Summer mercato 2021-22 (71 Viewers)

[GiocataGrande]

And I just can't take you seriously for the highest level of football if you spent 10-20 years coaching or playing and didn't win shit.

So you remove all other factors when judging a player and refuse to take them serious if they dont win trophies, ignoring other factors like:

Strength of opposition, Coaching, Strength of the club (Kane for example has been carrying Spurs for ages, always performing well, but this will now be completely ignored), luck (by pure luck Kane could have won CL or other trophies ).

Since Kane decided to stay at Spurs and it didnt pay off yet, he is now a "loser" and should not be taken serious.

Meanwhile players like Suarez who move onto a superstar team of Barca with Neymar and Messi, has shown a lot more ambition and this is admirable.

What kind of rubbish Nazi logic is that

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[il brutto]

Once again you are going on about moral victories.

I am talking about tangible, objective wins (trophies). If someone said we are winners of the CL in 2015 you'd laugh in their face. Doesn't matter who we played, we lost.

You can use context and reasoning to explain the loss, doesn't make it hurt any less and doesn't remove anything from Barca winning it. Us getting there was a great ACHIEVEMENT but we did not WIN it.

When I say loser I do not mean someone is worthless, achieved absolutely nothing etc. But winning is a habit and as someone smart said once there is a reason why some coaches and managers win always and some always lose. And I just can't take you seriously for the highest level of football if you spent 10-20 years coaching or playing and didn't win shit.

And what does any of that have to do with what I said? I never claimed that teams that don't win should be called winners. I was simply pointing out that the word loser is never used in the context that you are using it.

 

[rainhard]

The winner wins something, Loser lose something

When someone never wins something then he is not a winner
But does he lose something? Every year he tries to win that something (league or cups)
when he does not win then he lost that opportunity to win league or cups
Maybe he wins the battle in some games, but he is absolutely without doubt lose the war

Someone even said 2nd position is the biggest loser of all
The win is not important that is the only thing that matters

And put this logic in Harry Kane
Has he won something with his current club? if not then, without doubt, his club is a loser club
Can he win something with a different club? Probably with a high percentage of winning

So my conclusion are Harry Kane is someone that capable of winning something in a loser club

 

[il brutto]

So you remove all other factors when judging a player and refuse to take them serious if they dont win trophies, ignoring other factors like:

Strength of opposition, Coaching, Strength of the club (Kane for example has been carrying Spurs for ages, always performing well, but this will now be completely ignored), luck (by pure luck Kane could have won CL or other trophies ).

Since Kane decided to stay at Spurs and it didnt pay off yet, he is now a "loser" and should not be taken serious.

Meanwhile players like Suarez who move onto a superstar team of Barca with Neymar and Messi, has shown a lot more ambition and this is admirable.

What kind of rubbish Nazi logic is that

Kane should have been ambitious and joined Maccabi Tel-Aviv, Shakhtar Donetsk or Celtic when he had the chance, would be a winner by now.

It's a bit weird how in football chasing a trophy makes you "ambitious" but in basketball for example chasing a ring isn't really considered in such a positive way especially if you're considered a great player.

 

[Orgut]

The whole thing about judging a coach that didnt manage a winning team and then calling him mediocre because he havent won anything...
Juve dominated Italy for a decade and I mean total domination as we were almost crowned at the start of every season with both Serie A and Coppa Italia.
Does all the managers that coached all the other teams suck?

Did Sarri win anything with Napoli? Im not sure but if he havent it doesnt take the good work he put there.
Gasperini is a tougher case as you can say he is unproven at a big club but its tough to say he isnt good enough while he is proving himself with Atalanta by way overachieving.

Ranieri was claimed to be a good manager before he won with Leicester and I even remember some joy around here when we first got him.

