange that we’re replacing Partey, who’s arguably one of the best players in his position in the PL, with a player who’s a downgrade, for around the same money.