Moratti mentioned yesterday that Mancini as a manager is much more forceful about what he wants in the transfer market, and usually gets exactly what he wants. So maybe we gave Branca too much credit for Mancini's first stint at Inter.
But this made me think about how we have wasted precious money in 2014, because we had a coach who was very different tactically from Mancini. All in all, we committed about Eur 80 million in additional players and coach (fee plus 1 year wages). How much of that money was well spent (I know some of these are loan options, and we can always send them back)? Lets look at the players we bought in 2014, their suitability to Mancio's tactics, and whether Mancio would have agreed to buy them:
1. Hernanes: Wasted. Mancini does not have any role for this kind of a player apart from the occasional AM role, and for that we now have Kovacic and even Shaqiri. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? NO
2. D'Ambrosio: Reasonably suited. Largely because when he was hired, he did not suit Mazzarri's tactics AT ALL, so Inter had got that completely wrong at that time. But as it turns out, two wrongs sometimes make a right. Mancio needs proper FBs, and D'Ambrosio fits. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? MAYBE
3. Vidic: Reasonably suited. Inter took a punt on him, largely influenced by "marketability" reasons, and Vidic never suited Mazzarri's 3 man formation. But with Mancio, he may have a chance. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? MAYBE
4. Dodo: Wasted. A perfect Mazzarri wingback, he is of little use to Mancio. Dodo either needs to develop his defensive game enough to play as a LB, which is unlikely, or he needs to improve his end product (crosses, assists, goals) to play as a sub winger under Mancio. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? NO
5. Osvaldo: Averagely suited. When in form, Osvaldo has the ability to suit any formation, but it is very obvious that if Mancio was the coach in the summer, we would have focused on a winger instead. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? NO
6. Medel: Averagely suited. A perfect DM for Mazzarri, but Mancini usually goes for DMs who can also play as a B2B or CM when in possession due to his preference for the double pivot. His work rate and reasonably decent passing may yet endear him to Mancio, but he is not the ideal player for the new coach. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? UNLIKELY
7. M'Vila: Reasonably suited. The modern DM/B2B, he suits all formations. Probably more suited to Mancio's style than Mazzarri's. However, for Mancio this role requires someone with the best work rate, and M'Vila's fitness and attitude are a big question mark. I doubt Mancio would have picked him. Would Mancio have agreed to buy him? UNLIKELY
Every new coach will need some different players, but if you hire a coach who is completely different tactically, then a lot of the investment you made in players before will be wasted. It is very possible that out of these 7 players we invested in 2014, we will let 5 go now (M'Vila, Dodo, Osvaldo, Vidic, and maybe Hernanes). This is one of the main reasons why I am usually against the changing of coach, and why I feel Mancini should get at least 3 years to build a team whatever the results.
So far, clearly Mancio is having his way in the transfer market, and that is how it should be. It will all be wasted if Mancio does not stay with us for at least 3 years, and in our situation, we cannot afford to keep wasting so much money.
I hope Thohir gives Mancini a lot of leeway, even if the results start going against us. In Mancio we trust.