Should Sagna see £100,000-a-week?

It’s a long week between matches, what with no mid-week fixture to look forward to (or dread, as is your wont), and there’s apparently not enough misinformation or ginned-up scandal to fill the void as we wait to visit Stoke. Some of the more-desperate and lazier of the rags are building up around the idea that Stoke haven’t yet forgotten Aaron Ramsey’s temerity in daring to decide to break his leg and are working themselves up into a frenzy over his return, which is more than a bit silly because (a) he’s already injured (no, Potters, not in a way that allows you to take glee from it) and (b) he won’t even make the trip. Maybe they could arrange for Shawcross to break an effigy’s leg at some point to sate their blood-lust? I kid. In the absence of much else to talk about, then, we look inward. It seems that Tomáš Rosický is set to sign a new deal with saying he is “adamant” that Tom stay. Of the other member of the long-in-the-tooth crowd, it seems that Bacary Sagna or the remoras attached to him are holding out for a bigger payday.


More specifically, The Telegragh suggests that Sagna—or those who represent him, who like all agents are pure as the driven snow—is playing hardball, to the tune of a three-year deal worth £100,000 per week, which would mark a 143% 43% raise over his current rate of £70,000 per week (math corrected with a bit of help. Ahem). There are apparently four-year deals at the same or similar 100k level from Galatasaray, PSG, or Monaco, and even given Sagna’s evident loyalty to Arsenal, such deals, not to mention the chance at silverware that a club like PSG could offer/guarantee, must be tempting indeed. The tax-rate in Turkey is something like 13%, a nifty cut from the rates many pay in England. For a man about to turn 31, the contrast is stark: on one hand, his current club apparently won’t budge from its current offer, essentially the same contract and wages; on the other, a host of clubs willing to give him the golden parachute he wants to ease into retirement.

Given how dedicated, consistent, and (at times) superb Sagna has been, doesn’t he have a right to wonder what price loyalty? After all, he’s made 269 appearances, broken his leg twice, seen other teammates and friends leave for almost-instant glory, not to mention pay-raises, and what does he get in a season in which he’s seen us announce a new deal with Puma worth some £30m a year? A standard, one-year deal with no pay-raise despite being our only legitimate full-time right back has to feel a little, well, disappointing.

If the club are not willing to resign him at £100,000 a week, we have to be willing to ask ourselves, what will we lose and what could we gain? Are there younger, better right backs out there who would match or beat Sagna’s performance? If so, can they be had for less than what Sagna wants? With Carl Jenkinson and Hector Bellerin behind him, Sagna is almost ideal—he’s reached an age at which he may not want or be capable of two or three starts per week, but he knows Arsenal, he knows the Prem, and he can tutor Jenkinson and Bellerin. Given other needs we’d like to meet, such as striker (a position that usually commands hefty fees) and center-back, the utility—not to mention the symbolism—of retaining Sagna is not to be overlooked.

If he could be wooed with a compromise bid of, say, £85k for two years, would this convince him to stay? He’s one of Arsenal’s longest-tenured players and has put in years of dedicated, loyal service. Does that count for something, or should the club focus more exclusively on its bottom line even if it means losing Sagna and having to find a replacement in the summer? I’m torn. It’s not my money, so I can’t just go ahead and say, “sign him, whatever it takes!” On the other, I love the guy and hope to see him finish out his career here even if that does require us to pony up. What do you think? Can you put a price-tag on what he’s been worth to the club over the years, or is time to say “thanks, best of luck to you elsewhere?” Offer your views below the fold.

‘Til next time, thanks for stopping by!

!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);;js.src=p+’://’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

11 thoughts on “Should Sagna see £100,000-a-week?

