Should Arsenal Hand Theo Walcott a New Contract?
Hailing from Southampton's famed youth academy, Theo Walcott had several choices after electing to move clubs in January 2006.
The London trio of Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur were all interested in the Stanmore-born attacker, as noted by the Independent's Nick Harris, and the then-16-year-old chose Arsenal for an eventual £9 million transfer fee—per Jeremy Wilson of the Telegraph.
TOP NEWS
Madrid Fines Players $590K 😲
'Mbappé Out' Petition Gaining Steam 😳
Star-Studded World Cup Ad 🤩
Three contracts, nine seasons, 76 goals and 302 appearances later, Walcott's north London career is rapidly approaching a crossroad season.
Having one year left on his current deal, the England international must decide whether the Emirates is the best place for him to continue. Arsene Wenger has crafted one of the best attack-minded clubs in European football, meaning competition for places is immense.
Walcott, should he accept the challenge of holding off Arsenal's depth at winger and centre-forward, has a second hurdle in his way: Does the club want him past 2015/16?
It would seem an obvious, affirmative answer, but no agreement has yet been struck—despite Walcott's late-season burst.
Wenger, via Sky Sports, told the media after his sixth FA Cup title:
"I don’t see why [Walcott] should not be here next season. He is a player who was out for a year—January [2014] to January [2015]—and it took him a while to come back to his best.
I think he is now at an age where it is very interesting. He now has experience, he's at his peak physically and it’s time to stay with us.
"
Arsenal's active leader in appearances (57 more than Tomas Rosicky) and goals (18 more than Olivier Giroud), Walcott netted a hat-trick in his last Premier League outing, then opened the scoring in the 2015 FA Cup final against Aston Villa.
Handing the 26-year-old a long-term contract should appear a formality, but Arsenal may be playing a different game. A cruciate ligament injury suffered in 2013/14, combined with groin issues in 2014/15, may have the Gunners reluctant to pin Walcott down for multiple years without witnessing a full season.
Fully returning to Arsenal's squad late December, Walcott—included 30 times on Wenger's teamsheets—has played just 730 minutes in all competitions. The rapid Englishman has not played a complete 90 minutes for the north Londoners since 1 January 2014 vs. Cardiff City.
Possessing all the makings of a saga (with Walcott wanting to sign immediately and Arsenal waiting to see what they have before committing), the club could risk alienating their long-serving goal threat by not acting promptly.
Does Walcott deserve a new contract this summer? In a 2014/15 meritocracy—no.
Deserve is a loaded word in football. Sometimes the best team loses and they deserve points. Sometimes a player deserves more statistical output for the diligence they show. The term is used for a myriad of situations. Walcott, simply by his injury status, is not deserving of a new deal this window, but risking his loss is too great a gamble for Arsenal.
Should Walcott be given a new contract this summer? Projecting forward—absolutely.
The 26-year-old's last extension came in January 2013 during a 43-appearance, 21-goal season—one could easily announce his deservedness; this renewal, though, would be based more on Walcott's age, time served and the potential Wenger feels exists, not necessarily last season's merit.
Sky Sports wrote after the Gunners' 2014/15 FA Cup parade: "Asked by Sky Sports News HQ if he thought an Arsenal extension was in the offing, Walcott said: 'I am sure things will get resolved.'"
The timing of a new contract will likely depend on the 26-year-old's ability to confirm his injury demons have been shaken. At that time—with both player and manager currently hopeful—expect a deal to be negotiated and signed before sand runs through the proverbial hourglass.
Stats via WhoScored.com; transfer fees via Soccerbase where not noted.
.jpg?w=600 "Colts Release Kenny Moore")
