Luciano Spalletti

n4l said:

The only "gap" to fill was icardi. Conte did not have use for perisic. Please don't revise history. He tried perisic as LWB, RWB, and as one of the CFs in pre-season. He had no need for Perisic, just like he had no need for Politano. Ninja played practically injured after his injury to Milan in the first part of the season. Conte also did not have use for him or wanted him.

Regarding money spent. We can't run away from the money that's being spent now. We don't have any SA anymore where we needed to break even EVERY YEAR. Even if we wash away the lukaku money (80M specific player that Conte requested), we've invested a lot, not only in transfer fees but also salaries. We didn't want to/didn't give icardi a raise beyond 5M, yet had no problem paying lukaku almost 9 and eriksen near 10. Godin at 6 and so on. FFS, we just confirmed Hakimi for 40M+ straight cash. We splashed 80M cash for lukaku. We'll be spending 40M+ cash for barella. The most cash we spent with Spallo is 24M and he only got 1 of those each season (vecino, ninja)..I mean...come on guys. This isn't a Conte v Spallo thing. This is just reality.

Conte is playing with MANY of spallo's players, plus added new players. Period. We are also paying Conte near 3x what we paid Spallo. We also had to pay Spallo and staff 25M+ just to fire them.

You simply cannot runaway from the investment made into Conte that we simply did not do with Spallo. That is indisputable and quite frankly, retarded we're even arguing/discussing this.

Click to expand...

We also spent 25m for Lautaro in Spalletti's second season. The total cost of Politano also was 25m so you could count him as well.

n4l said:

The most cash we spent with Spallo is 24M and he only got 1 of those each season (vecino, ninja)..I mean...come on guys.

Click to expand...

come on stop this I know you love exaggerating things just to prove hiring Conte was mistake, like even if a referee doesn't point to the spot where he sees no penalty against us, you still claim that the penalty was legit and that we were lucky to escape - just little tricks to bring a shadow over the victory Conte achieved

but come on, we spent pretty much amount of money for the players he wanted, also don't compare the market of the 17-18, with the last year's exorbitant prices. He didn't improve in his next year, so we parted our ways, what you guys are moaning about I don't get it? you wanted a 3rd season with him just to witness another year full of struggles, soap operas? we wanted to make the further step and Spalletti just doesn't fit the level why is it so hard to grasp.

Il Drago said:

We also spent 25m for Lautaro in Spalletti's second season. The total cost of Politano also was 25m so you could count him as well.

Click to expand...

Right. And now we are buying those players (lazaro, sensi, eriksen), as well as 40, 50, and 80M players. No difference there.

Carry on guys. Conte is god. He didn't get more investment and is exceeding expectations. Got it.


Over and out.

Spallo was idiot enough to let exchange a brilliant to a stone, so that's another minus to his karma

n4l said:

Right. And now we are buying those players (lazaro and sensi), as well as 40, 50, and 80M players. No difference there.

Carry on guys. Conte is god. He didn't get more investment and is exceeding expectations. Got it.


Over and out.

Click to expand...

I only mentioned facts. Who said Conte is God? I didn't even want Conte and I am still very disappointed with this season progress but there's no need to exaggerate in order to find excuses for Spalletti. He had a good first season but his second one was very disappointing. He was satisfied with our mercato (his words), he failed in Europe with qualification entirely in our hands, he lost the dressing room and had a bad relationship with the management, there was no progress in our game and we secured top 4 in the last minutes of the season once again. Spalletti simply had to go. Whether Conte is the right coach for Inter and if he has succeeded so far is an entirely different matter.

n4l said:

Right. And now we are buying those players (lazaro, sensi, eriksen), as well as 40, 50, and 80M players. No difference there.

Carry on guys. Conte is god. He didn't get more investment and is exceeding expectations. Got it.


Over and out.

Click to expand...

Right, so according to transfer market website, this season we spent 158m. As you said, take lukaku out as a direct replacement for icardi and that is 100m.

Last season, we spent just under 90m.
Season before that, we spent 123m.

Thats just the totals on that website, I've not gone through and broke down permanent etc, so the likes of politano even is included in this seasons costs.

OK, so not much difference. Now let's stop this silly narrative.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/int...46/plus/0?saison_id=2019&pos=&detailpos=&w_s=

Harpsabu said:

Right, so according to transfer market website, this season we spent 158m. As you said, take lukaku out as a direct replacement for icardi and that is 100m.

Last season, we spent just under 90m.
Season before that, we spent 123m.

