[X-Offender]

A couple of players will definitely come. Hopefully they're quality.

[X-Offender]

I wish we hadn't spent those 20 million on Bertolacci, and instead added 10 more and signed Witsel right away.

Bertolacci didn't impress me at all yesterday. He didn't do anything remarkable or to take not of.

[han2503]

I wish we hadn't spent those 20 million on Bertolacci, and instead added 10 more and signed Witsel right away.

Bertolacci didn't impress me at all yesterday. He didn't do anything remarkable or to take not of.

Agreed, so far he's done nothing to dither my opinion of him that he's another Bonaventura. An in-betweener who's a good player but nothing special. Reliable but won't really make a huge difference to our overall gameplay

[Danny]

From what I've seen of him he's a Makelele type. Clean, simple passes, reliable in possession and the kind of midfielder who's always available. He's a deeper version of Bona but more efficient. And clearly that fits Miha's vision for the team so I'm happy to go with it.

[han2503]

From what I've seen of him he's a Makelele type. Clean, simple passes, reliable in possession and the kind of midfielder who's always available. He's a deeper version of Bona but more efficient. And clearly that fits Miha's vision for the team so I'm happy to go with it.

Wasn't Makelele a pure anchor DM?

I see nothing that indicates Bertolacci is anywhere near that type of player.

I think he's mostly a 2-way player. He's good on both sides of the ball, just like Bonaventura, but still, the problem is that he doesn't really add all that much to our midfield. Had we spent what he was actually worth, I'd say he'd have been a smart purchase that gives us added depth in our midfield and more quality than Muntari or Essien ever did. But we spent 20m on him, and for that kind of money I'd expect more from a player

Makelele was one of the best in his positions and few did it better than him. Bertolacci is a regular run of the mill midfielder

[X-Offender]

De Jong is much more similar to Makelele.

[Danny]

Wasn't Makelele a pure anchor DM?

I see nothing that indicates Bertolacci is anywhere near that type of player.

I think he's mostly a 2-way player. He's good on both sides of the ball, just like Bonaventura, but still, the problem is that he doesn't really add all that much to our midfield. Had we spent what he was actually worth, I'd say he'd have been a smart purchase that gives us added depth in our midfield and more quality than Muntari or Essien ever did. But we spent 20m on him, and for that kind of money I'd expect more from a player

Makelele was one of the best in his positions and few did it better than him. Bertolacci is a regular run of the mill midfielder

Actually I'd argue if he's another Bonaventura it's exactly what our midfield needs, aside a creative spark. Monto's absolute rot, De Jong's a destroyer, but we don't have a clean and efficient space player who can be relied on for neatness and tidiness.

But Bona has massive limitations and I don't see those with Berto.

As for 'that kind of money' - you forget the bit about young players costing way more than they once did.

I mean this with respect but you seem to be stuck in 2005 where players costing 20M were basically world class. That doesn't happen now.

An ordinary player of quality costs that, and world class is now 50M upwards.

This is a big issue - we're now dabbling in the transfer market seriously for the first time in what feels like years, but some fans haven't adjusted to, effectively, inflation. What once would cost us 5M now costs four times that.

And it makes you think we're signing rubbish at over inflated prices, when the truth is a decent quality player costs a ludicrous amount.

What I am saying is stop using the 'value for money' card - it doesn't exist for players under about 25. You pay over the odds and that's the only way to get the players you want.

This post has been edited by Danny: Aug 1 2015, 10:44 AM

[han2503]

For 25m Barca bought Rakitic and Real bought Kroos.

I'm not saying we could get that kind of quality player in because Barca and Real are what they are and we cannot compete with that, but you can make smarter purchases with that kind of money

And sorry, but inflation or not, at best Bertolacci is worth 10 to 13m, because even in today's market that's what he's worth because he can't even be considered a great player, let alone top quality.

You're seriously overestimating Berto's qualities. When I say he's Bonaventura level, I don't just mean in terms of the type of player he is, but also quality level. And seriously, how can you make an assessment on Bona's shortcomings vs, Bertolacci's when we've only really seen him play for 90 minutes over 2 friendly games? He was decent vs Inter and very quiet vs Real.

