Mercato Team (Ausilio, Marotta, & Co.) and Strategies

ADRossi

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Jul 17, 2010
Messages
20,048
Likes
22,984
10 years of FIF
Forum Supporter
This might sound like a very radical idea, but y'alls consider this:

Juve already got Higuain, Benatia, Alves & Pjanic. Add that to the already boss of a team they have. Juve will be fuckin feared, man. I'm tellin' ya.
2006 & that whole calciopoli stuff was a decade ago. Juve now have an own stadium & a clean, good team. They boss in every aspect, they have CL football... What I'm tryin' to say is... let's just put all these differences aside & become Juve fans tbh :proud:

Inter is just hopeless as shit, man. We changing owners now every couple years, we don't do jack shit in mercato. I mean why stick to yo ugly ass of a disappointment girlfriend, when you could be with a super model? I'm just sayin'...

Just think about fellas :proud: & as far as I know there isn't a forzajuveforums just yet!

tumblr_llcuj3vt5n1qagjn7o1_500.gif
 

Shark

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
6,165
Likes
1,830
Favorite Player
Adriano
10 years of FIF
Yay Lionheart is back!! You forgot your signature "have this D son 8===D"


Wait, you're still an inter fan? Lol, we've all moved on to other clubs. I'm supporting grasshoppers zürich now.
 

JJM

morepoststhanu
La Grande Inter
Joined
Aug 10, 2007
Messages
40,944
Likes
112
Favorite Player
ur mom
Old username
icardiscores
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
This might sound like a very radical idea, but y'alls consider this:

Juve already got Higuain, Benatia, Alves & Pjanic. Add that to the already boss of a team they have. Juve will be fuckin feared, man. I'm tellin' ya.
2006 & that whole calciopoli stuff was a decade ago. Juve now have an own stadium & a clean, good team. They boss in every aspect, they have CL football... What I'm tryin' to say is... let's just put all these differences aside & become Juve fans tbh :proud:

Inter is just hopeless as shit, man. We changing owners now every couple years, we don't do jack shit in mercato. I mean why stick to yo ugly ass of a disappointment girlfriend, when you could be with a super model? I'm just sayin'...

Just think about fellas :proud: & as far as I know there isn't a forzajuveforums just yet!

CkwqFxTWEAEvMlA.jpg

giphy.gif
 

Jane The Virgin

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Aug 30, 2010
Messages
4,288
Likes
1,021
Favorite Player
Barella
Old username
the dude
10 years of FIF
That last sentence aside, for us becoming juve fans. Lionheart nailed it.


Juve comes from serie b, and in 10 years is 20 times the team they were before calciopoli and 100 times the team that we are now.


its so simple that it becomes tragic how dumb our team is...
 

enjoy

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
6,731
Likes
1
Favorite Player
Christian Vieri
This might sound like a very radical idea, but y'alls consider this:

Juve already got Higuain, Benatia, Alves & Pjanic. Add that to the already boss of a team they have. Juve will be fuckin feared, man. I'm tellin' ya.
2006 & that whole calciopoli stuff was a decade ago. Juve now have an own stadium & a clean, good team. They boss in every aspect, they have CL football... What I'm tryin' to say is... let's just put all these differences aside & become Juve fans tbh :proud:

Inter is just hopeless as shit, man. We changing owners now every couple years, we don't do jack shit in mercato. I mean why stick to yo ugly ass of a disappointment girlfriend, when you could be with a super model? I'm just sayin'...

Just think about fellas :proud: & as far as I know there isn't a forzajuveforums just yet!

 

KaiokenFlash

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,450
Likes
0
Favorite Player
Javier Zanetti
10 years of FIF
Both your comments are spot on, and the truth is somewhere in between.

TL;DR

I've always been against the strategy that certain people, like bandiera for example, want Inter to implement - basically becoming a mid-table team, or second-best team in Dortmund fashion, by developing talent and then selling it to the highest bidder. In BVB's scenario usually the highest bidder is their direct rivals, and players want to be sold and go there precisely because of the club's strategy - they see clearly that the club has no ambition to close the gap and contest the league "for real". Even now, when they got like 40+M for Mkhitaryan what did they do? They bought like 5 promising kids for that money. Yeah, in two-three years hopefully you'll have not one, but maybe even a couple of proper players, but don't expect to win any silverware anytime soon.

I've always wanted to see clever purchasing strategy, no matter the cost actually. Even if we spend 60M on a player, if the move is smart money isn't lost, you can consider it invested at worst, because the deal with proper players is that even if they aren't performing they still have a high perceived value - players like Pato, for example, would still go for 10-15M, although their careers are over for big football, yet they still get chances and attention from big clubs, as desperate for a miracle as us.

One signing that fits my dream model is Banega, I have no idea how we managed to get this guy, as he was a wet dream of mine for the past couple years. It's a very Marottaesque transfer, I'm sad to admit - zero money for a prime quality player. The dude even skipped on CL football with Sevilla and I'm extremely impressed with that sacrifice.

Erkin, for example, is exactly the transfer we should try to avoid. So-so player, who we only got because he's out of contract and he's decent. We could've just passed on buying anyone and continue with D'Ambrosio and Nagatomo. If we could squeeze some money - invest in one proper back, that has a chance to actually stick around more than six months, now or in the winter. Although I'm not quick to write him out since I haven't seen him play that much.

