Nicolò Savona (20 Viewers)

[Robee]

16m + 10% resale according to Schira. If you count on 20 mil resale, that's Comolli's 18 mil. Meh.

- - - Updated - - -

What old cows? This new management sold Mbangula for 10M. Championship players are sold for way more.

Whether its new or old management, we are selling NextGen players for some pretty low profit margins. It's not serving the purpose either from a sporting or a financial perspective. And this is a worrying sign.

The new management has a different modus operandi? Do they even have an operandi in the first place? Please elaborate. I'm all ears.

And replaced Mbangula with what lesser player as you said...?

Pretty low fee, yes agreed. That has been mentioned by dozens of members here; that's the price we're paying for having to sell to buy or even to simply meet FFP regulations. You can whine all you want, it wouldn't change a thing not even you were at the helm yourself. That's just the reality of the club for now.

Management is changing shape too; we have a CEO, Chiellini and are looking for a sporting director. In the light of these changes, we have barely spent an extra dime this summer...

Joao Mario was paid for by Alberto Costa. Conceicao is being paid in installments, while J. David was a Bosman deal and we're recycling a lot of returning loanees. Can't be much more penny pinching than that...

We also stopped pushing out people... So it's kind of a big switch from the Giuntoli era. Clear for everyone to see.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Boksic]

Still not learnt to include buy-backs.

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

I really don't get why was Mbangula 10m and Savona 15m? Judging from their performances last year, Mbangula was pretty good, while, apart from his first 4-5 matches, Savona has been dreadful, a joke.

Savona for €15-€20m is actually a very good sale. He’s a Serie B level player.

Mbangula had a much better season, is a winger, is younger…we undersold him for sure.

 

[PhRoZeN]

i understand wanting to sell him, but I really think we should have and could have gotten more if we weren't so eager to sell him as earlier possible.

Too right

 

[Juvellino]

Always thinking short term just to shoot for top 4

 

[Lion]

Still not learnt to include buy-backs.

buy backs are for big teams. fake big teams like juve don't get to bully anyone

 

[Salvo]

Will be interesting to see how he develops as a player, I personally would've kept him for another year with so many question marks in the backline.

 

[Stevie]

Alot depends on Nottingham Forest's season

If they have a good season his price could double and vice versa if they have a bad season he could catch some of the blame and disappear into obscurity

 

[Buck Fuddy]

No we didn't. You're taking the piss on almost all of them. The only one we did need from that list is Huijsen. All the rest was or is dispensable for sure but we're talking Savona here, not the rest of them. That could take us endlessly far.

Savona would be 6th or 7th choice right now, depending on whether you place him before or after the amazing Rugani nobody seemed to want to offload.

I'll spell it out for you: We sell (potentially) useful homegrown young players for small fees & buy useless players for high(er) fees and wages.

If you think that's a solid, sustainable business, good for you.
I don't think it is.

 

[Osman]

I'll spell it out for you: We sell (potentially) useful homegrown young players for small fees & buy useless players for high(er) fees and wages.

If you think that's a solid, sustainable business, good for you.
I don't think it is.

It really is that simple.


Its really Pavlonian how we keep making the same nonsensical approach under 3 different management's.

 

[Robee]

I'll spell it out for you: We sell (potentially) useful homegrown young players for small fees & buy useless players for high(er) fees and wages.

If you think that's a solid, sustainable business, good for you.
I don't think it is.

We did but not this summer anymore so why continue on this song? If you do think so, please name them.

If anything, we're inactive...

 

[Gigiventus]

Cash cow? Barely. We are selling them for peanuts. That's the bigger issue here.

Other clubs like Chelsea for example sell their youth for twice their value.

Selling for more money would be better of course, but focusing on exploiting our youth for cash is the problem, both strategies should be complementary.

Buying is more expensive than developing, its also easier though, so our management takes the easy route.

We should not have had to sign Nico, we should have had Soule. We should not have had to sign Kelly, we should have had Hujsen. Same for De Winter, same for Fagioli, and likely same for Miretti and Savona.

We sell a kid for 15m and sign a slightly better player for 30m. We also increase our wage bill by a lot since the kids earns much less. 3 years down the line we are looking for another 30m decent player while our kid would have been able to fulfill that role. It takes planning and good management, but it's ultimately better to grow some players for the first team.

