Inter Waste Eur 80 Million in 2014?

[Bluenine]

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.

 

[Tsuna]

i see my thanks has influenced u to make a whole separate post about it

 

[Dylan]

D'Ambrosio you could argue is the only capable fullback in the squad.

 

[.h.]

Medel is a classic Mancini player.. Remember the 4-3-1-2? Vieira cambiasso zanetti?

 

[Lyran]

Agree with Browha... Medel and D'ambro suits Mancini very well!

Even Dodo can be usefull to Mancini, he's still young and can improve in many areas, specially in defense.

 

[chipschups]

Medel is a classic Mancini player.. Remember the 4-3-1-2? Vieira cambiasso zanetti?

True, I dont see medel have a problem to fit mancio tactics..
after one halftime nightmare when he left out medel on bench againts lazio..
Im pretty sure he wont bench medel againt

For dodo, mancini seen a maxwell 2.0 on him
And seems he feels dodo not ready yet
Thats why he put him on Lmf at last appereance and the result is failed..

 

[Shaun]

D'ambrosio is one of the the best fullbacks in the league. He's a great buy for any coach. Also, Osvaldo average? The dude's stats this season are utterly fantastic. His goals per minute ratio is amongst the best in the league. I feel the problem that arose with him is that Mancini clearly was trying to build a rapport with Icardi when he first arrived and felt the need to play him as often as possible. Whereas Osvaldo probably felt under-utilised, and he probably was. Especially after his performance against Roma.

I also agree with browha's opinion about Medel being a very typical Mancini player

Also, I don't think Vidic would have been bought on Mancini unless he was going to sell Rano. When playing a back four having centerbacks that are compatible with each other is very important. I do see Rano-Vidic combo as particularly compatible. I feel Rano, Vidic, Andreolli, and Campagnaro are all somewhat similar to each other. And none are particularly suited with playing with each other in a back four. Leaving Juan in a fortunate situation of becoming of pivotal importance as the only CB with a skillset that is suited to playing with our all our other CBs. Especially when playing the high-line Mancio has been employing. Sadly though he seems to have no confidence in his abilities to play without a 3rd centerback.

 

[Bluenine]

Medel is a classic Mancini player.. Remember the 4-3-1-2? Vieira cambiasso zanetti?

Medel is nothing like the 3 players you mentioned. Cuchu had vision, Vieira had lateral threat, and Zanetti and Medel are like chalk and cheese. Medel is not the kind of holding midfielder Mancio prefers, and he is playing largely due to lack of better alternatives - a hint of that was the Lazio game, where Mancini preferred Kuz+Guarin over Medel. But Medel's work rate and reasonable passing ability make him suitable for Mancio's formation. So like I said, Medel (along with D'Ambrosio) is a player who Mancini will probably keep and adapt to his formation, but if Mancio was our coach last summer, I doubt he would have gone for Medel.

But my above post was more about the other five players where we ended up wasting money.

- - - Updated - - -

D'ambrosio is one of the the best fullbacks in the league. He's a great buy for any coach. Also, Osvaldo average? The dude's stats this season are utterly fantastic.

You misunderstand. I am talking about Mancini's need for Osvaldo is average, because he would have preferred to focus our spend to buy wingers instead. Osvaldo is not average by any means, he was a great fit in Mazzarri's plans, and he has performed much better than most of us expected. But ever since Mancini has come, even before his tantrum against Juve, you could see that he is not as much in Mancio's plans as he was in Mazzarri's. I have now changed "average" to "averagely suited". Hope that explains.

Re D'Ambrosio, we got lucky. We bought a player that was wasted in our coach's plans, Mazzarri had no use for him as he preferred wingbacks, so I disagree that he is a great buy for every coach. He wasn't a great buy for someone who does not play with Fullbacks. But he fits Mancio's plans well, and his performances have improved so much under the new coach.

This thread is not about how good each player is, but about who suits which formation and style of play, and how a dramatic coaching change impact our new buys.

 

[Handoyo]

Really funny how just a win against Genoa has sparked so much optimism in the club, fans, coaches, players and staff alike. I just hope we don't crash and burn next week.

 

[Shaun]

I think D'ambrosio suited Mazzarri's plans too. He was just injured for the first part of the season. Either way we're very fortunate to have him

 

[qb4ever_2k]

Pointless post, with your argument, Kolarov, Aguero, Yaya Toure, David Silva were not Mancini player either.