Anyway, I'm happy to even be linked with players that cost more than 25M, like Gabriel Jesus or Joao Mario, even if those are just rumours. Don't forget that those 25M were the absolute maximum for us the last couple of years for transfers and at the end, we got what we paid for - the Alvarez and Shaqiri sort of players, the "almost, but not quite". The lottery type fringe players, that no one else really wanted, and we hoped for some magic to happen for them to become world-class overnight so they can single-handedly win us games, as we've constructed a whole team of mediocre players. I'm referring to Mazzarri times, things are getting better with Mancini, and I'm giving him credit for that. At least, even if he buys in bulk and sells them in months, what's left is of quality that slowly builds a solid foundation for a proper team in the near future.

In those last couple of years, we've missed on so much more than revenue. We play shit football with the aforementioned so-so players and on top of that, this strategy didn't win us anything, not even a qualification for CL. What's sad is that we still spent quite a lot, both for fees and wages.

So, enough with the half measures. Like our childish dream to swap Mancini with anyone, really anyone. Disregarding myopically that this anyone, Prandelli for example, would probably be as bad, or worse than Mancini, if it's not a real and proven coach like Simeone. I think that the Chinese also get that - if they really vetoed transfers like Toure and Candreva and their reported willingness to not only get quality youth players, but spend what's needed to get the best out of the crop. So, hopefully the winds are changing and we can expect good things to come our way.
An excellent post. You've shown a perspective I havnt really appreciated with regards to transfer strategy.

I agree with the notion that spending big, on the right players sends messages to our better quality players in regards to our intention for the up coming season. Just look at Higuain, and his somewhat show of being unsettled in view of Napoli's transfer targets.

I hope the Chinese ownership continue investing in Transfer's like Caprari, high reward low risk. Whilst perusing the likes of G.Jesus and more seasoned players such as J.Mario
 

Armes

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
4,792
Likes
341
Favorite Player
Ronaldo L.N.D.L
10 years of FIF
This might sound like a very radical idea, but y'alls consider this:

Juve already got Higuain, Benatia, Alves & Pjanic. Add that to the already boss of a team they have. Juve will be fuckin feared, man. I'm tellin' ya.
2006 & that whole calciopoli stuff was a decade ago. Juve now have an own stadium & a clean, good team. They boss in every aspect, they have CL football... What I'm tryin' to say is... let's just put all these differences aside & become Juve fans tbh :proud:

Inter is just hopeless as shit, man. We changing owners now every couple years, we don't do jack shit in mercato. I mean why stick to yo ugly ass of a disappointment girlfriend, when you could be with a super model? I'm just sayin'...

Just think about fellas :proud: & as far as I know there isn't a forzajuveforums just yet!

Don't compare Ds with Wallace. He a bad influence boy.
 

Harpsabu

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Jun 19, 2011
Messages
8,307
Likes
5,818
Favorite Player
Diego Milito
10 years of FIF
Im sure Lionheart is trolling... i really really hope its trolling
 

kameru

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,214
Likes
0
Favorite Player
R9
10 years of FIF
:awwyeah: it's everybody right anyway, to be or not to be an Interista
 

bandiera

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
4,642
Likes
155
Both your comments are spot on, and the truth is somewhere in between.

TL;DR

I've always been against the strategy that certain people, like bandiera for example, want Inter to implement - basically becoming a mid-table team, or second-best team in Dortmund fashion, by developing talent and then selling it to the highest bidder. In BVB's scenario usually the highest bidder is their direct rivals, and players want to be sold and go there precisely because of the club's strategy - they see clearly that the club has no ambition to close the gap and contest the league "for real". Even now, when they got like 40+M for Mkhitaryan what did they do? They bought like 5 promising kids for that money. Yeah, in two-three years hopefully you'll have not one, but maybe even a couple of proper players, but don't expect to win any silverware anytime soon.

I've always wanted to see clever purchasing strategy, no matter the cost actually. Even if we spend 60M on a player, if the move is smart money isn't lost, you can consider it invested at worst, because the deal with proper players is that even if they aren't performing they still have a high perceived value - players like Pato, for example, would still go for 10-15M, although their careers are over for big football, yet they still get chances and attention from big clubs, as desperate for a miracle as us.

One signing that fits my dream model is Banega, I have no idea how we managed to get this guy, as he was a wet dream of mine for the past couple years. It's a very Marottaesque transfer, I'm sad to admit - zero money for a prime quality player. The dude even skipped on CL football with Sevilla and I'm extremely impressed with that sacrifice.

Erkin, for example, is exactly the transfer we should try to avoid. So-so player, who we only got because he's out of contract and he's decent. We could've just passed on buying anyone and continue with D'Ambrosio and Nagatomo. If we could squeeze some money - invest in one proper back, that has a chance to actually stick around more than six months, now or in the winter. Although I'm not quick to write him out since I haven't seen him play that much.

Anyway, I'm happy to even be linked with players that cost more than 25M, like Gabriel Jesus or Joao Mario, even if those are just rumours. Don't forget that those 25M were the absolute maximum for us the last couple of years for transfers and at the end, we got what we paid for - the Alvarez and Shaqiri sort of players, the "almost, but not quite". The lottery type fringe players, that no one else really wanted, and we hoped for some magic to happen for them to become world-class overnight so they can single-handedly win us games, as we've constructed a whole team of mediocre players. I'm referring to Mazzarri times, things are getting better with Mancini, and I'm giving him credit for that. At least, even if he buys in bulk and sells them in months, what's left is of quality that slowly builds a solid foundation for a proper team in the near future.

In those last couple of years, we've missed on so much more than revenue. We play shit football with the aforementioned so-so players and on top of that, this strategy didn't win us anything, not even a qualification for CL. What's sad is that we still spent quite a lot, both for fees and wages.