Inzaghi - Some rate him and some dont. He didnt win anything although he is still young but to be honest - Take away his style of football and focus about overall results and I dont think Lazio have done that great. They have their periods but in the end they finish in their expected place +-

I personally think a manager should be chosen based on characteristics of your players and the characteristics of your gameplan.
Right now I see our players fit more to the style of Gasperini than Allegri and this is why I always mention Gasperini is the best fit for our current team.
Another coach who could fit is Conte although unavailable and I dont think there is one wanting him to come back but he does know how to make a team fight on the field which is a thing our team really lacks.

The thing is we already know Allegri knows how to win and this makes Allegri more likeable for us.

In the end I think it will be one of Allegri 80% /Gasperini 18%/Pirlo again 1%/Other 1%

 

[IlCapitano]

So you remove all other factors when judging a player and refuse to take them serious if they dont win trophies, ignoring other factors like:

Strength of opposition, Coaching, Strength of the club (Kane for example has been carrying Spurs for ages, always performing well, but this will now be completely ignored), luck (by pure luck Kane could have won CL or other trophies ).

Since Kane decided to stay at Spurs and it didnt pay off yet, he is now a "loser" and should not be taken serious.

Meanwhile players like Suarez who move onto a superstar team of Barca with Neymar and Messi, has shown a lot more ambition and this is admirable.

What kind of rubbish Nazi logic is that

I did not say remove context. You are applying meaning and context to my word loser I did not put there. If you win you are a winner, if you lose yyou are a loser. That is in the definition of the word, literally.

I am fine applying context for single season or game, but going your whole career without winning anything? Nah.

Strength of opposition and those other factors did not stop Inzaghi and Lazio, did not stop Simeone and Atleti, Dortmund, Klopp, Lewa etc. etc.

Suarez was a winner long before Barca. He won the league in Uruguay, won league and cup with Ajax, won cup with Liverpool and won Copa America with Uruguay. Then went on and proved himself with Barca. Literally won at every level he played at.

The logic is proven by facts. Winners win and hwlp others win. You are more likely to win again if you have won before. This is literally our club's mantra.

And what does any of that have to do with what I said? I never claimed that teams that don't win should be called winners. I was simply pointing out that the word loser is never used in the context that you are using it.

You are applying context that I did not put there.

How else should they be called? You either win or lose at the end of the season. Are you a great achiever? Moral victor?

 

[il brutto]

You are applying context that I did not put there.

How else should they be called? You either win or lose at the end of the season. Are you a great achiever? Moral victor?

No one for example would say "Sassuolo lost the Serie A" or "Sassuolo finishes the Serie A as a loser", that just sounds silly. The only situation where I can think the word lose would be used is when you fail in relation to your goals. For example "Juventus loses the Scudetto to Inter".

 

[GiocataGrande]

If you win you are a winner, if you lose yyou are a loser. That is in the definition of the word, literally.

The logic is proven by facts. Winners win and hwlp others win. You are more likely to win again if you have won before. This is literally our club's mantra.

ffs I am not discussing the definition of the word win/winner here: Offcourse a winner is a winner and a loser is a loser ..... like, come on man????

The logic you speak of sounds like a mathematician trying to merge an enormous amount of factors and variables (like the ones i already stated in my earlier post) into a simple equation where only the final product is what can be used as a judgement on the players capabilities as a football player.

In my opinion this becomes an overly cynical, black/white, almost ignorant, way of looking at things.

but whatever, its your way of thinking. To me that is absolutely crazy and way too simplified

 

[rainhard]

The whole thing about judging a coach that didnt manage a winning team and then calling him mediocre because he havent won anything...
Juve dominated Italy for a decade and I mean total domination as we were almost crowned at the start of every season with both Serie A and Coppa Italia.
Does all the managers that coached all the other teams suck?

Did Sarri win anything with Napoli? Im not sure but if he havent it doesnt take the good work he put there.
Gasperini is a tougher case as you can say he is unproven at a big club but its tough to say he isnt good enough while he is proving himself with Atalanta by way overachieving.

Ranieri was claimed to be a good manager before he won with Leicester and I even remember some joy around here when we first got him.

