Tiago Mendes (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter Turk_Bianconero
- Start date
Big signing 
I can edit your post though if you want, Turk.
I can change it to:
We bought the biggest flop in the history of flopping. The most useless in the history of uselessness
WELCOME TO JUVE TIAGO AND GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE ASAP
I can edit your post though if you want, Turk.
I can change it to:
We bought the biggest flop in the history of flopping. The most useless in the history of uselessness
WELCOME TO JUVE TIAGO AND GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE ASAP
our first great signing caused a great hole in our pocket.
It's not unjustified, and it's not hate.
There is a reason (reasons) why a great majority of the fans don't like Grygera, Ranieri, Tiago, Marchionni and Molinaro.
Now since you happen to be in the tiny minority that doesn't dislike Tiago (on the contrary, you love the player and it makes you blind), it's sudddenly unjustified hate, huh? But if it's about Molinaro, it's justified?
All 5 of them are hurting the team with their incompetence, lack of quality, or in Tiago's and Marchionni's case, awful displays, even though they've both shown in the past that they can be much much much better than they are in Juve.
With Tiago it's even worse because, while the other 4 cost nothing or almost nothing, we spent 23.4m eur on his transfer fee and his wages so far in these less than 2 years.
And i'd even forgive his bad displays if he at least shows some passion and gives an impression that he's trying and he cares. But i could bet that his jersey is dry after a 90 minute match. No sweating, no passion, nothing.
That's why he's disliked. Timbers like Molinaro offer nothing but you can see them try. That's unacceptable, but it's still more acceptable than players who offer nothing and don't even try.
There is a reason (reasons) why a great majority of the fans don't like Grygera, Ranieri, Tiago, Marchionni and Molinaro.
Now since you happen to be in the tiny minority that doesn't dislike Tiago (on the contrary, you love the player and it makes you blind), it's sudddenly unjustified hate, huh? But if it's about Molinaro, it's justified?
All 5 of them are hurting the team with their incompetence, lack of quality, or in Tiago's and Marchionni's case, awful displays, even though they've both shown in the past that they can be much much much better than they are in Juve.
With Tiago it's even worse because, while the other 4 cost nothing or almost nothing, we spent 23.4m eur on his transfer fee and his wages so far in these less than 2 years.
And i'd even forgive his bad displays if he at least shows some passion and gives an impression that he's trying and he cares. But i could bet that his jersey is dry after a 90 minute match. No sweating, no passion, nothing.
That's why he's disliked. Timbers like Molinaro offer nothing but you can see them try. That's unacceptable, but it's still more acceptable than players who offer nothing and don't even try.
We knew that you were sarcastic. I meant your sarcasm when i said that it was pathetic.
-------------------
I did a little investigation
Transfer fees paid:
- Tiago 13m eur
- Molinaro 2.5m eur
- Marchionni 0 eur
- Grygera 0 eur
- Ranieri 0 eur
Wages in the last 2 years
- Tiago 2.6m eur. With taxes it's 5.2m eur for one year. For two years it's 10.4m eur
- Grygera 1.8m eur. With taxes 3.6. For two years 7.2m eur
- Marchionni 1m eur. With taxes 2m, for two years 4m eur.
- Ranieri. I don't know if he's getting 0.5m or 1m eur per year. I'm getting different info. I'll count 1m per year. With taxes 2m, for two years 4m eur.
- Molinaro 0.5m eur. With taxes 1m eur. For two years 2m eur
So, we paid 13m eur for Tiago on transfer fee
We paid 2.5m eur on transfer fees for Ranieri, Molinaro, Grygera and Marchionni
We paid 10.4m eur for Tiago's wages
We paid 17.2m eur for the wages of Ranieri, Marchionni, Grygera and Molinaro.
Total:
- We paid 23.4m eur for Tiago
- We paid 19.7m eur for Ranieri, Grygera, Marchionni and Molinaro
And yes, Hoori is right. Secco paid 42.9m eur for these 5 people.
You only love her for the Tiago part, because you are the most guilty one for the Ranieri and Molinaro part of it she mentionned. But I guess it doesnt matter aslong she is saying All the blame doesnt go to Tiago, which FYI no said it does (havent read the match thread, but Tiago is targetted for his displays, not for the whole teams), he is highlighted more because he is the big signing (hefty investment, unlike the others mentionned in her post), and whats most gauling of all, he plays without any backbone.
You are missing the point with her whole post if you only pay attention to the Tiago part. A clear sign of you being one the most guilty in regards to the other parts is, that you call me a Molinaro lover when I dont spew irrational hate on him 24/7 as you do.