The point is there is no player who is perfectly suited for a coach, both the buy coach and the player will need to adapt. And Inter or any other club can not buy players in preparation for the next coach the have.

And yes, I understand that changing coach is more costly than just paying the new one's salary.

 

[.h.]

It was the balance of skills in those three I was highlighting and I think mwdel offers a lot that Mancini does like. Hence he's been playing a lot lately.
Dmabro is definitely a Mancini style signing, and given his issues with lb at inter last time I think Dodo isn't far off either. He needs work but he will get there.
Even Osvaldo I think Mancini would have signed, and vidic is the mould of cordiba or Samuel who made great careers under him.

 

[Wings]

First off, is there a reason you always repost your long posts in this section?

Second, while I agree with you on principle (that our management does not have enough vision when conducting transfers), I'll have to give mgmt some leeway here. First, as others have noted, I don't see what is particularly not-Mancini about most of these players, particularly D'Ambrosio or Medel or Osvaldo.

Which brings me to my next point. What exactly is a Mancini player? What type of player does he require to implement his style of football? You mention that it would've been obvious to buy wingers, but when did Mancini use out-and-out wingers before? Not at Inter, and the only ones I can remember him buying at Man City were Adam Johnson and Scott Sinclair. It's actually very surprising to me that he's turned to 4-2-3-1 with wingers.

For me, there's been two consistencies about Mancini's purchases. First, big names (Ibra, Toure, Aguero). Second, his central midfielders have had plenty of physicality, which I think is part of his desire to have a solid, strong defensive base. But that seems to me about it.

 

[Bluenine]

It's usually the other way round, I usually write a post, then decide it has some legs, so I write a larger article here, then repost this to the original post. Silly, I know.

What characteristics of each player are not suitable to Mancini, that we have already discussed. I guess we agree to disagree there.

What exactly is a Mancini player - that is a good question. What I mean by "Mancini player" is someone who suits his current tactical plans - coaches grow and their tactics evolve with time, so we cannot just go by the past as a template. We also have to look at the present. From here on, let me indulge in more speculative opinion and basically expand on what you said:

1. Fullbacks. IMO Mancio likes physically strong, attacking FBs who have a developed end product (crosses, assists, goals). Maicon & Kolarov are good examples. Which is why I think D'Ambrosio is reasonably suited. Dodo lacks that end product and the physicality.

2. Central midfield: I agree Mancio likes physically strong midfielders, but to add to that, I think he prefers these midfielders to be more than just destroyers. They need to be B2B or have a good passing games/vision as well. I think Yaya Toure and vieira are good examples.

3. Wingers/AM. I agree that this is something Mancio evolved towards during his city stint. I don't think he is averse to using AMs as wingers either, like he did with silva and before that stankovc at times. However, I doubt the fact that our two most expensive players (pre shaqiri) are both AMs who cannot play on the wing is ideal for Mancio. I have a feeling one of them will eat a lot of bench time (unless both of them perform awesome, which is unlikely)

Anyways, this is of course just my opinion .

 

[.h.]

I dont think thats true on full backs. Maivon is an exception to the rule.. Maxwell, favalli, chivu... A lot of his full backs have been very defensive players.

 

[ScottishInterista]

Well zabaleta, kolarov and clichy are all quite attacking full backs

 

[J..]

Ah Favalli. Good memories.

 

[Pajo]

Well zabaleta, kolarov and clichy are all quite attacking full backs

Kolarov and Zabaleta yeah, but Clichy is actually good defender but crap going forward.

 

[Big Willy]

D'ambrosio is one of the the best fullbacks in the league.

Poor Serie A.

 

[Wings]

It's usually the other way round, I usually write a post, then decide it has some legs, so I write a larger article here, then repost this to the original post. Silly, I know.

What characteristics of each player are not suitable to Mancini, that we have already discussed. I guess we agree to disagree there.

What exactly is a Mancini player - that is a good question. What I mean by "Mancini player" is someone who suits his current tactical plans - coaches grow and their tactics evolve with time, so we cannot just go by the past as a template. We also have to look at the present. From here on, let me indulge in more speculative opinion and basically expand on what you said:

That is a good point, that managers can evolve. I was just questioning what exactly Mancini's tactical plans are. What kind of football is he looking for? Is he even looking for a specific style of football? I guess we will find out soonish.