Marc Bartra

[Zangash]

Song isnt a better CB than Bartra. But the fact the club gave him so many chances there ahead of Barta and then still didnt give Barta much games after Song left tells its own story.

They tried to find a new CB but fucked up with Song.... and still didnt turn to Barta.

It does mean something if four coaches have not fancied him and tried to find other players before turning to him.

Who the heck knows what it means. Our sporting director was Zubi. He signed Song to play CB and signed Vermaelen for... I'm not even sure what reason. Is Vermaelen's signing yet even more proof that there's something wrong with Bartra?

 

[BBZ8800]

Why Lucho doesn't use Bartra more often is up in the air right now, but using past managers as an excuse seriously holds no weight at all.

No, Tito was for playing Song as CB instead of Bartra. Unless you have solid points to explain why Song was the better option.

Song wasn't a starter for any manager. We learned why in the end, because he wasn't good enough.
Adriano isn't a starter for any manager.
Montoya isn't a starter for any manager.

Iniesta is a starter for all managers (for example, Pep, Tito, Tata, Lucho).
Messi is a starter for all managers.
Busi is a starter for all managers.
Pedro was a starter for some managers.

Look, if 4-5 managers in a row "love" you, that says something.
If you are liked by 2 managers, and hated by 2 managers, ok, it happens.
But if you are on the bench with 4 managers in a row, that can't be a coincidence.

Song isnt a better CB than Bartra. But the fact the club gave him so many chances there ahead of Barta and then still didnt give Barta much games after Song left tells its own story.

They tried to find a new CB but fucked up with Song.... and still didnt turn to Barta.

It does mean something if four coaches have not fancied him and tried to find other players before turning to him.

+1 Exactly.
That is the point.

It only tells that all managers are trying every possible option, except playing with Bartra.
(They all judged that he is not good to be a starter, for some reason)

Also, if Vermaelen was fit, who knows, maybe even him would be infront of Bartra/Mathieu.

Coaches don't trust him too much...

Anyway, we are not discussing whether Bartra is good, since he is good.
This is about whether he is the next Puyol. Which he probably isn't.

 

[khaled_a_d]

In Pep's last Season 2011-12, Bartra was actually 21 and a half aged (at the end of a Season).
He was old enough to be used.

But again, Pep decided not to use him too much.
Busquets, for example, was aged 20 and in that Season he played 24 matches under Pep.

So, from this or that reason, Pep also decided not to push/play Bartra, but he had faith in some other young players.

So, we could say that Pep, Tito (+Roura), Tata and Luis Enrique all used him not too much.

In fact Thiago who is few months younger was officially promoted and used in Pep last season while having Xavi/Iniesta/Cesc to compete with him .along with Cuenca&Tello who was promoted that year too
sure it is expected that defenders get promoted a bit older but with the injuries and lack of depth in defense and he still didn't use him

IMO Bartra is a good defender ,right now he is exceeding my initial expectation after Tito season.I thought he wasn't good enough to be here but he is now proving to be a good squad player .good to have him
Have high doubts he can be starter .but won't rule the chance he proves me wrong

 

[Zangash]

Song wasn't a starter for any manager. We learned why in the end, because he wasn't good enough.
Adriano isn't a starter for any manager.
Montoya isn't a starter for any manager.

Iniesta is a starter for all managers (for example, Pep, Tito, Tata, Lucho).
Messi is a starter for all managers.
Busi is a starter for all managers.
Pedro was a starter for some managers.

Look, if 4-5 managers in a row "love" you, that says something.
If you are liked by 2 managers, and hated by 2 managers, ok, it happens.
But if you are on the bench with 4 managers in a row, that can't be a coincidence.



+1 Exactly.
That is the point.

It only tells that all managers are trying every possible option, except playing with Bartra.
(They all judged that he is not good to be a starter, for some reason)

Also, if Vermaelen was fit, who knows, maybe even him would be infront of Bartra/Mathieu.

Coaches don't trust him too much...

Anyway, we are not discussing whether Bartra is good, since he is good.
This is about whether he is the next Puyol. Which he probably isn't.

While I get your point, part of it is due to runoff. By that I mean:

1.) Tito was essentially a less intelligent and risky version of Pep. What were the odds of him changing anything?
2.) Tata was scared shitless of the six year old in the top row of the Camp Nou who boo'd him. What were the odds of him changing anything? He used Cesc as a frequent starter constantly but after departing revealed a very negative opinion of the player.
3.) Lucho attempted to make major signings in midfield, defense, and the front line and ultimately didn't get to make all of them. Would Iniesta and Busquets and Alves all be such nailed on starters if he had a board capable of signing the players he asked for (Koke, Cuadrado, etc)?

A faulty transfer policy and a board incapable of hiring a manager with competency should not be indicators of solidarity among the men in charge. If Pep was still here we can be almost certain the team hierarchy would not be as it has been for the past few seasons.