You are missing the point with her whole post if you only pay attention to the Tiago part. A clear sign of you being one the most guilty in regards to the other parts is, that you call me a Molinaro lover when I dont spew irrational hate on him 24/7 as you do.
-------------------
I did a little investigation
Transfer fees paid:
- Tiago 13m eur
- Molinaro 2.5m eur
- Marchionni 0 eur
- Grygera 0 eur
- Ranieri 0 eur
Wages in the last 2 years
- Tiago 2.6m eur. With taxes it's 5.2m eur for one year. For two years it's 10.4m eur
- Grygera 1.8m eur. With taxes 3.6. For two years 7.2m eur
- Marchionni 1m eur. With taxes 2m, for two years 4m eur.
- Ranieri. I don't know if he's getting 0.5m or 1m eur per year. I'm getting different info. I'll count 1m per year. With taxes 2m, for two years 4m eur.
- Molinaro 0.5m eur. With taxes 1m eur. For two years 2m eur
So, we paid 13m eur for Tiago on transfer fee
We paid 2.5m eur on transfer fees for Ranieri, Molinaro, Grygera and Marchionni
We paid 10.4m eur for Tiago's wages
We paid 17.2m eur for the wages of Ranieri, Marchionni, Grygera and Molinaro.
Total:
- We paid 23.4m eur for Tiago
- We paid 19.7m eur for Ranieri, Grygera, Marchionni and Molinaro
And yes, Hoori is right. Secco paid 42.9m eur for these 5 people.
I did a little investigation
Transfer fees paid:
- Tiago 13m eur
- Molinaro 2.5m eur
- Marchionni 0 eur
- Grygera 0 eur
- Ranieri 0 eur
Wages in the last 2 years
- Tiago 2.6m eur. With taxes it's 5.2m eur for one year. For two years it's 10.4m eur
- Grygera 1.8m eur. With taxes 3.6. For two years 7.2m eur
- Marchionni 1m eur. With taxes 2m, for two years 4m eur.
- Ranieri. I don't know if he's getting 0.5m or 1m eur per year. I'm getting different info. I'll count 1m per year. With taxes 2m, for two years 4m eur.
- Molinaro 0.5m eur. With taxes 1m eur. For two years 2m eur
So, we paid 13m eur for Tiago on transfer fee
We paid 2.5m eur on transfer fees for Ranieri, Molinaro, Grygera and Marchionni
We paid 10.4m eur for Tiago's wages
We paid 17.2m eur for the wages of Ranieri, Marchionni, Grygera and Molinaro.
Total:
- We paid 23.4m eur for Tiago
- We paid 19.7m eur for Ranieri, Grygera, Marchionni and Molinaro
And yes, Hoori is right. Secco paid 42.9m eur for these 5 people.
Transfer fees are water under the bridge. They're sunk costs. They have no bearing on the future. By your standards here, Zidane was a complete flop at Real Madrid because in no way did he live up to the value of his transfer fee.
You judge players by how they perform, plain and simple. Anything leading up to how they got here is the fault of the front office and everyone else who architected the deal.
Nobody goes around tossing asterisks around Chiellini because Moggi got his other half for a song from Fiorentina. It's not relevant.
I've been saying this all season.
You judge players by how they perform, plain and simple. Anything leading up to how they got here is the fault of the front office and everyone else who architected the deal.
Nobody goes around tossing asterisks around Chiellini because Moggi got his other half for a song from Fiorentina. It's not relevant.
I've been saying this all season.
The transfer fee represent the "sacrifices" our club made to get a certain player.
The expectations for this certain player do grow according to to the sacrifice we made.
The maximum performance and the potential of this certain player, are also related to his estimated value. It also affects his position in the squad and expected role on the team (meaning a starter, decent subber or squad player)
So it is VERY relevant, to the way we ought to judge a player's contribution to our team!!
The expectations for this certain player do grow according to to the sacrifice we made.
The maximum performance and the potential of this certain player, are also related to his estimated value. It also affects his position in the squad and expected role on the team (meaning a starter, decent subber or squad player)
So it is VERY relevant, to the way we ought to judge a player's contribution to our team!!
IMO, that's a ridiculous way of looking at it. If we sign a top-notch centerback for €15 million, does that mean he should automatically get the nod above Chiellini whom we only paid €4.3 million for?
Once the player is acquired, transfer fees are no longer relevant at all. Player performance is not a function of them. Only the anticipated expectation of how a player could perform -- which is the responsibility of the front office rather than the player -- factors in a transfer fee.
If some unknown takes the pitch for a €2 million transfer fee, proves himself better than anyone, the player is the player. And credit or derision from there goes exclusively to the person who made the deal.
