top of page
Writer's pictureNeil Nagwekar

Walcott wages part of modern football


Such is the polarization of our fans that even the contract extensions of Theo Walcott and Santi Cazorla are met with unclear reactions. Not that I’m condemning anything – it’s good to have your opinion and by all means, fight for it. However, it’s quite obviously preferable to have facts from all angles before citing an extreme viewpoint. Not unless you’re Michael Owen.

Despite the haphazardness in standpoints, the reception on Santi’s news is generally warmer. I tend to concur – aside from him being my favourite current Arsenal player by some distance, last season was a clear indicator to what he can still offer to the club. Part of that was by Wenger doing what I hoped and playing Cazorla deeper, but mostly was also down to a huge ensemble of skills and tricks packed into one tiny smiley teddy bear.

To me he’s fully deserving of any kind of wages Arsenal are paying him, considering how good he was. People worried about his incrementing age could also take the case into point that normally, it’s the stamina of a player that tends to diminish after the 30-mark. Cazorla doesn’t strike to me as a pacer or an all-action sort of player. Sure, his robust build may fail him in a year or two, but it’s not like he’ll be entirely useless. After all, his strength lies in his skills and dribbles.

Also, if you find Cazorla’s £100K wages dubious, you may find Theo’s downright ridiculous.

Theo’s £140k a week also includes image rights, which means the club recoup all money earnt from his sponsorship deals and use of his image. [@gunnerpunner]

Even so, it’s little consolation for some. After all it was suspect if he was worthy of £100K, even when he was banging them in at the beginning of 2012/13. Not only does adding £40K to that sound like throwing good money after bad, but it also nearly shuts the door on a potential Karim Benzema.

I’ll be brutal – of course Theo Walcott is not worth £140K. The guy has contributed next to nothing since holding the club to ransom in January 2013. Say what you will about his marketability and pace (due to diminish in three years), but without his supersonic speed Walcott is no better than Lukas Podolski. Indeed, I’d venture he’s worse.

That being said, such is modern football that hardly anyone is paid what they’re worth. Since when has Angel di Maria’s stock worth £44m, especially after what happened at Manchester United last season? Raheem Sterling is a young and exciting prospect, but is surely not even close to the £180K wages he’s rumoured to receive at Manchester City.

Football was always going toward a direction where £140K forwards are found on the benches. This is why I wouldn’t mind someone like Podolski staying – £100K is not hugely outrageous for a 29 year old 100+ capped German international with power and pedigree. I don’t like it, but such is footballing life. Roll with it.

By no means do I suggest that Arsenal should resort to the City’s and the Chelsea’s of the transfer market and put average players on blockbuster pay packets. However, what I’m trying to say is that the level of incomes in football have inflated so much that decent players like Theo Walcott and Lukas Podolski are bound to receive £100K – £140K, and world class talent should get close to £200K. It’s a miracle we have Mesut Ozil and Alexis Sanchez around the £140K mark, but it’s not a miracle that will last for long.

Let’s make the most of it while we can.

-Santi [Follow me on Twitter @ArsenalBlogz ]

Comentários


bottom of page