And I was never on the boat of Bartra being the next Puyol. I just find this argument of "4 managers think he sucks so he must suck" to be, well, sucky.

 

[JamDav1982]

While I get your point, part of it is due to runoff. By that I mean:

1.) Tito was essentially a less intelligent and risky version of Pep. What were the odds of him changing anything?
2.) Tata was scared shitless of the six year old in the top row of the Camp Nou who boo'd him. What were the odds of him changing anything? He used Cesc as a frequent starter constantly but after departing revealed a very negative opinion of the player.
3.) Lucho attempted to make major signings in midfield, defense, and the front line and ultimately didn't get to make all of them. Would Iniesta and Busquets and Alves all be such nailed on starters if he had a board capable of signing the players he asked for (Koke, Cuadrado, etc)?

A faulty transfer policy and a board incapable of hiring a manager with competency should not be indicators of solidarity among the men in charge. If Pep was still here we can be almost certain the team hierarchy would not be as it has been for the past few seasons.

And I was never on the boat of Bartra being the next Puyol. I just find this argument of "4 managers think he sucks so he must suck" to be, well, sucky.

There is evidence of how Pep rated him at club.... and he dindnt play him much at all. Despite him being 20/21 and being voted best defender in Segunda.

When did Tata reveal a negative opinion of Cesc?

Edit: The way you speak about Tito and Tata is a disgrace. Trying to belittle them as if you know better.

Grow up.

 

[Zangash]

There is evidence of how Pep rated him at club.... and he dindnt play him much at all. Despite him being 20/21 and being voted best defender in Segunda.

When did Tata reveal a negative opinion of Cesc?

Edit: The way you speak about Tito and Tata is a disgrace. Trying to belittle them as if you know better.

Grow up.

Tata deserves to be belittled imo. Was in way over his head.

I only speak negatively about Tito in how he chose his players. Alexis got to start almost every week but couldn't score if one on one with an open net, and this was when Tello was actually playing well.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Sorry, but lol.
Barca in 2000-2003 was like Real Madrid a few Seasons ago.
We weren't good, but expectations were always the highest.
We expected La liga title in every Season, and wanted to reach the CL finals in every Season.

It doesn't matter what fans expect. Fans of Valencia probably also expect to win La Liga and CL. What matters is the objective situation at the time and Barca of early 00s was a mediocre club compared to what it has become now and CB position was certainly one of the weakest.
Anything else of what you said is just tl'dr regurgitating of the same.

Why compare Bartra with Puyol? Puyol is a legend. Probably, Barça's best defender ever.

Exactly. Comparing retired legend to someone, who's career hasn't even started properly is retarded. Especially to assess if that someone is not good enough for first team. Saying ''but coaches didn't use him so he must be bad'' is not a good argument, especially given how we all see that Mathiue is worse in about every aspect of the game, but still chosen over Bartra.
My assumption is what i've already said. Coaches of recent Barca are just too afraid to use inexperienced players because of immense pressure they get thanks to tremendous success of Pep's team (which ironically introduced several youngsters). Add the fact that we have a former champion's league winning/world cup winning/world cup finalist defensive pairing and not a goddamn Christanval to compete with even if the former are in bad from, doesn't help Bartra. Putting a young midfielder or young forward is never the same risk as trusting young defender. One fuck up from a defender costs more than 10 fuckups from any of the former. Managers instinctively think that more experienced player is safer option in key matches and often wont jeopardize their plans with potentially high risk/high reward decisions. 20 year old Puyol would not be playing in post Pep's Barca either.

 

[JamDav1982]

Tata deserves to be belittled imo. Was in way over his head.

I only speak negatively about Tito in how he chose his players. Alexis got to start almost every week but couldn't score if one on one with an open net, and this was when Tello was actually playing well.

Get a grip and grow up.

You dont have a single clue what you are speaking about as per usual.

 

[Alarcón]

Tata deserves to be belittled imo. Was in way over his head.

I only speak negatively about Tito in how he chose his players. Alexis got to start almost every week but couldn't score if one on one with an open net, and this was when Tello was actually playing well.

No one deserves to be belittled and especially not for the line-up they chose in a freaking game. They all tried their best but coaching Barça is hard, and Tata had the decency to step down when he realised the job was too big for him. You should learn some manners.

 

[khaled_a_d]

Sorry, but lol.
Barca in 2000-2003 was like Real Madrid a few Seasons ago.
We weren't good, but expectations were always the highest.
We expected La liga title in every Season, and wanted to reach the CL finals in every Season.
(We played CL semifinals in 2000 and 2002, if I remember correctly, losing to Valencia and Real)

We are Barca, and we were always Barca. This reply is just insane, sorry.
You make it sound like we were Liverpool or Arsenal and that we could have experimented with youngsters, without pressure.

Also, we were CL winners in 2006, and expectations were high.
How on earth then Pedro, Busi and other guys managed to stay here?
By your logic, expectations back then were even higher than today.