So, enough with the half measures. Like our childish dream to swap Mancini with anyone, really anyone. Disregarding myopically that this anyone, Prandelli for example, would probably be as bad, or worse than Mancini, if it's not a real and proven coach like Simeone. I think that the Chinese also get that - if they really vetoed transfers like Toure and Candreva and their reported willingness to not only get quality youth players, but spend what's needed to get the best out of the crop. So, hopefully the winds are changing and we can expect good things to come our way.

I think the best response to this was already made by N4L a while back. You're thinking about the home run, we should be thinking about getting on base. You're also making a ridiculous amount of logical fallacies.

Bottom line is that we should be making targets and building the best team within our financial constraints. We should try to sign the best player within our budget. Juve could've spent 60 mill on Joao Mario or Andre Gomes, instead they're going with Pjanic for 30. We signed Ranocchia for 20 mill in 2011, Milan signed Thiago Silva for 7 mill in 2009, Juve signed Barzagli for 350k. We spent 13 mill for Guarin, Roma spent the same amount on Pjanic, Juve spent less on Vidal.

Selling your top players is not inherent to developing young players. Spending 25 million is not inherent to getting an Alvarez and a Shaqiri. Not spending under 25 mill is not inherent to not qualifying for CL, mediocre players, and shit football. With your logic I could say we shouldn't spend less than 40 mill because Liverpool spent 40 mill and got Carroll. :lol: You can talk all you want about how Joao Mario is a good player for us but he is out of our budget.

Our "improvements" mean fuck all considering we spent >100 mill after Mazzarri left. 8th and 4th place are two laughable returns with the money and time we've given Mancini.

I've never heard of anyone suggesting we should swap Mancini for "anyone else". Do you think anyone will say that Bandiera should be Inter coach over Mancini for example? No.

And N4L made a good post a while back about how signing proven coaches isn't even a precedent among Europe's top finishing clubs. The "only a proven coach like Simeone if Mancini leaves" argument is just another way to rationalize jerking off to Mancini's trophy cabinet. Trophies and coaching at top clubs are not inherent to being a competent coach. Showing signs of competency AND having a history of winning trophies is awesome but we won't be able to attract anyone like Simeone or Ancelotti in our current state. In your own words Mancini is doing badly here. The only thing relevant is that we can do better.

- - - Updated - - -

An excellent post. You've shown a perspective I havnt really appreciated with regards to transfer strategy.

I agree with the notion that spending big, on the right players sends messages to our better quality players in regards to our intention for the up coming season. Just look at Higuain, and his somewhat show of being unsettled in view of Napoli's transfer targets.

I hope the Chinese ownership continue investing in Transfer's like Caprari, high reward low risk. Whilst perusing the likes of G.Jesus and more seasoned players such as J.Mario

Bottom line is that we should be building the best squad of players we can with the best coach within our financial constraints. Overpaying, underpaying, spending little, spending a lot, top players staying, top players leaving is all irrelevant which makes Wobblz's points all irrelevant. :) If you ignore the financial situation, I could use those points to make an argument for Inter to end up like Roma, Lazio, or even Parma post the early 00s (let alone getting banned from Europe or getting relegated/filing for bankruptcy).

And just for the record, top players leaving for better clubs and Higuain being upset with Napoli not spending lots of money on high profile players does not prove that not spending lots of money on high profile players is inherent to "top players" leaving the club. FFS, think for a second.
 
Last edited:

KaiokenFlash

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,450
Likes
0
Favorite Player
Javier Zanetti
10 years of FIF
I think the best response to this was already made by N4L a while back. You're thinking about the home run, we should be thinking about getting on base. You're also making a ridiculous amount of logical fallacies.

Bottom line is that we should be making targets and building the best team within our financial constraints. We should try to sign the best player within our budget. Juve could've spent 60 mill on Joao Mario or Andre Gomes, instead they're going with Pjanic for 30. We signed Ranocchia for 20 mill in 2011, Milan signed Thiago Silva for 7 mill in 2009, Juve signed Barzagli for 350k. We spent 13 mill for Guarin, Roma spent the same amount on Pjanic, Juve spent less on Vidal.

Developing young players is not inherent to being a selling club, and in any case it's not relevant. Spending 25 million is not inherent to getting an Alvarez and a Shaqiri. Not spending under 25 mill is not inherent to not qualifying for CL, mediocre players, and shit football. With your logic I could say we shouldn't spend less than 40 mill because Liverpool spent 40 mill and got Carroll. :lol: You can talk all you want about how Joao Mario is a good player for us but he is out of our budget.

Our "improvements" mean fuck all considering we spent >100 mill after Mazzarri left. 8th and 4th place are two laughable returns with the money and time we've given Mancini.

I've never heard of anyone suggesting we should swap Mancini for anyone. Do you think anyone will say that Bandiera should be Inter coach over Mancini for example? No.

And N4L made a good post a while back about how signing proven coaches isn't even a precedent among Europe's top finishing clubs. The "only a proven coach like Simeone if Mancini leaves" argument is just another way to rationalize jerking off to Mancini's trophy cabinet. Trophies and coaching at top clubs are not inherent to being a competent coach. Showing signs of competency AND having a history of winning trophies is awesome but we won't be able to attract anyone like Simeone or Ancelotti in our current state. In your own words Mancini is doing badly here. The only thing relevant is that we can do better.