Inzaghi - Some rate him and some dont. He didnt win anything although he is still young but to be honest - Take away his style of football and focus about overall results and I dont think Lazio have done that great. They have their periods but in the end they finish in their expected place +-

I personally think a manager should be chosen based on characteristics of your players and the characteristics of your gameplan.
Right now I see our players fit more to the style of Gasperini than Allegri and this is why I always mention Gasperini is the best fit for our current team.
Another coach who could fit is Conte although unavailable and I dont think there is one wanting him to come back but he does know how to make a team fight on the field which is a thing our team really lacks.

The thing is we already know Allegri knows how to win and this makes Allegri more likeable for us.

In the end I think it will be one of Allegri 80% /Gasperini 18%/Pirlo again 1%/Other 1%

I expect Gasperini, with his Atalanta he can go far in UCL. And fresh idea , proven system (Atalanta is one of the most exciting team to watch)
they are talented and energetic

We lack of full back but Gasperini using wide midfielder
We have Dybala and Gasperini using AMC

What we dont have is 2 striker upfront if we let go of CR7 and dont take Morata

 

[Orgut]

I expect Gasperini, with his Atalanta he can go far in UCL. And fresh idea , proven system (Atalanta is one of the most exciting team to watch)
they are talented and energetic

We lack of full back but Gasperini using wide midfielder
We have Dybala and Gasperini using AMC

What we dont have is 2 striker upfront if we let go of CR7 and dont take Morata

There are rumors about Gasperini but we have by far more rumors about an Allegri return.

 

[Lapa]

The names to replace Alex Sandro are:
• Emerson Palmieri (Chelsea)
• Robin Gosens (Atalanta)
• Gayà (Valencia)
[Tuttosport]

Welcome, Agent Palmieri.

@Bianconero81

 

[CrimsonianKing]

Juve’s mercato will first prioritize plusvalenza then reinforcements. Vecchiasignora



Is there a logical reason why Allegri would choose to come here again?

 

[zizinho]

I think there should be a distinction between winning and losing players/coaches/clubs. Tottenham hasn't won shit since forever, and they had great teams last decade or so. There is 3 domestic competitions and one european each year. Arsenal no matter how shit they are win the FA Cup regularly atleast. But then there is also overachievers and underachievers. Which of the two is Kane decide for yourself. I'll break down his career in short:
14/15 he scored 21 goals in the league and they finished 5th with 64pts. Weak competition tho, only Mou's Chelsea with 87pts and three 70+pts teams. They lost the EFL cup final to same Chelsea so that's fair. He didn't score. Lost in the 4th round of FA Cup to Leicester but without him. Lost in the EL Ro.32 to Fiorentina but he didn't play. So average season

15/16 he scored 25 in the league and they finished 3rd with 70pts, in a even weaker competition. Leicester with 81pts and Arsenal with 71pts. Losing the 5th round of FA Cup with him and many starters against Crystal Palace. Losing the EFL cup 3rd round against Arsenal with him playing. He didn't score in neither. Lost the EL Ro.16 to Dortmund, with him playing 24 minutes. So another average season but CL qualifications thanks to underachieving top clubs.

16/17 29 goals in the league, 86pts, 2nd place behind Contes Chelsea who won 93pts. 3 other teams finished with 70+pts and ManU with 69pts so it was a rather competitive season unlike past ones. Lost FA cup semifinal against Chelsea 4-2 and scored once. Lost the EFL cup 4th round vs Liverpool without him. Finished 3rd in CL group stage behind Monaco and Leverkusen with him scoring two goals, and then lost to Gent in the EL Ro.32 with him scoring once, but in the wrong net. It was 3-2 on agg. So other than the premier league rather average in other competitions.

17/18 30 goals in the league, 3rd place finish with 77pts, so a weaker competition again (City 100, Mou's ManU with 81, pool 75, Chelsea 70). Lost EFL 4th round vs WHU without him, lost FA cup semifinal vs ManU, with him. He didn't score. Lost to Juventus in Ro.16 of CL, 3-4 agg. Scored once.

