considering we play entirely through the middle (with no width) and have little depth with any technical quality in that middle, do you honestly not agree that the club could really use greater quality in the middle? that signing eriksen would be merely "throwing money at someond just for the sake of him not signing for inda"
funny you mention preventing inter from signing players as motivation because it seems like thats exactly what we did do this winter by dropping 45 mil on a 20 y/o who wont play here this season.
I look at the signing of kulusevski differently. He can play in multiple positions for one and one that allows us to play 433 with him out wide. Secondly he is cheaper than eriksen when you consider signing on fees and wages are factored in and yet he has been a revelation this season and his price will only go up.
Signing eriksen poses 2 problems for me from a tactical view point, a midfield with him and pjanic in a midfield 3 is far too lightweight for my liking, and alternatively if we play him in the trequartista role then we are restricting ourselves to 4-3-1-2 and it's pointless to think sarri will play any other formation besides that and the 4-3-3.
The other issue being given his wages he would have to play nearly every game to make it worth while and in effect we would have to drop/rotate regularly with someone of similar wage in that forward 3.
- - - Updated - - -
Don't bother.
Logic and Badass don't go well together.
Same with critical thinking and Badass.
Biased, blind fanboyism - now we speaking.
Say that without crying