- - - Updated - - -



Bottom line is that we should be building the best squad of players we can with the best coach within our financial constraints. Overpaying, underpaying, spending little, spending a lot, top players staying, top players leaving is all irrelevant which makes Wobblz's points all irrelevant. :) If you ignore the financial situation, I could use those points to make an argument for Inter to end up like Roma, Lazio, or even Parma post the early 00s (let alone getting banned from Europe or getting relegated/filing for bankruptcy).

And just for the record, top players leaving for better clubs and Higuain being upset with Napoli not spending lots of money on high profile players does not prove that not spending lots of money on high profile players is inherent to "top players" leaving the club. FFS, think for a second.
I think it depends on the club in question. Ie for Napoli it's very relevant. Higuain is happy in Naples and with the possible bumper contract this will only add to retaining him. However if Napoli don't invest to atelast try and compete with Juves dominance, it wouldn't be surprising if Higuain wants to leave.

I'm sure Handanovic said something similar along the lines of investing last season. This point made, regardless of any clubs bidding for Handanovic or not. I don't think it's a black/white point but depends on the club/player and circumstances in regards to competition. So there's no need to be patronising. We can have a discussion like adults.
 

bandiera

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
4,642
Likes
155
I think it depends on the club in question. Ie for Napoli it's very relevant. Higuain is happy in Naples and with the possible bumper contract this will only add to retaining him. However if Napoli don't invest to atelast try and compete with Juves dominance, it wouldn't be surprising if Higuain wants to leave.

I'm sure Handanovic said something similar along the lines of investing last season. This point made, regardless of any clubs bidding for Handanovic or not. I don't think it's a black/white point but depends on the club/player and circumstances in regards to competition. So there's no need to be patronising. We can have a discussion like adults.

Reread what I wrote bro. Higuain saying he wants to leave because Napoli aren't spending lots of money on top players does not prove that not spending money on top players inherently means your top players will leave. If you disagree with that, you're creating a causation based on one example, or a correlation at the very best. I also never said it can't depend on the club/player, in fact that's the point I'm making.

And again, the entire argument about top players leaving is irrelevant. We should be focusing on building the best team within our constraints. Everything else is meaningless talk. We can talk big about competing with Juve and spending lots of money to set an example but it has fuck all to do with reality.
 

KaiokenFlash

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,450
Likes
0
Favorite Player
Javier Zanetti
10 years of FIF
Your referring to a point I never made. Read what I wrote. I said that it sends a message to our players in regards to our intention. I didn't say that it'll definitely keep our better players. Nor did I say Higuain will definitely stay if Napoli invest. My post was merely an appreciation of the effect certain transfers have on other players within a club.

Regarding meaningless talk.. I'm not saying the point your making is invalid. But this is a forum. It is not a place where only facts are exchanged. But also thoughts and opinions in regards to transfer strategy. I'm sure you can appreciate that.
 

bandiera

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
4,642
Likes
155
Of course, if I didn't want to exchange ideas about the club I wouldn't come to FIF. And my opinion that it's "meaningless talk" is also an opinion ;)
 

Wobblz

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
9,187
Likes
647
Favorite Player
Baggio
10 years of FIF
I think the best response to this was already made by N4L a while back. You're thinking about the home run, we should be thinking about getting on base. You're also making a ridiculous amount of logical fallacies.
I'm making logical fallacies, while you're kindly returning the favour with blatant cherry-picking and sampling biases.

Bottom line is that we should be making targets and building the best team within our financial constraints. We should try to sign the best player within our budget. Juve could've spent 60 mill on Joao Mario or Andre Gomes, instead they're going with Pjanic for 30. We signed Ranocchia for 20 mill in 2011, Milan signed Thiago Silva for 7 mill in 2009, Juve signed Barzagli for 350k. We spent 13 mill for Guarin, Roma spent the same amount on Pjanic, Juve spent less on Vidal... Spending 25 million is not inherent to getting an Alvarez and a Shaqiri. Not spending under 25 mill is not inherent to not qualifying for CL, mediocre players, and shit football. With your logic I could say we shouldn't spend less than 40 mill because Liverpool spent 40 mill and got Carroll.
lol2.gif
You can talk all you want about how Joao Mario is a good player for us but he is out of our budget.
I agree. I don't believe I said we should be after Suarez or Neymar. Juve hasn't spend on Joao Mario or Andre Gomes (yet), because they can attract better players for less. We can't. Pjanic for example, had a release clause of 38M, you're citing 32M (even 30) because he himself wrote of a large chunk of that sum just to join them. We signed Ranocchia for 20M in 2011, indeed in 2011, when he was regarded by most experts to be better than Bonucci. There are no guarantees. We signed Quaresma for 40 as well, it's easy to make statements in hindsight, and indeed other clubs have done the same 'mistake', or should we say uncalculated gamble on the likes of Carrol. Thiago Silva is the opposite gamble, one that worked well, such as Murillo in our case. That's cherry-picking, the truth is a self-regulated market has some median price for decent talent and that gets only higher. You can choose to bet and hope for the best, as I said we are doing, or you can choose to minimise the negative outcomes of a bet by spending more money for more stable outcomes. Again, there are no guarantees, but we shouldn't expect any silver bullets.

Developing young players is not inherent to being a selling club, and in any case, it's not relevant.
There's nothing bad in developing youth players, but it only gets you so far. It's way-way harder and takes years to develop talent than to buy one, no? The question is, what we aspire to be.