  1. Anonymous

    I think same as with any job there needs to be an incentive. Older players with experience and something still to offer need to see there is no real ceiling at Arsenal.But that loyalty and longevity will be rewarded, it also sends out a message to the younger first teamers of what can be attained if they remain and follow the path of the senior squad members. It is a juggling process and reliant on many factors, not least who is coming through snapping on their heels. We still have a sizable stadium debt outstanding and an older squad so not everyone can reach that 100k p/w status. If he's currently in the region of 60k I'd be happy to see him on more but maybe not the levels of 100k. It's a tricky call and one I'm happy enough for those at Arsenal to judge each case on it's own merits.Obviously that is why our experienced players have moved on to a final payday elsewhere

  2. Anonymous

    Don't mean to nit pick but 100,000 is a raise of just under 43%. If he received a 100% “raise” surely he would be receiving 140,000 or double what he is getting ie 70,000 + 100% X 70,000= 140,000

  3. Anonymous

    130's a bit steep innit? That would make him the highest paid RB in the Prem, I think. That might send a dangerous message that sticking around past your prime will be rewarded handsomely and when they don't get that pay-out, we might be stuck with angry vets. if he wants 100k for for years, maybe offer 90k for 3-4 to see if that does it. hell,if we win silverware this year, he might just be reminded of the other reasons for sticking with the club!

  4. Anonymous

    Sagna has been loyal while the rest of his generation were selling out. 100K is a fair price for the player he still is and the guidance he can give the youngsters. How much is the continuity worth to the team? SIGN HIM UP…. NOW!!!

  5. Anonymous

    The problem with Sagna is his versatility, his reliability and his ability. I like Carl a lot but he is very one dimentional – he runs or passes down the wing and he crosses…all good and such but when the down the line route is blocked he is stymied…he turns around and looks for Per. I have yet to see him make a decent square pass and continue his run – in other words Carl doesn't get triangles. Now with a team like Arsenal that is a problem because we play triangles. The other thing he cant do is give the WS1 another outlet like Sagna does. Carl also doesn't get heading. Not to say he wont but he needs to get it soon or other more skillful players will over take him. So back to Bac!What you are paying for is experience + skill + character. Compare a Bacary stinker say with a Nacho Monreal Stinker – right no comparison. Even when Sagna has an off day it is still pretty good or he has come up against a left winger so hot on the day that you would need 2 fullbacks to contain them. (Think Hazard on a good day) Arsenal should give him a resigning bonus – say 5M it would cost us that for a like for like replacement and an incrementally sliding scale of say 100K in year one 90K in year 2 and 80K in year 3 with a provision of bonuses that reward appearances in the last 2 years. By that I mean if he is playing so well he keeps anyone else out of the position he deserves the money. acary

  6. Anonymous

    give him 100k, he's deffo worth it. as he gets older he can move to CB and have Jenks or Bellerin next to him for in-match mentoring! other guys are gonna cost more and need time to figure things out, even Coleman (not that Everton will sell him to us).

  7. Anonymous

    I hope he will stay. Wenger always talk about loyality and he called Dennis Bergkamp a player that was royal, now it's time to prove loyality will pay off, Sanga is a royal player he has shown many times on the pitch or off the pitch, he deserve to get what he want.

  8. Anonymous

    I believe that, had they given Sagna a raise over the past few years (one of his “sore points”), a smaller increase now would be more tolerable. The difficulty in (miserly) Wenger's view must be whether a long-term deal is worthwhile given the (high) probability that in a few years Sagna will have slowed-down and would be less-effective. Sagna seems to be focused as much on the weekly salary as the length of contract. Thus, two years at $100K with lessened possibility of that much by then is less appealing than 3 to 4 years of $100K or even $90K. It was my understanding that Arsenal offered one or two years but not at $100K, thus setting up the situation they now find themselves in. Maybe, rather than a straight-line salary, they could “front-load” it so that 2 years of $100-110K and then 2 years of $90. It comes to the same and maybe one of those last years, they convert him to a “coach” and move his salary line off the books.All of this assumes, of course, that AW believes he is worth any additional money or does not (egotistically) believe he already has or can sign an equivalent player for $50K.Consider, his (financial) evaluation, for better or worse of Draxler and the strong indication that we will now never see him as an Arsenal player with BM and others now moving in for the kill.


Leave a Reply