If Deulo doesn't get chances here, there is a strong reason for that.
If Bartra is a squad player for 4 coaches in a row, there must be strong reason for that.

Young Puyol, on the other hand, played for 4-5 different coaches (Van Gaal, Ferrer, Rexach, Antic, Rijkaard).
We can go in circles forever with answers how Barca was weaker back then.

Look, Bartra is a good squad player.
But calling him still the next Puyol even after 4 coaches don't believe in him, even though he is already 24...

tbf he has a point ,Barca always wanted to win everything ,that is true but the expectations wasn't as high as the post Laporta era .
What Pep and Rijkaard has done to this club is huge .not only what fans would expect from the team in terms of wins but also from our players in terms of ability
Fans now don't want to see a solid good player in the starting line up.they want every single one to be a sort of superstar in his position IMO .
We won the CL with players like MVB/Edmilson/Oleguer/Giuly starting . all were very good players and sort of glue guys who helped the team a lot but fans won't accept those kinds of players anymore

 

[Ini8]

We won the CL with players like MVB/Edmilson/Oleguer/Giuly starting . all were very good players and sort of glue guys who helped the team a lot but fans won't accept those kinds of players anymore

Yes, that's kind of sad. I'd love have those kind of players in our squad. I hope we stop buying superstars every summer and start buying utility players/talented youngsters who have been properly scouted and can break into the starting eleven at some point in the future.

 

[Hamzah]

bartra is a perfect backup player. and if he keeps improving he can MAYBE replace pique one day.

 

[KingMessi]

Tata deserves to be belittled imo. Was in way over his head.

I only speak negatively about Tito in how he chose his players. Alexis got to start almost every week but couldn't score if one on one with an open net, and this was when Tello was actually playing well.

He may not have worked out here. But we should give him the respect he deserves, at the very least.

 

[BBZ8800]

It doesn't matter what fans expect. Fans of Valencia probably also expect to win La Liga and CL. What matters is the objective situation at the time and Barca of early 00s was a mediocre club compared to what it has become now and CB position was certainly one of the weakest.
Anything else of what you said is just tl'dr regurgitating of the same.

Ok, we will not agree on this one.
Look, Barca was never the best team in the world officially, until Pep's era.
That is the only moment in history when we were the best, for a longer period.

We had our moments in the past, like with Cruijff and Rijkaard.

But again, your post sounds as if we were some average European club.
When I was a kid in 90s and when I started to watch football, during 90s, this is how me and all of my friends ranked top teams in the world:
-- if someone would ask in any Season during 90s who will win Champions league, the answer would be:
1. Milan
2. Juventus
3. Barcelona
4. Real
5. or Manchester
-- we could add Arsenal as a no6., but they were behind "big5"

Bayern wasn't that strong back then, till 99'.
Roma, Lazio and Inter were good in Italian Serie A, but not good enough in Europe.
Chelsea was a crap club back then. City was in a div 2 or div 3.
French teams were average teams, like Schalke today.
That's it basically.

So, I can agree that TODAY Barca and Real are Top2 teams in the world for the last 5-10 Seasons.
And in the past those were Milan and Juventus, and Barca and Real were 3rd and 4th biggest European teams.

But that's it.
We were always "Barca".

We were always among Top5 European teams. And so, we couldn't afford to casually develop youngsters in Puyol's and Xavi's era, as some posts amy suggest.

Saying ''but coaches didn't use him so he must be bad'' is not a good argument, especially given how we all see that Mathiue is worse or at best equal in about every aspect of the game, but still chosen over Bartra.

That is subjective.
If I were a coach, my choices would be probably 1. Pique 2. Masch 3. Mathieu/Vermaelen 5. Bartra

Bartra is good, but I personally don't trust him.
He rushes to make a tackle, he leaves a space behind him.
It works against teams like Levante.
Bigger teams can easily exploit that, drive him off his position and get alone with our keeper after 2-3 precise passes.

My assumption is what i've already said. Coaches of recent Barca are just too afraid to use inexperienced players because of immense pressure they get thanks to tremendous success of Pep's team (which ironically introduced several youngsters). Add the fact that we have a former champion's league winning/world cup winning/world cup finalist defensive pairing and not a goddamn Christanval to compete with even if the former are in bad from. Managers instinctively think that more experienced player is safer option in key matches and often wont jeopardize their plans with potentially high risk/high reward decisions. 20 year old Puyol would not be playing in post Pep's Barca either.

That is your opinion, ok.
I wouldn't play Bartra because he is too young, but because I don't like his defensive skills.

 

[DonAK]

Bartra is a good player. Very good back-up to have. Usually always does his job well when called upon. Some of us including me may have expected way too much of him and perhaps rated him too highly.

That said those belittling him and playing him down are wrong too. A player plays sparingly, but does quite well whenever he plays. What more do you want?

Some people are just unbelievable.