We dropped 100m in Luiz and Koop while we sold Fagioli and may sell Miretti. We are gonna watch Hujsen become world class. We had him here, wanting to play for us. If Motta and Guintoli continued we might have even cashed in on Yildiz.

Chelsea's human trafficking network works well because they are in the prem and they don't need money. Chelsea can tell anyone to fuck off if the offer is too low because they don't need to sell. We aren't in that position. Madrid and Barca should be more like our model, not Chelsea.

 

[Salvo]

I'll spell it out for you: We sell (potentially) useful homegrown young players for small fees & buy useless players for high(er) fees and wages.

If you think that's a solid, sustainable business, good for you.
I don't think it is.

Yeah it doesn't make any sense and also it really prevents us from having an identity. Who are we going to replace him with, what will be the point.

 

[Xperd]

It really is that simple.


Its really Pavlonian how we keep making the same nonsensical approach under 3 different management's.

The one common denominator in all of them

 

[Alen]

We should not have had to sign Nico, we should have had Soule. We should not have had to sign Kelly, we should have had Hujsen. Same for De Winter, same for Fagioli, and likely same for Miretti and Savona.

I don't agree. I mean, sure, if we say "we sold Huijsen so we'd replace him with the more expensive Kelly", it looks very bad, but we can turn it the other way. Keep Fagioli and not buy Thuram, or keep De Winter and not buy Bremer, or keep Iling and not buy Conceicao or whatever.
You win some, and you lose some. We can't just keep and play all our youngsters, simply because most of them aren't good enough. On the other hand, you can't sell youngsters and get good money if you don't play them, so from time to time we'll have to give them a chance even if they're not good enough (and then lose points because of that).

What should be done, as hard as it is, is to have good coaches and scouts, so they'd know that Yildiz and Huijsen should be kept, that De Winter, Soule, Iling, Mbangula, Savona should be sold for good profit, but also, they'd know how to reinvest the money and buy more of Thuram and Bremer, and less of Kelly.

 

[Berbatov]

Savona for €15-€20m is actually a very good sale. He’s a Serie B level player.

Mbangula had a much better season, is a winger, is younger…we undersold him for sure.

At the last part of the season Tudor put him in heart of the defence..and he handle it..and then someone will complain about Kelly and Rugani...you're
absolute demagogue with little knowledge about Juventus team.

 

[The Quazis]

Peeps mentioning Fagioli who would have been dumped by Fiorentina if they didn't make Europe and the clause wasn't activated.

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

At the last part of the season Tudor put him in heart of the defence..and he handle it..and then someone will complain about Kelly and Rugani...you're
absolute demagogue with little knowledge about Juventus team.

wtf are you talking about you dunce.

Savona performed at his “best” during his first 4-5 games under Thiago Motta when he played as an RB.

He’s sucked pretty much since late last year and was absolutely terrible as a kind of Bremer replacement at the CWC. He’s also third in the pecking order as an RCB with Kalulu and Gatti clearly ahead of him.

And I also don’t complain about Rugani. I’d keep him any day of the week over Savona as the Bremer replacement.

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

Peeps mentioning Fagioli who would have been dumped by Fiorentina if they didn't make Europe and the clause wasn't activated.

Like @Alen said, the vast majority of the young players we’ve sold aren’t good enough and never will be. The only one we seem to have gotten wrong is Huijsen. Maybe Soule might turn into a good, consistent top player in Serie A. I doubt it though.

Where we go massively wrong, is who we replace these players with and how much we spend on their transfer fee and wages.

 

[Robee]

Like @Alen said, the vast majority of the young players we’ve sold aren’t good enough and never will be. The only one we seem to have gotten wrong is Huijsen. Maybe Soule might turn into a good, consistent top player in Serie A. I doubt it though.

Where we go massively wrong, is who we replace these players with and how much we spend on their transfer fee and wages.

Pretty much this and even Huijsen... If he would've been replaced by a (cheap) Barzagli to name just any of the old center backs, we would only hear a fraction of the crying we do now. But it was a well overpriced Lloyd Kelly ffs...

Marotta sold a lot of good players pretty much on the cheap but he was capable of replacing them (before it all went down the drain).