BBZ8800
Senior Member
I said in the message to sign new midfielder, so he would be playing the most minutes obv. Arthur would.be in rotation. Rather Arthur than those oldies.
And it's not like we could get rid of all three oldies at the same time. It would be process.
Ok, but I don't get this idea "rather Atthur than those oldies".
Why would you guys rather have a weaker player just because he is young?
Is our goal to win matches or to win a trophy of a local teen magazine for fielding a team with an average age of 23?
I know, a reply will be: he is young. Maybe he will improve.
How many times we have seen the same scenario in recent years?
I will try to remember, it was the same with:
The new Xavi Samper, The new Baresi Bartra Bartresi, The new Messi Halilovic, Arnaiz (lol, remember when people had faith in him for a few months), Sandro Ramirez a possible future no9, The new Iniesta Denis, Montoya, Wague, Marlon, Mina, Malcom the great, The Black Prinze Dembele, the new Xavi Arthur, Alena, Puig, Baby Busquets Oriol etc.
I know that each player has it's own way of development, but if a success rate of similar players is around 10-20%, do you think it's wise to put too much hope into an option that guys like Arthut will magically improve?
And is it wise to sell players who were actually world class players once in their careers like Busi, Raki, Vidal in order to make more room for guys like Arthur?
For me, the answer is pretty clear.
Last edited: