The more I think about it, the more I am convinced of this.

This 4-3-1-2 foolishness has to stop. And instead of going 4-3-3, let's give Paqueta some more attacking freedom and play him in the hole.

But obviously Giampaolo's conservative and ancient mentality will never opt for that.

That looks great. The only question mark being Kessie, as he's not that good in a more holding type of role. I'd actually prefer Biglia next to Bennacer over Kessie in that kind of formation.

I think they'd complement each other well.

Obviously this is moot, I can't see us changing to this kind of system

I knew someone would bring this up.

Let me ask you a question. Out of the three seasons Kessie has played in Serie A thus far, which has been his best?

A ) Atalanta 16/17
B ) Milan 17/18
C ) Milan 18/19

The obvious answer is A. And what position did Kessie occupy then? He was part of the double pivot in Gasperini's 3-4-1-2, usually alongside Freuler. What position does Kessie occupy in his NT? Still part of the double pivot in Ivory Coast's 4-2-3-1, as per the Africa Cup of Nations from a couple of months ago.

So, why do people doubt him in that role here then? If anything, playing more retracted in midfield would relieve him of most of his offensive freedom (where he makes most mistakes) that come by being played as mezz'ala, and would give him more defensive duties, where he can exert his physicality and pressure on the ball (arguably his strongest suits).

Playing Biglia alongside Bennacer would be having two players of similar characteristics, and everyone knows that a double pivot works best when you have both brains (Bennacer) and brawn (Kessie) together.

I like this formation...a lot!

I think it will allow Paqueta to really flourish. Suso will play in his best position, and I guess Rebic also. Piatek should have no problem finding the goal with this kind of supporting cast. Kessie and Bennacer is not a bad partnership to have. Kessie despite his attacking weakness gives the team lots of energy..and Bennacer could be the slick quick-pass player in midfield. This could really work well.

On another point, I'm happy we got Rebic.

True. But, we are not lacking that honestly. We have lots of vision in Paqueta/Suso. We need this kind of explosive player.

Agreed, but what irks me most is that Rebić is very unstable mentality-wise. This could turn out to be a problem considering our team.

So Summary as per transfermarket.com

IN:
R Leao 25 Million Euros (Forward)
T Hernandez 20 Million Euros (Full back)
I Bennacer 16 Million Euros (Midfield)
L Duarte 11 Million Euros (CB)
R Krunic 8 Million (Midfield)
Rebic 2 year loan 5 Million loan fee (Forward)
Kessie Irrelevant for this market


OUT:
P Cutrone 18 Million Euros
D Laxalt Loan with option to buy 8 Million
A silva 2 year loan

All other departures were either free or loans. So basically we failed to sell. From Donna, Suso to dead rubber like Samu, Borini etc all

What do you mean? He is a red-card magnet? Or his performances are not consistent?

Honestly, in my opinion, he will be a success with us. Exactly the type of player we need. Of course, he will need to evolve with us, but I really like his pace and his general play.

I think we did okay. Why should we sell Donna? Yes, it was a quite expensive transfer market, but we did improve key areas. We need to get into the Champions leauge to become attractive for the big players. Look at Inter..

Agreed. Keeping Donna and Suso was a success IMO.

He is consistently inconsistent and depends on the mood of the team. If the team plays good he's usually good, if the team is bad he's usually the worst.

I think we should have gone with selling Donnarumma. I admit, I'm not a good judge in goalkeeper talent. But let's open the Donna-Milan talk. He has a big contract with us and is our number 1 keeper for 5 seasons or so. In the last two seasons IMO he hasn't really grown or evolved. The problems that bugged him years ago are still there, his mistakes and stupid decision making is here, his poor ball handling and passing hasn't improved. Whereas his price could actually sink after yet another average season. Next year Italy will play the Euro and if he (which is more then expected IMO) makes some of his stupid errors at this stage, we'll never get that kind of money out of him that we could have got now.

All the while we have Reina who's okay for a time like ours. I think we have to be rational - we have to put our money in places we actually need extra quality. I'd sell Donna in a heartbeat for a real good organizational player or a classy striker who creates on his own.

In the end it is good that we kept both Donna and Suso. But to me it is a bit alarming that how we cannot even sell our top players.

As for the window, it just depends how good will the new young talent be on the field.

Hmmm, yes he makes mistakes from time to time, but the guy has saved our asses in so many occasions. When it comes to world class saves, I think he is one of the best. His reflexes are extraordinary.

I see Daniel Maldini has been included in the 2018/19 roster, but he's been given the #98 shirt. I was under the impression that any Maldini kid could have chosen the #3 in case they made it to the first team.

May be 3 is mainly a defenders number and i believe he is an AM

Still should have taken the 3.

Anyway, looks like the Correa deal was almost done, according to AS. Atletico had lowered their demands, but then out of the blue we opted for a loan instead, and they declined (rightfully so).

Oh good God

Maybe we'll be able to snatch him up during January, if he would still join us by then.

You make good points. Maybe I have this general feeling about Kessie in a holding role from one or two games he played for us under Montella as the DM (not in a double pivot though)

I really wish Giampaolo would shift to something like that, it would suit all our players so much better


What do you mean? What kind of issues has he had?

Honestly, I don't think the money was ever really there for him.

When Silva to Monaco fell through this was basically over there and then

But when it comes to downsizing and building a competitive squad that can reach CL you have to be shrewd and pragmatic. IMO it would benefit us more to sell Donna sooner rather then later because his value isn't rising in the past 2 seasons. Also, a team like Milan should prioritize important position at put all available resources in two or three key positions. Right now Donna does not give us any special edge; Reina can do good as well for a considerably lesser wage while the money from Donna's transfer could be used to sign a top player or top talent willing to come to Milan.

This is what I was saying all along. Is it necessary to splash 30M on a talent leftback? Even if he is the new Maldini. Hell even if he is a Maldini per se. This team with Paolo Maldini in the roster would still struggle and stay 5th or 6th or 7th. But this team with say Weah and Albertini would have a serious shot a 4th spot. This is the difference I'm talking about; and right now we're in a position where such decisions have to be made with care.


Is this your thing with disliking high numbers? If so, I agree. But fact is, Milan retired the #3 shirt. Also, perhaps Daniele (and Paolo) wanted less pressure and publicity.


But we had the money to grab Leao and Duarte? Hmh...

Who spent 30M on a left back?

I get your logic about Donnarumma. But as far I know, nobody made any considerable offers for him. I think only PSG did and they offered very little, so we didn't consider it.

Sorry, 20M. Hernandez I meant.

We also sold Djalo (5M). And we reduced our wage bill considerably.

I understand the general frustration with AC Milan fans (here and on other forums). I am not particularly thrilled myself. That said ...

- FFP is real, B&G first and then F&M put us deep in a hole, and we have to climb out of it
- The FFP agreement with UEFA did *not* give us freedom to spend as much as we want (all it gave us is a little more time to meet FFP objectives, but we still have to be careful with spending)
- I really do not understand "FFP accounting", but it seems to me that "plusvalenze" are important and "minusvalenze" are to be avoided

If you take this into account, it can help understand some of what went on in this transfer market:

- We had to avoid selling players below book value (as that would have generated "minusvalenze"). And, unfortunately, some of our players are valued rather low based on their last couple of years (think Silva).
- As in the past, we struggled to sell marginal players with ridiculous wages (the few teams that can afford to pay a high salary do not care for them, smaller teams that may be interested are not willing to match their wage, and most players are not willing to take a pay cut by going somewhere else - think Monto).
- We did try to sell players that could generate a plusvalenza, even when that was not "popular" (think Cutrone). At the same time, we avoided "selling cheap" (for example, PSG's offer for Donna in June was unacceptable, same goes for the lowball offers we got for Suso).
- FFP driven restrictions can also explain the Correa saga. Initially we were counting on Silva's sale, we had to delay when the deal with Monaco fell apart, I guess we kept the deal alive because someone felt we needed someone with that player profile, and at the end (apparently) Atletico was willing to meet our offer but all we could afford was a loan deal (which Atletico understandably refused)

On the positive side:

- For the most part we got players that fit Giampaolo's system
- For the most part we got players with potential to increase in value (which will hopefully result in plusvalenze in the future)
- We did not dump / undersell players that we count on (I am ok with Cutrone leaving, as I do not think he is that good, I am not convinced we could have gotten much more, and his value was not going to increase by riding the bench)
- We did not pay excessively for players (for example, it would have been nice to get Sensi but not at that price)
- We did not get players that have "baggage" (think Icardi or some other "fan favorites" I have seen mentioned)
- Next year the book value of some of our crappy players will be lower (which will make our life a tad easier)
- Not only we reduced our wage bill, but new players were signed at reasonable wages
- For the most part, we did not go for loans (especially loans without a by option). Now, this last point is debatable, as one or two "quality" players may have been beneficial in the short run, possibly the difference between making CL or not. So it is not clear what makes most sense from a long term perspective.

Bottom line:

- Don't be too hard on Elliott and Gazidiz, what we are experiencing is clearly unpleasant, but I do not think there is much of a choice (we simply cannot get back to the top without meeting FFP rules). FWIW, Inter had to go through a similar "cure", though Suning did a great job with increasing revenues (let's see how our management fares in this area).
- Don't be too hard on Maldini and Boban, what they were asked to do was not easy (regardless of experience level)
- Stop lamenting Leo, he contributed in part to our problems by getting a couple of marginal players with ridiculous wages. He is good (possibly very good) for a team like PSG (which has a large budget and more room for errors), but not for present-day Milan.

As for Giampaolo, I share some of the concerns I have seen on this and other forums, but I think he is more "flexible" than he gets credit for, and his system is a tad more complex than what we have been used to in recent years (so he needs more time to get going). I *really* would like to watch Milan games and feel good about the team. Obviously I like "winning" but AFAIAC "winning ugly" is rather painful to watch, and even when winning we have been far from consistent. In other words, I am willing to give Giampaolo a little more time before I turn negative.

20M for a left back is very acceptable IMO. We couldn't have kept playing with Rodriguez, and I'm glad the club realized this.

@Forza Milan! I think we kept the Correa deal alive because we hoped that someone would eventually make an offer for Silva. But in the end nobody did and we couldn't afford to spend +40M for Correa.

But my question remains. Why did we spend on Leao?

Unless we're certain that he's world class, I really can't explain. Those 30M could have been spent more wisely no doubt.

True. Let's see, perhaps we will have the answer this season. I have my doubts, though.

Agreed (I believe Mendes tried until the end, and the last-minute exchange with Rebic was a fallback), but I also think we were set on him (as opposed to others) because he fit a certain profile (both in playing style and personality).


Good question, Leao's purchase was "interesting" in that it did not fit the overall pattern of behavior with our new management. I heard it said that Elliott blocked Correa but not Leao, because Correa exceeded a set amount (I don't know if there is any validity to this, and I can't even remember where I read it).

Worth noting that Elliott has (or had) a financial stake in Lille (so I guess the money was "kept in the family"). Also, the Djalo sale was probably related (so both teams got "plusvalenze" out of the overall deal).

My guess is that we wanted to get forwards that were not primarily "poachers", and these do not come cheap.


I do not believe you can be certain of something like that :-). Especially with someone that young plus going to a new league (one that emphasizes defense), not to mention that he is going into a team relatively low on talent that is still adjusting to a new system. I think it was a gamble, hopefully it will pay off. Will see ...


Possibly. My guess is that we prioritized building a faster and more "dynamic" front line over other needs. Interested in what you would have done with the 30M (I have read a lot of different opinions thru the summer, so I am genuinely curious).

EDIT: read this after my post. Basically it says that buying Rebic will de-value Leao. Of course, this is CM and they seem to like to dump on Milan ...

*cough*Joao Felix*cough*



I would have kept the 30M, added something extra and signed Correa or Depay, or someone of that calibre.



The guy who wrote that article (Cristiano Ruiu) is an idiot, a complete ignoramus, a disgusting Galliani kissass that has an agenda for every article he writes. Do not believe a word you read.

He cost Atleti a tad more than 30M :-)


For some reason I missed the fact that it was Ruiu, I normally avoid his posts for those exact reasons. He is not the only one on CM who likes to put Milan in a bad light, not sure why I still bother with that site.

Yeah, but the point was that you sometimes can be certain if a youngster is world class or not.



He's one of those guys I would punch if I saw him walking on the street.

I still wonder what really went down between Silva and Monaco.

Had that gone through, I believe we'd be looking at a completely different transfer market

All in all, with the resources we had, I think we did good. But yes, the Leao move is still baffling to this day considering how much they wanted Correa. I mean logic states that you first go after your top target. Just doesn't make sense how we spent all the Cutrone money on a shot in the dark when we were desperate for a profile like Correa

They were looking for a player to complement Piantek is all I could think of

Monaco were going to pay 30M as agreed, but then some issues came during Silva's medical, so they offered 20M instead and we refused.

Dunno. I think Monaco wanted to reduce the price so they came up with "medical problems" as an excuse. I do not believe there was a real problem.

Looks like the Rebic-Silva deal is just a two-year loan with no option to buy. So, if Rebic does well, we'll have to negotiate with Eintracht for his purchase.

Maybe the contract expires for both after 2 years

They both expire in June 2022, so no.

Hmm, are you sure? It was everywhere that there will be an option in the deal. Both ways

https://www.milannews24.com/rebic-due-anni-...to-ecco-perche/

According to what was stated by Oliver Frankenbach, financial director of the German club, the reason behind the lack of a right to purchase in the negotiation for Rebic and André Silva is due to the short time available to the two clubs that, apparently, have started to strike the negotiation only in the last days of the transfer market.

Huh, this could be problematic

Of course an option to buy doesn't bring any guarantees with it. But if Rebic has 2 really great season with us they'll want a bigger fee than what would have been agreed upon this summer.

Of course the same can be said for Silva, but I just don't see that happening

But he'd have only one year left in his contract then. Doubt they'd ask more than 25M for a player who's contract is about to expire.

Who knows, they'd still hold all the cards, especially if he does very well with us and even more so if Silva struggles with them

Let's not get too much ahead of ourselves, shall we?

Rumors:

- Dani Olmo has been linked with Milan for the past few days but nothing concrete emerged. Then today he wasn't called up for the friendly with Lokomotiva and in the press conference the Dinamo Zagreb coach said "He won't play because there's a negotiation going on". The price tag is 25M.

- Milan are thinking about Emre Can for midfield as the Turkish-German player is no considered by Sarri.

Source: Mediaset

Don't know how good Olmo is, but I'd be delighted about Can.

Never heard of Olmo, but an absolute no to someone who wasn't good enough for a weak Liverpool.

Emre Can is good, man.