Real, Barca, Bayern produce talent, they incorporate it in their ranks, but they still spend a shit-load to make their teams what they are. Dortmund does the same, at a smaller scale, but when you sell your biggest stars and replace them with five unknown kids it sends the wrong message. Who did Juve, for example, "produce" lately? They usually bet on the best of the best youth they can find, they either buy the cream of foreign talent like Pogba or Dybala, or farm-out top local players like Berardi and Zaza to "developing clubs" and see whether they'll turn out good without any risk of actually playing them. All of this comes from the outside. It's not like they're where they are because they introduced some strict youth system, they just rely on smart transfers. On the contrary, we have better internal youth system than them, but for some reason, we haven't produced any world beaters in the last five years. Maybe because the chances for this to happen are one in a thousand players and each crop from the youth ranks takes 4-5 years to develop until we can judge them. Excuse me, but Benassi and Duncan, to name some, are decent players and nothing more for now.

Our "improvements" mean fuck all considering we spent >100 mill after Mazzarri left. 8th and 4th place are two laughable returns with the money and time we've given Mancini.
Again, it's not about how much we spent, as to how we spent it. I think we both agree. But one thing is for sure, if we spent 10M we'd be far worse.

Moreso, we've been in the green the last two season when it comes to transfers - +£6.63m in 14/15, and +£12.38m in 15/16, so I'm not sure where this 100M spent comes from?

And don't get me started on FFP, it's the bastard child of socialism and football - everyone is equal, but some are more equal than the others.

I've never heard of anyone suggesting we should swap Mancini for anyone. Do you think anyone will say that Bandiera should be Inter coach over Mancini for example? No. And N4L made a good post a while back about how signing proven coaches isn't even a precedent among Europe's top finishing clubs. The "only a proven coach like Simeone if Mancini leaves" argument is just another way to rationalize jerking off to Mancini's trophy cabinet. Trophies and coaching at top clubs are not inherent to being a competent coach. Showing signs of competency AND having a history of winning trophies is awesome but we won't be able to attract anyone like Simeone or Ancelotti in our current state. In your own words Mancini is doing badly here. The only thing relevant is that we can do better.
Actually, I'm reading a lot of names, circulating lately. Let's name some of them, shall we? Prandelli, Pellegrini, Blanc - are they so much better to justify a change of coach yet again, especially in the thick of pre-season? I doubt it. If you have any other genius insights, please elaborate, but I don't see a "safe bet" outside of Simeone right now. We already tried the ballsy way of appointing a prodigy coach in Strama and the "ready for a step-up" coach with a defined game-style in Gasperini and Mazzarri. We all know how that went, so forgive me if I'm sceptical of hearing nobodies linked to the coaching position here. Don't underestimate how much people turn to shit when they sit on our bench, due to pressure or whatever the reason is, I prefer to get someone who has 150% to give, so when he turns to shit for us he'll be at least at a 100%.

And Mancini is doing bad? Well, looking at the front three I see clubs that above all have better players than us. If we had a team that clearly looked better on paper than Napoli or Roma, then I'd be the first to send some shit Mancini's way. He hasn't overperformed, but neither underperformed so much. I think this year's table was a fair reflection of reality.
 

CafeCordoba

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
36,470
Likes
16,800
Favorite Player
Toro, Barella
10 years of FIF
And Mancini is doing bad? Well, looking at the front three I see clubs that above all have better players than us. If we had a team that clearly looked better on paper than Napoli or Roma, then I'd be the first to send some shit Mancini's way. He hasn't overperformed, but neither underperformed so much. I think this year's table was a fair reflection of reality.

Okay, but do we then need the best paid coach in the league to get our team play to reflect the reality? He should overperform for sure, that's why he's paid so handsomely.
 

Wobblz

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
9,187
Likes
647
Favorite Player
Baggio
10 years of FIF
Okay, but do we then need the best paid coach in the league to get our team play to reflect the reality? He should overperform for sure, that's why he's paid so handsomely.
I hate to act like his attorney or something, but the club decided he's the best we can get and I really don't see some other obvious choice they missed on that's guaranteed to overperform in the current circumstances.
 

bandiera

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
4,642
Likes
155
Incoming mega-post.

I'm making logical fallacies, while you're kindly returning the favour with blatant cherry-picking and sampling biases.

I agree. I don't believe I said we should be after Suarez or Neymar. Juve hasn't spend on Joao Mario or Andre Gomes (yet), because they can attract better players for less. We can't. Pjanic for example, had a release clause of 38M, you're citing 32M (even 30) because he himself wrote of a large chunk of that sum just to join them. We signed Ranocchia for 20M in 2011, indeed in 2011, when he was regarded by most experts to be better than Bonucci. There are no guarantees. We signed Quaresma for 40 as well, it's easy to make statements in hindsight, and indeed other clubs have done the same 'mistake', or should we say uncalculated gamble on the likes of Carrol. Thiago Silva is the opposite gamble, one that worked well, such as Murillo in our case. That's cherry-picking, the truth is a self-regulated market has some median price for decent talent and that gets only higher. You can choose to bet and hope for the best, as I said we are doing, or you can choose to minimise the negative outcomes of a bet by spending more money for more stable outcomes. Again, there are no guarantees, but we shouldn't expect any silver bullets.

Every transfer is a bet, but that's why you should be looking at the indicators with the highest correlation. As you put it, "choose to minimize the negative outcomes of a bet to find more stable outcomes". Pricetag is correlated with getting a good player, just like nationality, league, and age for example, but the highest correlation is technical ability on the field. You look for the highest technical ability within your budget. you spend more for quality because pricetag is a function of quality, not the other way around. for example, it would be really retarded to reject a player with higher technical ability for someone else who costs more.

obviously it comes down to the club's ability to identify technical ability, but its definitely still a higher correlation than fucking pricetag. you're confusing cause, effect, and association.

and at the end of the day signings should be based on profiles from the coach so you automatically need to be judge characteristics and quality ahead of pricetag, unless you're advocating for (in all likelihood) a team of high cost players with zero cohesion.

