Marco Verratti

Catta

Senior Member
The Mino Raiola effect. The ones he hasn't fucked up in the head are count-on-one-hand list. Every other one is a headcase. Poor Donnarumma needs to ditch him before it gets worse than that whole contract problem he's already had.

I think only Maxwell was a normal Raiola client
 

ASordidGod

New member
Not as good as Kroos either.

Yeah, okay, I forgot about him. :lol:

The Mino Raiola effect. The ones he hasn't fucked up in the head are count-on-one-hand list. Every other one is a headcase. Poor Donnarumma needs to ditch him before it gets worse than that whole contract problem he's already had.

I'm pretty sure you're joking, but even so it's more likely the other way round. As in, only headcases and the truly desperate are willing to sign with him.
 

Ritchie

New member
The glad we never got him comments are daft given some of the absolute dross signed in midfield lately.

He wouldn't have stagnated either had he come here.
 

BarçaBarça

New member
It is a joy to see him fail, after he bet on PSG as a way to be a successful footballer in the European elite.

Fair game to players who play to earn money, but a really hope that is the only thing you can ever do in PSG.
 

El Gato

Villarato!
I'm pretty sure you're joking, but even so it's more likely the other way round. As in, only headcases and the truly desperate are willing to sign with him.

Probably true to an extent. Symbiotic relationship at its finest. But there is a lot of evidence of Raiola pushing deals through feeding players' egos more than of the contrary. Gigi Donnarumma wasn't exactly famous for being a nut at his age.
 

Barcilliant

Senior Member
I would prefer Pogba to Verratti. If we could get Pogba on loan and maybe send Gomes the other way that would be interesting.

Thoughts?
 

Messi983

Senior Member
City have built a team out of oil money

They have but they've used their resources much smarter since Pep is there. They've spent 500M over the last two years to rejuvenate the team and improve overall depth. Yes, they've overpaid for most players but that's expected when everyone know they have money. They also whiffed on some signings like Bravo and Nolito (thought they were both pretty cheap in todays world) but at the same time they got 7 potential new longterm starters (Ederson, Walker, Laporte, Stones, Sane, G. Jesus and Mendy would also be a starter if he'd be healthy). From the most used players only D.Silva, Fernandinho, Aguero, Otamendi, KDB and Sterling have stayed from the old guard though the last two were most likely brought in 2015 with the knowledge that Pep will join next season. So while it's true they've spend a lot they have also made the right signings in most cases and they won't really have to spend much in coming years. I think Fred is already a done deal and he'll eventually take over from Fernandinho and B.Silva could be a replacement for D.Silva. Then they'll only need to improve bench once some of the older guys will leave but their first XI will be pretty much set for the next 3-5 years.

On the other hand PSG have used 400M on just two players and they still have big holes at LB and DM and could also use an improvement at RB (Alves is just getting old) and GK. Their bench is also nowhere near good enough after so much money spent so I prefer City's approach/project between both oil clubs.
 

Ritchie

New member
The problem with their approach is they spent the 400 mill on two players but neither of them are the best player in the world. Neymar you could say is in the top 3 and Mbappe is mainly potential.

They'd have been better off going for Hazard instead of Neymar for half the fee and using the other half on proper full backs and a DM or just kept Matuidi. Mbappe is a good investment as long as he doesn't stagnate in France like Veratti.
 
Last edited:

ASordidGod

New member
The problem with their approach is they spent the 400 mill on two players but neither of them are the best player in the world. Neymar you could say is in the top 3 and Mbappe is mainly potential.

They'd have been better off going for Hazard instead of Neymar for half the fee and using the other half on proper full backs and a DM or just kept Matuidi. Mbappe is a good investment as long as he doesn't stagnate in France like Veratti.

Yeah, agree. And isn't the money for Mbappe due to be paid this season, further restricting them in transfer market? They were too obsessed about making a statement signing; if they'd taken the Neymar money and spread it around they'd be much better off. Goalkeeper's meh, Dani Alves' old, left back's poor, CM's bar Veratti not good enough, and Cavani is what he is, which is a poacher/goal scorer which is okay in France but not in Europe. Neymar's top quality, and Mbappe may well be one day, but they don't compensate for the deficiencies within that team/squad.
 

Givenchy

Senior Member
The problem with their approach is they spent the 400 mill on two players but neither of them are the best player in the world. Neymar you could say is in the top 3 and Mbappe is mainly potential.

They'd have been better off going for Hazard instead of Neymar for half the fee and using the other half on proper full backs and a DM or just kept Matuidi. Mbappe is a good investment as long as he doesn't stagnate in France like Veratti.

totally agree and tbh they actually had a pretty good team before Neymar and Mbappe as we saw in last years 4-0. instead of throwing money at big names they'd be better going the City route, smart investments and amazing depth. iirc they still need to balance the books for the Mbappe deal so expect AdM to leave
 

footyfan

Calma, calma
The messages criticizing Verratti are funny because a player of his profile is exactly what Barca is missing at the moment, and he would be key to unlocking EV's drab football.
 

Home of Barca Fans

Top