Actually based on those 2 games, I can easily make a case that he is an average to good player, but they're not enough to make an assessment either way. We're not saying he's not good, but so far he hasn't shown us anything to make us think differently than we did when we signed him. Who knows, he could turn into the next Marchisio, but so far nothing indicates that, and as of right now, 20m is just too much for him

[X-Offender]

I agree with Han. If Bonaventura cost us €6 million, Bertolacci is worth €12 million, max. Roma completely played us for fools and we fell for it. And looks like we're being played again with Romagnoli.

Also, no wonder Zenit are asking €35 million for Witsel, when they think these guys (us) paid €20 million for a nobody like Bertolacci.

Galliani just loves digging his own grave.

[han2503]

I agree with Han. If Bonaventura cost us €6 million, Bertolacci is worth €12 million, max. Roma completely played us for fools and we fell for it. And looks like we're being played again with Romagnoli.

Also, no wonder Zenit are asking €35 million for Witsel, when they think these guys (us) paid €20 million for a nobody like Bertolacci.

Galliani just loves digging his own grave.

Yep

Same thing with paying out the 8m for Adriano

[Danny]

I agree with Han. If Bonaventura cost us €6 million, Bertolacci is worth €12 million, max. Roma completely played us for fools and we fell for it. And looks like we're being played again with Romagnoli.

Also, no wonder Zenit are asking €35 million for Witsel, when they think these guys (us) paid €20 million for a nobody like Bertolacci.

Galliani just loves digging his own grave.

Napoli offered 28M for Romagnoli. It was rejected.

Guess we're not the only fools then?

[Danny]

For 25m Barca bought Rakitic and Real bought Kroos.

I'm not saying we could get that kind of quality player in because Barca and Real are what they are and we cannot compete with that, but you can make smarter purchases with that kind of money

And sorry, but inflation or not, at best Bertolacci is worth 10 to 13m, because even in today's market that's what he's worth because he can't even be considered a great player, let alone top quality.

You're seriously overestimating Berto's qualities. When I say he's Bonaventura level, I don't just mean in terms of the type of player he is, but also quality level. And seriously, how can you make an assessment on Bona's shortcomings vs, Bertolacci's when we've only really seen him play for 90 minutes over 2 friendly games? He was decent vs Inter and very quiet vs Real.

Actually based on those 2 games, I can easily make a case that he is an average to good player, but they're not enough to make an assessment either way. We're not saying he's not good, but so far he hasn't shown us anything to make us think differently than we did when we signed him. Who knows, he could turn into the next Marchisio, but so far nothing indicates that, and as of right now, 20m is just too much for him

Berto has an equivalent career to Kondogbia, including number of caps.

Yet you're ready to regale Geoff as the next Makelele while discarding Berto as a piece of filth even though the latter outplayed the former in the ICC.

[X-Offender]

Napoli offered 28M for Romagnoli. It was rejected.

Guess we're not the only fools then?

Yep, apparently we're not.

[han2503]

Berto has an equivalent career to Kondogbia, including number of caps.

Yet you're ready to regale Geoff as the next Makelele while discarding Berto as a piece of filth even though the latter outplayed the former in the ICC.

Italy's options in midfield are threadbare at best, France on the other hand have an abundance of riches. Pogba will always come in ahead of him there anyway.

I never regaled Kondogbia as anything just that he's a very good player with high potential to be a great one in the future. And certainly one who has a higher threshold than Bertolacci.

And OMG, please stop mentioning the ICC game as a basis for this argument. It was 2 friendly games that had no meaning, Bertolacci was far from great in either appearance. I'm not basing my opinion of him on that as it's simply not enough. I'm prepared to give him a chance but so far he's shown that he's not the type of player we were really desperate for, which was a creator. However, this in no way means that I think he's rubbish, just not what we really needed

[Rossoneri7]

For 25m Barca bought Rakitic and Real bought Kroos.

I'm not saying we could get that kind of quality player in because Barca and Real are what they are and we cannot compete with that, but you can make smarter purchases with that kind of money

And sorry, but inflation or not, at best Bertolacci is worth 10 to 13m, because even in today's market that's what he's worth because he can't even be considered a great player, let alone top quality.

I'm baffled. Can you please explain how such a figure is reached? Or is it based on your assumptions?