Thats just the totals on that website, I've not gone through and broke down permanent etc, so the likes of politano even is included in this seasons costs.

OK, so not much difference. Now let's stop this silly narrative.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/int...46/plus/0?saison_id=2019&pos=&detailpos=&w_s=

Click to expand...

Net spending is what matters, and its not remotely close (100m this season, 15m last season)

PHM1605 said:

Net spending is what matters, and its not remotely close (100m this season, 15m last season)

Click to expand...

Yeah but it isn't Contes fault we could only loan icardi, perisic, nianggolan, politano etc. That's on the management. The spend is similar. By that logic, we should have spent 200m for conte

n4l said:

The only "gap" to fill was icardi. Conte did not have use for perisic. Please don't revise history. He tried perisic as LWB, RWB, and as one of the CFs in pre-season. He had no need for Perisic, just like he had no need for Politano. Ninja played practically injured after his injury to Milan in the first part of the season. Conte also did not have use for him or wanted him.

Regarding money spent. We can't run away from the money that's being spent now. We don't have any SA anymore where we needed to break even EVERY YEAR. Even if we wash away the lukaku money (80M specific player that Conte requested), we've invested a lot, not only in transfer fees but also salaries. We didn't want to/didn't give icardi a raise beyond 5M, yet had no problem paying lukaku almost 9 and eriksen near 10. Godin at 6 and so on. FFS, we just confirmed Hakimi for 40M+ straight cash. We splashed 80M cash for lukaku. We'll be spending 40M+ cash for barella. The most cash we spent with Spallo is 24M and he only got 1 of those each season (vecino, ninja)..I mean...come on guys. This isn't a Conte v Spallo thing. This is just reality.

Conte is playing with MANY of spallo's players, plus added new players. Period. We are also paying Conte near 3x what we paid Spallo. We also had to pay Spallo and staff 25M+ just to fire them.

You simply cannot runaway from the investment made into Conte that we simply did not do with Spallo. That is indisputable and quite frankly, retarded we're even arguing/discussing this.

Click to expand...

You obviously didn't understand what i meant.

Ridiculous discussion. The level of investment we've done during last year's time is completely different to investments made during Spalletti era. I don't understand how can anyone even argue this.

And I was totally for sacking Spalletti and still am. He lost the locker room so exit was the only choice. But twisting the facts is just something which needs to be cleared.

it would have been interesting in some ways to see what we would have done transfer wise with spalletti - I dont know if we would have brought as much youth in or trusted Bastoni. I know, I know, we were linked to Sensi and Barella before Spalletti, but there's no guarantee we would have signed them, and apparently it was a vote of confidence from Conte that prevented Bastoni from going out on loan again this season

Bastoni wouldn't have been essential to have in 2-CB setup as Godin was signed already. Anyway yeah, it's an interesting parallel universe scenario to think of. Barella was also pretty much booked. Striker situation would have been the most interesting one since Spalletti surely wouldn't have demanded Lukaku.

.h. said:

it would have been interesting in some ways to see what we would have done transfer wise with spalletti - I dont know if we would have brought as much youth in or trusted Bastoni. I know, I know, we were linked to Sensi and Barella before Spalletti, but there's no guarantee we would have signed them, and apparently it was a vote of confidence from Conte that prevented Bastoni from going out on loan again this season

Click to expand...

Bastoni would probably have been loaned out, true, but it makes sense. Skriniar, De Vrij, Godin, Ranocchia. Bastoni would have just been an extra guy for training.

Barella would have come either way.

Sensi is an odd one as we opted for him mostly because we ended up with him due to fielding 3 MCs. With Spalletti he'd be weak in a 2 man midfield and he could only play as trequartista. I doubt he'd be an option for that, but we still may have pounced if he was available.

Perisic would have remained for sure. If there wasn't a situation between Marotta and Radja, he'd also remain.

That means we'd be shopping for wingers and possibly a striker to rotate with Lautaro up front since Spalletti was pretty adamant on his 4-2-3-1. We'd possibly have Chiesa on the right and Alexis Sanchez would still be an option but for a rotation role with Perisic. Politano would have been a rotation piece on the right, so I guess Chiesa-Politano with Perisic-Sanchez. Lautaro up front but cannot really think of a name as cover. Or maybe we'd go for an older player as Dzeko [no clue on his relationship with Spallo, but he was discussed in 2018 as well] as a stop gap until Lautaro becomes first team ready (because as a lone striker he wasn't really ready). Even Higuain from Juventus could have been possible I guess since our management rates him.