18/19 17 goals in the league, 4th place with 71pts. City and Pool close to 100pts but Chelsea and Arsenal hang around 70pts. ManU 66pts. Was injured a lot of season and team played better with him out, except the EFL cup where they lost to Chelsea after having a 1-0 lead from the 1st game where he scored. CL they went on their biggest run ever with him out, eliminating a great City and Ajax side, then lost final with him back. Even vs Dortmund in Ro.16 they were better the game without him than the game with him. So asterisk season due to injury but also great team achievement in the CL without him.

19/20 18 goals in the league, 6th place. 59pts. Average competition, pool with 99, City 81, United and Chelsea 66 pts. Leicester 62. Another injury ridden season, and this time team didn't look better without him. Lost to Leipzig and lost both domestic cups. But team weaker than year before definitely.

20/21 so far 21 goals in the league, 4 games to go. 56 pts, 6th place. Average competition as we get at best 3 70+pts teams and City with barely over 90pts at best. FA cup lost 5th round to Everton, scored once. EFL cup lost final to City, didn't score. EL lost to Dinamo, scored twice.

With the NT, Euro 2016 zero goals, lost to Iceland in Ro.16. World Cup 2018 scored one goal (penalty) in the knockouts despite playing maximum number of games and every minute. Nations League lost the semifinal vs Netherlands and didn't score again.

Imo he's a talented CF but he hasn't shown it at the biggest stage. Most of the biggest games he played he went missing. So I'd rather pass on him

 

[Dostoevsky]

Imo both Kane and Son are worth of top clubs. I don't think Tottenham is at that level and player does not equal club. Both deserve bigger stage.

Kane here would easily go above 30 goals.

 

[zizinho]

Imo both Kane and Son are worth of top clubs. I don't think Tottenham is at that level and player does not equal club. Both deserve bigger stage.

Kane here would easily go above 30 goals.

I'm not sure of that, Higgy after a record season barely went over 30 goals, and we played a maximum number of games going all the way in all competitions. Plus he had a greater team behind. Now Ronaldo does it but Ronaldo is GOAT.

 

[Dostoevsky]

EPL is way tougher than Serie A. So that "no competition" or "barely competition" is stronger than Italy. I also think he's suited for all leagues but possibly best for Serie A.

 

[Boksic]

EPL is way tougher than Serie A. So that "no competition" or "barely competition" is stronger than Italy. I also think he's suited for all leagues but possibly best for Serie A.

I don't know about that, especially from the point of view from an attacker. Teams aren't set up as well defensively or tactically in England and there is usually more room for attackers.

Especially at a team like Juve where up until this season teams would largely park the bus against us.

 

[Dostoevsky]

I don't know about that, especially from the point of view from an attacker. Teams aren't set up as well defensively or tactically in England and there is usually more room for attackers.

Especially at a team like Juve where up until this season teams would largely park the bus against us.

Imagine us play in the same league with Manchester City, United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Leicester and others. We'd win shit.

 

[Boksic]

Imagine us play in the same league with Manchester City, United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Leicester and others. We'd win shit.

This year definitely but we won't win anything in Italy either. Previous Juve sides e.g. under Allegri could win (they beat City in the CL) but would have had more of a challenge.

I wasn't meaning that Serie A is stronger than the EPL though. I was meaning that I don't think as an attacker Serie A would be an easier league to score in as teams are better set up defensively and tactically, plus there is typically less space, particularly if you play for Juve.

 

[zizinho]

EPL is way tougher than Serie A. So that "no competition" or "barely competition" is stronger than Italy. I also think he's suited for all leagues but possibly best for Serie A.

Competition means number of high quality teams. A team winning 59pts isn't competitive, a team winning 70-80 is. So the league with more such teams is more competitive. But that's besides the point. Strikers don't usually score a lot here. The league is more defensive in general, teams defend deep vs us and we don't try to score 4,5,6 goals often. So it's more difficult for a individual to have his numbers. You're more likely to win as a team tho

- - - Updated - - -

Imagine us play in the same league with Manchester City, United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Leicester and others. We'd win shit.

So you compare us to Tottenham? And Leicester lol