There's nothing bad in developing youth players, but it only gets you so far. It's way-way harder and takes years to develop talent than to buy one, no? The question is, what we aspire to be.

Real, Barca, Bayern produce talent, they incorporate it in their ranks, but they still spend a shit-load to make their teams what they are. Dortmund does the same, at a smaller scale, but when you sell your biggest stars and replace them with five unknown kids it sends the wrong message. Who did Juve, for example, "produce" lately? They usually bet on the best of the best youth they can find, they either buy the cream of foreign talent like Pogba or Dybala, or farm-out top local players like Berardi and Zaza to "developing clubs" and see whether they'll turn out good without any risk of actually playing them. All of this comes from the outside. It's not like they're where they are because they introduced some strict youth system, they just rely on smart transfers. On the contrary, we have better internal youth system than them, but for some reason, we haven't produced any world beaters in the last five years. Maybe because the chances for this to happen are one in a thousand players and each crop from the youth ranks takes 4-5 years to develop until we can judge them. Excuse me, but Benassi and Duncan, to name some, are decent players and nothing more for now.

Developing youth players is not inherent to being a selling club. That's the point you made and that's the point I replied to. Whether or not our Primavera are future world class players has nothing to do with that point. Developing youth players is not inherent to promoting a stream of players from the Primavera, and just for the record I've never said that we should do this.

Bottom line is that we don't have the money to simply spend our way back to the top even if pricetag had the highest correlation with quality and our top players will all leave if we don't consistently spend a lot of money. Developing youth players isn't out of preference but necessity. We should be building the best team within our financial constraints, and right now, if we want top talent we need to get it earlier and less developed.

Again, it's not about how much we spent, as to how we spent it. I think we both agree. But one thing is for sure, if we spent 10M we'd be far worse.

Moreso, we've been in the green the last two season when it comes to transfers - +£6.63m in 14/15, and +£12.38m in 15/16, so I'm not sure where this 100M spent comes from?

And don't get me started on FFP, it's the bastard child of socialism and football - everyone is equal, but some are more equal than the others.

should have said Mancini should be doing a lot better with this squad. If we'd spent 10 mill we'd be far worse? as if 10 mill is inherent to having less quality than 100 mill? you're making the same fallacy. If we signed Barzagli for 350k, Vidal for 8 mill, Pogba for free, Pirlo for free etc etc. it's ironic to make absolute statements like that when your entire point about spending more is based on probability.

We've been in the green the last two seasons? And how does that contradict whether or not we've spent >100 mill on players?

Actually, I'm reading a lot of names, circulating lately. Let's name some of them, shall we? Prandelli, Pellegrini, Blanc - are they so much better to justify a change of coach yet again, especially in the thick of pre-season? I doubt it. If you have any other genius insights, please elaborate, but I don't see a "safe bet" outside of Simeone right now. We already tried the ballsy way of appointing a prodigy coach in Strama and the "ready for a step-up" coach with a defined game-style in Gasperini and Mazzarri. We all know how that went, so forgive me if I'm sceptical of hearing nobodies linked to the coaching position here. Don't underestimate how much people turn to shit when they sit on our bench, due to pressure or whatever the reason is, I prefer to get someone who has 150% to give, so when he turns to shit for us he'll be at least at a 100%.

And Mancini is doing bad? Well, looking at the front three I see clubs that above all have better players than us. If we had a team that clearly looked better on paper than Napoli or Roma, then I'd be the first to send some shit Mancini's way. He hasn't overperformed, but neither underperformed so much. I think this year's table was a fair reflection of reality.

Pellegrini is better based on his work at Villarreal, Malaga, and his first year at City. negative of changing Mancini for Pellegrini relative to preseason preparation is a lot smaller than the negative of keeping Mancini over Pellegrini next season.

cherrypicking again. guess what, Barcelona appointed the "prodigy coach" in Guardiola and succeeded, Milan appointed the "ready for a step up" coach in Allegri and succeeded (if not Lippi, Ancelotti at Juve in years past). my point is that these profiles are irrelevant to technical characteristics. Similar results at a similar level does not imply they share similar characteristics. this is a professional football club; age, results, salary, profile of the club, profile of the competition should not be our primary criteria for hiring managers. and one could argue we hired Mancini and Rafa in the "proven coach" mould and it failed so your argument actually contradicts your point.


even if we want to say that Napoli, Roma, Juve all have better players than us, that doesn't prove Mancini has done a good job. it means we havent placed above teams with better players. and i dont think roma has a better squad. no doubt they didnt have a better squad before winter break, and even so, their bad form and our good form early in the season should have been enough to launch a better attack on third place. bottom line is that we were a badly coached team last season. results were dissapointing with the quality in our squad: 13 points off roma, only 3 above fio, and only 6 above sassuolo.

and lastly, I quoted you on that. in your own words "Prandelli would be as bad, if not worse than Mancini".
 
Last edited:

Wobblz

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
9,187
Likes
647
Favorite Player
Baggio
10 years of FIF
I wasn't making sampling biases, my point is that pricetag is not inherently linked with quality. Your evidence was cherrypicking bad transfers and my point is that I could just as well cherrypick good transfers. Spending more or spending less does not inherently make a good or a bad deal. I never said there were guarantees when it comes to signing players or football in general, but don't try to make it sound like the indicator with the highest probability of success is pricetag. We're a professional football club, we should have people able to make technical decisions instead of hedging our bets on spending more and not ending up with a flop.