We'd probably also go shopping for a right back and a left back but cannot really think of names here. We'd still be in the race for Eriksen in January so we'd basically have something like Barella-Brozovic with Eriksen in front of them, Radja possibly as his backup, Vecino as a back up for sure. Gagliardini and Candreva were on the transfer block, Conte requested that they remained. D'Ambrosio on the other hand was safe under Spalletti and Conte was willing to offload him, but he remained.

The gist of it is this, now there are some details in positions that could have changed, but I reckon Chiesa would have cost us 70m, possibly with Gagliardini and Dalbert going the other way or something to reduce the fee.

.h. said:

it would have been interesting in some ways to see what we would have done transfer wise with spalletti - I dont know if we would have brought as much youth in or trusted Bastoni. I know, I know, we were linked to Sensi and Barella before Spalletti, but there's no guarantee we would have signed them, and apparently it was a vote of confidence from Conte that prevented Bastoni from going out on loan again this season

Click to expand...

A player we would have certainly got if Spalletti had stayed is Steven Bergwijn, ex PSV winger who ended up at Tottenham in January. It was rumoured we had an agreement for him but suddenly Inter stopped everything. I guess it was the moment they decided to hire Conte. There were also plenty of rumours for Danilo, ex Man City rb who ended up at Juventus. There were also rumours in France about Nicolas Pepe, ex Lille winger who ended up at Arsenal but i don't know how seriously we should take them. Barella was a certainty since the previous summer but for the other positions it's anyone's guess.

Barella, Eriksen and Lukaku would not have arrived, big players dont sign for coaches like Spalletti

Bastoni would have been loaned out

Esposito would be playing for the primavera

Aguome would be playing for the primavera

Chiesa would have been signed

we would be playing for EL spots.

Lol, Barella was coming either way, stop saying BS. Your claim that Eriksen came because of the coach is laughable since the coach was the one annoyed by the transfer and was delaying it, while Eriksen came despite of who the coach was, especially one not known for using players like him. As for Lukaku, so what?

Esposito was introduced by Spalletti into the first team. So was Agoume. I get that he was quite hesitant but he was in no position to test kids for the first team.

If this was his second season, we'd be going for the Scudetto. But since the 2nd season included that disaster with PSV and whatever followed, the issue is null. You have to judge Spalletti's effect on the team, not how we'd do if he was around because there's a legit reason why he's still not around.

If Spalletti was brought this season, I'm pretty sure we'd still be in the Champions League now.

brehme1989 said:

Lol, Barella was coming either way, stop saying BS. Your claim that Eriksen came because of the coach is laughable since the coach was the one annoyed by the transfer and was delaying it, while Eriksen came despite of who the coach was, especially one not known for using players like him. As for Lukaku, so what?

Esposito was introduced by Spalletti into the first team. So was Agoume. I get that he was quite hesitant but he was in no position to test kids for the first team.

If this was his second season, we'd be going for the Scudetto. But since the 2nd season included that disaster with PSV and whatever followed, the issue is null.

If Spalletti was brought this season, I'm pretty sure we'd still be in the Champions League now.

Click to expand...

stop saying BS

At this stage the only difference between Conte and Spalletti is that Conte paid for hair transplants whilst Spalletti accepted his baldness.


They're both stubborn Italian coaches that underachieved.

Nyall said:

At this stage the only difference between Conte and Spalletti is that Conte paid for hair transplants whilst Spalletti accepted his baldness.


They're both stubborn Italian coaches that underachieved.

Click to expand...

XD

brehme1989 said:

Lol, Barella was coming either way, stop saying BS. Your claim that Eriksen came because of the coach is laughable since the coach was the one annoyed by the transfer and was delaying it, while Eriksen came despite of who the coach was, especially one not known for using players like him. As for Lukaku, so what?

Esposito was introduced by Spalletti into the first team. So was Agoume. I get that he was quite hesitant but he was in no position to test kids for the first team.

If this was his second season, we'd be going for the Scudetto. But since the 2nd season included that disaster with PSV and whatever followed, the issue is null. You have to judge Spalletti's effect on the team, not how we'd do if he was around because there's a legit reason why he's still not around.

If Spalletti was brought this season, I'm pretty sure we'd still be in the Champions League now.

Click to expand...

You're probably mistaking Agoume for someone else. Maybe Karamoh? Agoume officially signed Inter in July so Spalletti couldn't have introduced him to the first team.