If we're talking salary and contract renewals, you bet player performance is relevant. But transfer fees are lost causes. Any stock market investor, for example, cannot make financial decisions about whether to sell a stock by what they paid for it, because it's irrelevant to future results. In fact, the people who do stupid things in the stock market like not sell a stock until it's valued at least what they paid for it have a name: morons. This is Investing 101.
Short sellers in the marketplace eat these people for lunch over their stupidity, as it causes the shareholder more harm than good to presume current value is a function of a past price paid for the asset. Human psychology leads people to believe that current value is a function of what you paid for it, but the reality is that this is a massive mistake. We don't need to compound past financial mistakes with future ones out of bad human psychology.
Once the player is acquired, transfer fees are no longer relevant at all. Player performance is not a function of them. Only the anticipated expectation of how a player could perform -- which is the responsibility of the front office rather than the player -- factors in a transfer fee.
If some unknown takes the pitch for a €2 million transfer fee, proves himself better than anyone, the player is the player. And credit or derision from there goes exclusively to the person who made the deal.
If we're talking salary and contract renewals, you bet player performance is relevant. But transfer fees are lost causes. Any stock market investor, for example, cannot make financial decisions about whether to sell a stock by what they paid for it, because it's irrelevant to future results. In fact, the people who do stupid things in the stock market like not sell a stock until it's valued at least what they paid for it have a name: morons. This is Investing 101.
Short sellers in the marketplace eat these people for lunch over their stupidity, as it causes the shareholder more harm than good to presume current value is a function of a past price paid for the asset. Human psychology leads people to believe that current value is a function of what you paid for it, but the reality is that this is a massive mistake. We don't need to compound past financial mistakes with future ones out of bad human psychology.
If we were acquiring Chiellini today or another player of proven value, he wouldnt cost only 4.3 That means that his estimated value is no longer 4.3, but more likely near the sum you mentioned. But if we were singing today a 35mil CB, then yes the expectations of him would be big enough to demand a better performance due to the much higher expectations!
If that player failed to perform better than Chiellini or worse an even less valuable player, but still had a decent contribution as a sub,
even then his transfer would be considered a failed one.
There are many reasons that affect the value a player at any given moment, his age, potential, fitness, form , health, remainder of years in his contract.
If we consider all these, then we can draw some safer conclusions,
but there is no doubt that the the transfer fee represents smth of the current value of a certain player and def affects our expectations and their duty/responsibility to the team!
For ex, if we sell all of our RBs now and sign a 15mil RB and a 1.5 mil RB, of similar age, contract and fitness levels, but with a far different potential and average performance.
The 15mil RB, not only ought to be our first choice players, offering far better than the 1.5 nil sub, but also prove his worthy against similar valued opposition players!
Whilst on the other hand, we must only expect from the 1.5mil player to perform decent enough against similar valued opposition and he shouldnt be blamed for not being able to cope with the 15mil attacking wingers, as the 15mil would...
IMO he is not a flop if he can do his job against the similar valued player, but failed to compete with the best.
On the other hand, i expect more from a valuable player and i do consider him a flop if he fails to perform against players of similar value and only provides better performances against the lesser opposition!
If the player fails to offer average performances according to his value (that includes; potential, talent, fitness etc) then it is his fault, or the coaches fault, who failed to make the optimal use of his potential.
But if he does his job, though this wouldnt be enough to save the team's performances, because the performances needed, extend his maximum potential.
Then the fault lies solely to the managers for making a faulty estimation and decision, to invest on him, rather than choosing the right tool for the job. (like it is the case with Molinaro)
With Tiago, it is mostly the first case, but with Poulsen for ex, it is the second case...
If that player failed to perform better than Chiellini or worse an even less valuable player, but still had a decent contribution as a sub,
even then his transfer would be considered a failed one.
There are many reasons that affect the value a player at any given moment, his age, potential, fitness, form , health, remainder of years in his contract.
If we consider all these, then we can draw some safer conclusions,
but there is no doubt that the the transfer fee represents smth of the current value of a certain player and def affects our expectations and their duty/responsibility to the team!
For ex, if we sell all of our RBs now and sign a 15mil RB and a 1.5 mil RB, of similar age, contract and fitness levels, but with a far different potential and average performance.
The 15mil RB, not only ought to be our first choice players, offering far better than the 1.5 nil sub, but also prove his worthy against similar valued opposition players!
Whilst on the other hand, we must only expect from the 1.5mil player to perform decent enough against similar valued opposition and he shouldnt be blamed for not being able to cope with the 15mil attacking wingers, as the 15mil would...