And what then, may I ask, is "inherently linked with quality"? Price is the only quantitive and objective criteria we have on our disposal, or you're trying to say all clubs are clueless and value and price players on a whim? Prices are based on quality, more or less. If there are cheap quality players, where are they? Where's the current Vidal, or Pogba? If we're going there, then we shouldn't be discussing transfers or coaches, as success stems from management and scouts, we have no way of knowing what's going on there, so I'm discussing how I'd like the club to behave in regards to acquiring talent in the current circumstances, in the sense of us not identifying young cheap talents for some reason.

Or maybe we just started doing that? With Caprari, Roger Martinez and Julian Illanes, hopefully.

Developing youth players is not inherent to being a selling club. That's the point you made and that's the point I replied to. Whether or not our Primavera are future world class players has nothing to do with that point. Developing youth players is not inherent to promoting a stream of players from the Primavera, and just for the record I've never said that we should do this. Saying that we shouldn't sell Benassi for 3 mill is not the same thing as saying that we should promote a lot of Primavera players to the first team.

We sold Benassi for 3M, cause no one wanted to pay more for him at that time, and here we go again. Torino saw something we didn't and had something to give to the player we didn't - playing time. But are you saying that Benassi would work better than Brozovic, for example, in our midfield? Let's not take our shit for gold, will we? Just like when we were selling Caldirola and Donati.

Bottom line is that we don't have the money to simply spend our way back to the top. That's all there is to it. If we could do it, by all means, do it. Developing youth players isn't out of preference but necessity. We should be building the best team within our financial constraints, and right now, if we want top talent we need to get it earlier and less developed. That's with young players.

Well, on the contrary, we now have money thanks to the new owners, who last year spent like 110M on two European bench players. We can't use that money tho, because of FFP, which doesn't make any sense. I'm not advocating for sheikh behaviour, but investment when acquiring a company in order to get it on its feet as fast as possible is the only way I see. I sincerely hope they'll renegotiate and loosen up a little our current FFP contract at some point, so they have freedom to use their funds as they please. Again, nothing against young players, buying and developing, farming out, whatever. We're doing it already, actually for a long time now, it just doesn't work miracles for some reason.

We've been in the green the last two seasons? And how does that contradict whether or not we've spent >100 mill on players?
We spent that money cause we had it in the first place, and when you draw the line, we're ahead with some quality players like Miranda and Perisic, that are certainly the backbone of the team for next season.

Pellegrini is definitely a better coach based on his work at Villarreal, Malaga, and his first year at City. The negative of changing Mancini for Pellegrini relative to preseason preparation is a lot smaller than the negative of keeping Mancini over Pellegrini next season.

You're cherrypicking examples again. Guess what, Barcelona appointed the "prodigy coach" in Guardiola and succeeded, Milan appointed the "ready for a step up" coach in Allegri (if not Lippi, Ancelotti at Juve in years past). The point is that these profiles are irrelevant to technical characteristics. Similar results at a similar level does not imply they share technical characteristics. Again, this is a professional football club, we shouldn't just be looking at age, results, and profile of the club managed and profile of the competition.

I could also say we hired Mancini and Rafa in the "proven coach" mould and it failed. ;) These profiles mean nothing.
You open that sentence with me cherry-picking and then you do exactly that. Pellegrini is clearly a better coach? How, weren't those profiles meaningless? Yeah, Allegri came out of Milan, so what? They fired him, cause he was underperforming, he does win with other team now. We also fired Ranieri, now he won the EPL. Milan also "promoted" Seedorf and Inzaghi, care to say something about them, why didn't they turn out like Guardiola?

All I'm trying to say that there are a lot of factors in play, and again I'm only aiming to minimise the chances of failure with the hypothetical appointment of a new coach, in Mancini's place. I think we both would agree that the wrong coach is a huge waste of time and energy on all fronts. So, Simeone seems like the only candidate with an above-average chance of succeeding, based on common observations, albeit biased probably, as every other prediction made in the world. So if you're saying we can't get Simeone, that would be alright, maybe we can't. But then again, what makes you think we can get even Pellegrini and what makes you think he'll do better than what we currently have?

And even if we want to say that Napoli, Roma, Juve all have better players than us, that doesn't prove Mancini has done a good job. That proves we don't have more quality than those sides, that's it. If you give one manager the fourth best side in the league and he places 4th with 50 points, and you give it to another who places fourth with 60 points... see my point?

Way I see it, the biggest gap in quality between us and other sides is with the manager, and there are better options available. Our gameplay last season was dreadful. And no, I don't think Napoli or Roma has an outright better squad (and don't forget that the lack of balance in our squad is also Mancini's fault). Roma certainly didn't have a better squad before the winter break, and even so, the advantage we gained from our early season form should have gained us a CL spot ahead of them. And I quoted you on that, in your own words "Prandelli would be as bad, if not worse than Mancini".

I don't see any praise for Mancini's work coming out of my posts. Well, sure, there are better coaches, and there are worse ones. So? Clearly, some coaches make the difference. And the again, some players make it. Luis Enrique failed miserably with Roma and now he won the CL with Barcelona, I don't know what's up with that.

Considering the scarce options for a coaching replacement currently available though, then we can at least get some proper players and deal with a better coach later on.
 

bandiera

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
4,642
Likes
155
just for the record i edited my post a lot since you replied but w/e.

