Luca Marrone (3 Viewers)

Gallo

Better than Matri
May 30, 2012
123
I don't even know where to start with this post.
Wherever you want, but I'd really like to know what is wrong with it. 11M for Giovinco's half is by far too much. You can ignore part about Matri though, it's just meaningless addition coz I like mentioning him.
 

Gallo

Better than Matri
May 30, 2012
123
That effects only clubs financial situation not his worth, he was still obviously valued for 2x11M when we bought his half back. And that's totally unbelievable. It's not like we sent him on loan and give them those 7.5M to train and play him, we sold them half of 7M worth player and then bought half of 22M worth player.
 

JuveJay

Senior Signor
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007
72,251
Italian players are overpriced, he had a good season, we wanted him and Parma didn't want to sell him. I think he was probably worth €17m-€18m, when you see the market and other prices paid. We could go with that value because net we were getting a good player for way less than we would ordinarily have to pay.
 

Gallo

Better than Matri
May 30, 2012
123
It's just like saying we got him for free since we sold Krasic for few million as well, if we are counting unrelated transfer operations to make his price look lower, but that's just another addition to my previous post.

We would definitely get him cheaper with blind bids though, or if we sold his 11M worth half we could buy someone better for those 22M, like Ramirez.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,753
Co-ownerships are stupid anyway. I'm sure there is a reason they aren't used in other countries. It's just a loan with some gambling (with much better odds for team which gets player on co-own - ergo big teams like Juve lose) included.
They're not used in other countries because other countries have B teams where the youth products can play professional football.
 

Gallo

Better than Matri
May 30, 2012
123
How can initially loaning/co-owning Giovinco for €3.5m be unrelated to buying his half back for €11m?
Because those operations aren't affecting each other. First one was this summer just number of 3.5M which could be equally used to buy Messi for 150M or Giovinco's half for unbelievable 11M. We could use it wherever we would want, it wasn't restricted for buying back Giovinco. We paid 11M for him as we would 150M for Messi and not 146,5M.

- - - Updated - - -

They're not used in other countries because other countries have B teams where the youth products can play professional football.
They are loaning players anyway, and that's the thing to compare with co-owning, not B team.
 

Juve_fanatic

Second coolest member!
Apr 5, 2006
7,561
You know that Mascherano was arguably the best out-and-out DM in the world when he went to Barca?

When has Marrone ever shown any real defensive ability?

And, even as good as Mascherano is at one-on-one defending, when it comes to positioning and reading the game it is continually apparent that he is not a natural CB.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, Mascherano is very quick, so he can recover from positional errors at times.

Marrone doesn't have that.

All in all, any comparison between Mascherano and Marrone is utterly ridiculous.

If you must try to clutch at straws to try and convince yourself Marrone could have a future as a CB, at least use De Rossi as your comparison.
I dont know. The way i see it, Marrone doesnt need to have the things in the bolded part. At least not in a 3-5-2 formation playing Bonucci's position. In a 2 CB's formation i would agree with you, no doubt.
 

Raz

Senior Member
Nov 20, 2005
12,218
If we do not have faith in him, yes. If we do have faith in him, the best place to gain experience is with us. Afterall we are the best team, right?
Playing time in top level is the most important thing to develop as a player.

Look how Marchisio and Gio ended up? They were loaned and co-owned and now we can reap the rewards, it was both benificial of them and us.

If Marrone doesn't come back then he doesn't and it means he was really not good enough, but now he doesn't even have the chance to prove that he is good enough.
 

pitbull

Senior Member
Jul 26, 2007
11,045
Giovinco was easily good enough to play for us during those years he spent at Parma and if we had a decent coaches before Conte I believe he'd have developed into a way better player he is now. In the process we also lost 7m and humiliated ourselves. Stating him as a positive example of great business is laughable, it was already a fucking disaster when Marotta came at the helm, but hiring Del Neri and sending Giovinco away for two years worsened an already fucked up situation.
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
We paid 11M for his half, I don't care how much did we get for him before, but buying him for price which means he is worth 22M is ridiculous.

However, it's only 4M more than Matri, so he is very far from being the most overpayed player in Juve.
:lol2:
 

Buck Fuddy

Lara Chedraoui fanboy
May 22, 2009
10,636
If we do not have faith in him, yes. If we do have faith in him, the best place to gain experience is with us. Afterall we are the best team, right?
I'd say the best way to gain experience & improve is by playing games. As a CM, I might add, and he clearly won't get many chances with us.

While I too dislike the concept of co-owning, I'm not sure if selling him outright is the better option. We're obviously not going to get a lot of money for him, so if we sell him for cheap & he turns out to be a great player we're even more screwed than we would be if we still owned 50%.

Personally, I'd hold on to him for now & review the situation after the season.
 

Gallo

Better than Matri
May 30, 2012
123
I'd say the best way to gain experience & improve is by playing games. As a CM, I might add, and he clearly won't get many chances with us.

While I too dislike the concept of co-owning, I'm not sure if selling him outright is the better option. We're obviously not going to get a lot of money for him, so if we sell him for cheap & he turns out to be a great player we're even more screwed than we would be if we still owned 50%.

Personally, I'd hold on to him for now & review the situation after the season.
We on forums can say that because we don't know how much chances will he get in the rest of the season, but Conte and others know what are their plans, so situation should be solved as soon as possible, for Marrone's benefit.
Also please compare co-owning with loans and not selling, it makes much more sense.
 

Buck Fuddy

Lara Chedraoui fanboy
May 22, 2009
10,636
Maybe you should have read what I replied to. A simple question (of mine) asking Jack if he would sell outright instead of co-owning. Maybe then my answer would make sense.


But hey, judging by most of your posts, you're definitely one to go around telling others what does or doesn't make sense.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)