IMO he is not a flop if he can do his job against the similar valued player, but failed to compete with the best.
On the other hand, i expect more from a valuable player and i do consider him a flop if he fails to perform against players of similar value and only provides better performances against the lesser opposition!
If the player fails to offer average performances according to his value (that includes; potential, talent, fitness etc) then it is his fault, or the coaches fault, who failed to make the optimal use of his potential.
But if he does his job, though this wouldnt be enough to save the team's performances, because the performances needed, extend his maximum potential.
Then the fault lies solely to the managers for making a faulty estimation and decision, to invest on him, rather than choosing the right tool for the job. (like it is the case with Molinaro)
With Tiago, it is mostly the first case, but with Poulsen for ex, it is the second case...
Ummm, no.
Tiago only plays a handfull of matches, while the morons Grygera and Molinaro are fielded every single day. They get a free ride under Ranieri no matter how they play, but Tiago no matter what he does ends up being benched. And then I come to the forum to see what folks write, and the majority of the hate is directed towards Tiago. Even yesterday people were moaning over him when he didn't even play.
Alen, you said it yourself... you like hard runners over finesse players. And you can't prove that Tiago isn't trying when he steps on the pitch,
Players such as Grygera, Marchionni, Molinaro, et cetera, have never proven anything to justify them repeatedly playing for us. At other clubs Tiago has proven his quality, so I think I'm correct in saying Ranieri is partly to blame for what we currently see with the player.
I'm sorry, but that's just my opinion and nobody else is going to change that besides the players and personnel involved.
And I'd love Hoori even if she'd say murder Tiago.
Tiago only plays a handfull of matches, while the morons Grygera and Molinaro are fielded every single day. They get a free ride under Ranieri no matter how they play, but Tiago no matter what he does ends up being benched. And then I come to the forum to see what folks write, and the majority of the hate is directed towards Tiago. Even yesterday people were moaning over him when he didn't even play.
Alen, you said it yourself... you like hard runners over finesse players. And you can't prove that Tiago isn't trying when he steps on the pitch,
Players such as Grygera, Marchionni, Molinaro, et cetera, have never proven anything to justify them repeatedly playing for us. At other clubs Tiago has proven his quality, so I think I'm correct in saying Ranieri is partly to blame for what we currently see with the player.
I'm sorry, but that's just my opinion and nobody else is going to change that besides the players and personnel involved.
And I'd love Hoori even if she'd say murder Tiago.
We're definitely saying the same things here. What you're talking about re: Chiellini isn't the acquisition cost of a transfer, but rather the current market value. The two are different.
Here's where I disagree. I always thought Tiago wasn't worth the price we paid even before we acquired him. His performances have been about where I expected of him... little more, little less, based on what I've seen of him in the Portugal NT, at Chelsea, and at Lyon over the years.
So does that mean I should be especially pissed off at Tiago because some moron in the front office overpaid for his transfer fee? That's silly, and it's not Tiago's fault.
In my mind, anyone who seems quick to blame Tiago because of his overpriced transfer fee needs to take a hard look at themselves and how they valued the player in the first place. Because either they trusted Secco and crew to make the right valuation, which was wrong in my mind, or they agreed with Secco to begin with and they're finding out that they were just as wrong about Tiago's play and potential as Secco and crew were -- which means they're just as much to blame for getting it wrong and believing the wrong hype.
In that latter case, instead of getting pissed off at Tiago -- who, IMO, is meeting what my prior expectations were -- they should be pissed off at themselves for having ridiculously out-of-whack expectations of him ... or for trusting Secco and crew to be accurate.
Here's where I disagree. I always thought Tiago wasn't worth the price we paid even before we acquired him. His performances have been about where I expected of him... little more, little less, based on what I've seen of him in the Portugal NT, at Chelsea, and at Lyon over the years.
So does that mean I should be especially pissed off at Tiago because some moron in the front office overpaid for his transfer fee? That's silly, and it's not Tiago's fault.
In my mind, anyone who seems quick to blame Tiago because of his overpriced transfer fee needs to take a hard look at themselves and how they valued the player in the first place. Because either they trusted Secco and crew to make the right valuation, which was wrong in my mind, or they agreed with Secco to begin with and they're finding out that they were just as wrong about Tiago's play and potential as Secco and crew were -- which means they're just as much to blame for getting it wrong and believing the wrong hype.
In that latter case, instead of getting pissed off at Tiago -- who, IMO, is meeting what my prior expectations were -- they should be pissed off at themselves for having ridiculously out-of-whack expectations of him ... or for trusting Secco and crew to be accurate.