And what then, may I ask, is "inherently linked with quality"? Price is the only quantitive and objective criteria we have on our disposal, or you're trying to say all clubs are clueless and value and price players on a whim? Prices are based on quality, more or less. If there are cheap quality players, where are they? Where's the current Vidal, or Pogba? If we're going there, then we shouldn't be discussing transfers or coaches, as success stems from management and scouts, we have no way of knowing what's going on there, so I'm discussing how I'd like the club to behave in regards to acquiring talent in the current circumstances, in the sense of us not identifying young cheap talents for some reason.

Or maybe we just started doing that? With Caprari, Roger Martinez and Julian Illanes, hopefully.

the fact it's quantitative doesn't mean it is a higher or a lower correlation vs club's technical knowledge/scouting.

WTF? you're discussing how you'd like the club to sign players in "the current circumstances", how the fuck does that have anything to do with what i said? pricetag is not a high enough correlation to be successful, nor is it the highest correlation.

juve over the past 5-6 years, for example, signs players based on technical quality within financial constraints. they don't sign players worth 10 mill because they're worth 10 mill, they don't sign players for free because they're free. they look for quality in conjunction with their budget.

We sold Benassi for 3M, cause no one wanted to pay more for him at that time, and here we go again. Torino saw something we didn't and had something to give to the player we didn't - playing time. But are you saying that Benassi would work better than Brozovic, for example, in our midfield? Let's not take our shit for gold, will we? Just like when we were selling Caldirola and Donati.

first of all, lets clarify this has fuck all to do with the other discussion.

secondly, you need to stop looking at generic factors. caldirola and donati has nothing to do with benassi. they turned out badly but i could say bonucci turned out well. bottom line is that those players have nothing to do with benassi. again, cause, effect, association. being on our books has nothing to do with having or not having the quality. benassi doe snot need to be better than brozovic for it to be a bad deal to let him go for 3 mill. likewise, i don't think juve fans would be happy if they let go of berard in the second summer for 10 mill and rationalized it based on pasquato being shit and dybala being better than berardi. i'm not taking benassi for gold, i'm saying he's a young talented player that we let go for peanuts.

Well, on the contrary, we now have money thanks to the new owners, who last year spent like 110M on two European bench players. We can't use that money tho, because of FFP, which doesn't make any sense. I'm not advocating for sheikh behaviour, but investment when acquiring a company in order to get it on its feet as fast as possible is the only way I see. I sincerely hope they'll renegotiate and loosen up a little our current FFP contract at some point, so they have freedom to use their funds as they please. Again, nothing against young players, buying and developing, farming out, whatever. We're doing it already, actually for a long time now, it just doesn't work miracles for some reason.

well again, it goes back to my main point. saying you want them to renegotiate our FFP contract has fuck all with reality. and i don't think we've been farming out young players "for a long time now". we haven't invested in youth well nor is it supposed to "work miracles", as you put it.

We spent that money cause we had it in the first place, and when you draw the line, we're ahead with some quality players like Miranda and Perisic, that are certainly the backbone of the team for next season.
mate, what doe sthis have to do with what i said? :lol: i never said they weren't good players or that we couldn't spend the money, my point was that mancini should have done better last season with the squad he had and the funds he was given.

You open that sentence with me cherry-picking and then you do exactly that. Pellegrini is clearly a better coach? How, weren't those profiles meaningless? Yeah, Allegri came out of Milan, so what? They fired him, cause he was underperforming, he does win with other team now. We also fired Ranieri, now he won the EPL. Milan also "promoted" Seedorf and Inzaghi, care to say something about them, why didn't they turn out like Guardiola?

All I'm trying to say that there are a lot of factors in play, and again I'm only aiming to minimise the chances of failure with the hypothetical appointment of a new coach, in Mancini's place. I think we both would agree that the wrong coach is a huge waste of time and energy on all fronts. So, Simeone seems like the only candidate with an above-average chance of succeeding, based on common observations, albeit biased probably, as every other prediction made in the world. So if you're saying we can't get Simeone, that would be alright, maybe we can't. But then again, what makes you think we can get even Pellegrini and what makes you think he'll do better than what we currently have?

my point is that your logic with cherrypicking is onesided. it's not that i advocate the other side. my point is that i can use similar evidence to contradict your point. i wasn't making the counter argument that having a certain profile is inherent to being a good coach. my point is that profile isn't inherent to being a good or a bad coach.

how does that prove the profiles weren't meaningless? again, the club managed at, results, age, salary etc is poorly correlated with a good coach, because none of it inherently has anything to do with being a fucking good coach. instead, it's linnked to the route a coach would take. it's like judging a player based of age, being in serie b, salary etc. that equivocates berardi, verratti, el sharaawy with palladino, cordaz, galloppa, or allegri, lippi, ancelotti with mazzarri, novellino, del neri, gasperini. you're using the same logic you used when it came to pricetag. you're confusing cause, effect, and association when it comes to quality in football.

I don't see any praise for Mancini's work coming out of my posts. Well, sure, there are better coaches, and there are worse ones. So? Clearly, some coaches make the difference. And the again, some players make it. Luis Enrique failed miserably with Roma and now he won the CL with Barcelona, I don't know what's up with that.

Considering the scarce options for a coaching replacement currently available though, then we can at least get some proper players and deal with a better coach later on.

i didn't say you praised mancini but you questioned me calling him bad when i was quoting you....

there are available options right now, i would welcome pellegrini to inter. bottom line is that being "proven" means fuck all. if we did our research, there were many coaches available at the end of lats season that showed the technical ability to be good enough for our objectives.
 
Top