Walcott on the cheap

[Anonymous]

Wrong. Pearce said we could have had him for 1million, nothing Southampton could do because of his age. Pearce said he couldn't justify the price tag to Wadle so it didn't happen.

This was well before anyone had ever heard of him.

Wigley said he would be prepared to pay £3m for him, no suggestion that Southampton would have been prepared to accept that. In fact they rejected bids by Chelsea of more than double that before he turned 16. And there was no suggestion that Walcott would have been prepared to pay for us.

And I'd certainly heard of him by then, so had most of the top clubs that were after him.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/walcott-set-for-arsenal-despite-huge-chelsea-bid-523418.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/foot ... 23418.html</a>

Couldn't find a record of any bids for Walcott the summer prior to this article...

If I recall, it was his form and performances during the first part of that season that alerted the big clubs to him...

 

[keemcfc]

ONLY 18 months? arsenal have plenty of time to give him a new contract.

 

[moomba]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/walcott-set-for-arsenal-despite-huge-chelsea-bid-523418.html

Couldn't find a record of any bids for Walcott the summer prior to this article...

If I recall, it was his form and performances during the first part of that season that alerted the big clubs to him...

No, they were interested well before he made his debut for Southampton, Chelsea in particular. He was always a rising star starring in the England under age teams.

And having sold him for a fee rising to £12.5m in January 2006, do you really think they would have been prepared to sell him for £3m a few months earlier.

 

[Niall Quinn's Disco Pants]

At the time when we could have signed him he had played about 2 games for Southampton if that. Pearce couldn't justify spending that amount of money on a 16 year old when we didn't have a pot to piss in. Anyway, who's complaining, we got Darius Vassell instead.......!!!!

 

[Anonymous]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/walcott-set-for-arsenal-despite-huge-chelsea-bid-523418.html

Couldn't find a record of any bids for Walcott the summer prior to this article...

If I recall, it was his form and performances during the first part of that season that alerted the big clubs to him...

No, they were interested well before he made his debut for Southampton, Chelsea in particular. He was always a rising star starring in the England under age teams.

And having sold him for a fee rising to £12.5m in January 2006, do you really think they would have been prepared to sell him for £3m a few months earlier.

Just my opinion, but lots of promising youth players are scouted by the bigger clubs, simply because they have such complete scouting networks. However, no-one was sure how he would cope with first team football until that season began, and he got his chance. Hence no-one went in for him in the summer. Based on that, yes, I do believe he'd have cost considerably less than the 12.5 which Arsenal ended up paying. Plus, the fee Arsenal paid was structured over the length of his contract and based on appearances for club and country.

You said earlier Chelsea had already bid more than 3 million for him, at the time Wigley recommended him to Pearce...how do you know that as there seems to be absolutely no record of it?

 

[moomba]

Just my opinion, but lots of promising youth players are scouted by the bigger clubs, simply because they have such complete scouting networks. However, no-one was sure how he would cope with first team football until that season began, and he got his chance. Hence no-one went in for him in the summer.

No-one went in for him because he wasn't availableand wasn't interested in a move.

Based on that, yes, I do believe he'd have cost considerably less than the 12.5 which Arsenal ended up paying. Plus, the fee Arsenal paid was structured over the length of his contract and based on appearances for club and country.

You said earlier Chelsea had already bid more than 3 million for him, at the time Wigley recommended him to Pearce...how do you know that as there seems to be absolutely no record of it?

[/quote]

Just followed his career closely, saw Southampton at the time as a club with a great academy similar to ours, and at risk of losing their kids to bigger teams similar to ours.

Don't know if Chelsea ever formalised a bid, Walcott said quite a lot that he wasn't interested in a move to them. No confirmation of it, but this is from his Wikipedia page:

Before breaking into the Southampton first team, Walcott's massive potential was showcased in the 2005 MATCH Annual. His performances soon attracted attention from the British media, who saw him as one of the most promising young English talents of his time. There was speculation that Walcott would move to the Premiership and media reports linked him with some of the league's top clubs including Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur.

Do you think he would have joined City in our state?

 

[Anonymous]

Do you think he would have joined City in our state?

Who knows...you're right though...under the stewardship of Pearce, Ali Mac, and Wardle...probably not...;- )