Mateo Kovačić

[Harpsabu]

I know it’s unrealistic but it would be interesting to see him two years with Spaletti. I mean, Pjanic was worse when he came under Spaletti. Benched in Lyon, didn’t have position, he was basically free kick specialist who is too slow for attacking midfielder and too weak for defensive midfielder.

Spalletti didnt even coach Pjanic. He was gone before LS came back IIRC

 

[chipschups]

Spalletti didnt even coach Pjanic. He was gone before LS came back IIRC

Spalletti the one who switch Radja x Pjanic position. He said with that skinny leg Pjanic wouldnt survive play upfront get sandwiched by other defender. Thats why he put Radja who had muscle there.

 

[n4l]

People need to give up the kovacic wet dream. The kid just doesn't have the speed of thought, speed of execution, and consistent quality execution.

He could've been the next Iniesta, but just doesn't have the brain unfortunately.

 

[dynasty27]

Amongst all the Croatclan hype players he strikes as someone who could join an enemy

 

[Balor]

This is actually my biggest dissapointment with Inter. We don't try or know how to develop players. Icardi and maybe Skrniar and to a lesser extend Brozovic are the exception.

Look at Real, Barca, Bayern. All these big clubs develop players. They pay also a lot of money for young, talented and to an extend unproven players. But if you develop these players you can have them for maybe ten years. In this way you accomplish two things: you don't need to make a big turnaround every 2-3 years and the team is pretty much gel and second one: you can concentrate on one or two players per mercato. And for these players you can pay big money if you don't have holes in your team.
Chiesa maybe seems expensive at 60m. But if he turn good, we could be covered in this position for ten years and suddently doesn't seems expensive.
Same with Barella.


But definetely in 2 years we would look for Ninja's replacement. Already 30y old smoking, party animal.

Gabigol, Kondogbia, Joao Mario. 120m on three young players they thought could be developed over a number of years, it didn't work and left the club in shit for a few years. It's not that they haven't tried what you've suggested, reality is we just arent as good as other clubs in that regard. In Italy the only example of a club developing players is Sampdoria but then they get picked off by other clubs like us.

 

[Wallace]

If our trying is simply trusting Manshitni and Kia, then we haven't really tried.

Try harder.

 

[Balor]

If our trying is simply trusting Manshitni and Kia, then we haven't really tried.

Try harder.

I said they tried, but I also said it was a fucking disaster. Reality is they had to abandon it for the time being and go for the more tried and tested player for short term gain. Hopefully next season they start again with better young players but also this time we should have the benefit of actual world class players to influence them. We literally had no midfielder to teach K-dog or Mario, the fuck were they going to learn from Gary Medel?

 

[Wallace]

I don't agree with the notion of other players teaching, it's an overrated phenomena from football manager. Both Kondogbia and Joao Mario joined at the age of 23, not as a kid. Having a mentor helps with your adaptivity to a new environment so you can start focusing on learning on actual football related things.

It improves self learning, but it's not like football manager where every attribute dramatically increases. It's a misled motion.

They came as 23 experienced midfielders, especially Kondogbia, they did not need their hands to be held forever.

 

[Ed.]

I don't agree with the notion of other players teaching, it's an overrated phenomena from football manager. Both Kondogbia and Joao Mario joined at the age of 23, not as a kid. Having a mentor helps with your adaptivity to a new environment so you can start focusing on learning on actual football related things.

It improves self learning, but it's not like football manager where every attribute dramatically increases. It's a misled motion.

They came as 23 experienced midfielders, especially Kondogbia, they did not need their hands to be held forever.

Completely agree.

Phillipe Coutinho went to Liverpool at the age 21 and rose as a star without any older players mentoring him.

 

[Fapuccino]

I don't agree with the notion of other players teaching, it's an overrated phenomena from football manager. Both Kondogbia and Joao Mario joined at the age of 23, not as a kid. Having a mentor helps with your adaptivity to a new environment so you can start focusing on learning on actual football related things.

It improves self learning, but it's not like football manager where every attribute dramatically increases. It's a misled motion.

They came as 23 experienced midfielders, especially Kondogbia, they did not need their hands to be held forever.

It most certainly is not. Often times the difference between good and top players is a matter of details. Gaining just a bit more space, or moving slightly better, can give you the edge to change the tide of the game. Being around top players similar to you, and seeing how they play is a huge part of your development.

You have to be exposed to people better than you to become better. We might not notice the "little things" but they matter.

 

[Wallace]

We are not talking about the difference between good and top player.

We are talking about complete flops here.

If they need people holding their hands to save them from being complete flops, then they are the wrong people to begin with.

 

[K.I.]

We are not talking about the difference between good and top player.

We are talking about complete flops here.

If they need people holding their hands to save them from being complete flops, then they are the wrong people to begin with.

This, also Ed, who says Coutinho didnt have mentors there? he may have had one or not. Coaches can play that role as well.

 

[Fapuccino]

We are not talking about the difference between good and top player.

We are talking about complete flops here.

If they need people holding their hands to save them from being complete flops, then they are the wrong people to begin with.

Well it's not because playing with better players doesn't help, it's that that on its own is not enough then.

 

[Wallace]

I didn't say its completely useless, I just said it's overrated.

Dude, read.

 

[Fapuccino]

I didn't say its completely useless, I just said it's overrated.

Dude, read.

How do you go from it not being enough to salvage a player's career, to it being overrated? That's quite a leap of logic.

Fact of the matter is it's almost impossible to become a top player, unless you play with other top players. Just because many fail to take advantage of it, doesn't make it overrated.

 

[Balor]

I could go into so much depth about why you're out of your mind dismissing the influence of top players on those around them, particularly young players, but I'll just give you an extract I read before with details about the proven psychological effect that top players do have.

"The Köhler effect, named after the German psychologist Wolfgang Köhler. He found that weaker members of the Berlin rowing team improved their times fastest when paired with a more capable partner. This is partly about social comparison, raising aspirations by setting a higher benchmark, but is also about habits. As Anderson told me: “The weak link tends to work harder to keep up. But he also begins to absorb the attitudes of the top performer, who is often strong precisely because he is the first to the training ground.”

Also I know that anyone over the age of 30 is considered retirement age on this forum, but 23 isn't the age of a player in his prime, it's the age that a talent still has a lot more to learn to improve his game. And having top players around to learn from and compete with is how to improve a young player, otherwise they become complacent and turn into Joao Mario, a walking attitude with a big mouth.

 

[n4l]

I could go into so much depth about why you're out of your mind dismissing the influence of top players on those around them, particularly young players, but I'll just give you an extract I read before with details about the proven psychological effect that top players do have.

"The Köhler effect, named after the German psychologist Wolfgang Köhler. He found that weaker members of the Berlin rowing team improved their times fastest when paired with a more capable partner. This is partly about social comparison, raising aspirations by setting a higher benchmark, but is also about habits. As Anderson told me: “The weak link tends to work harder to keep up. But he also begins to absorb the attitudes of the top performer, who is often strong precisely because he is the first to the training ground.”

Also I know that anyone over the age of 30 is considered retirement age on this forum, but 23 isn't the age of a player in his prime, it's the age that a talent still has a lot more to learn to improve his game. And having top players around to learn from and compete with is how to improve a young player, otherwise they become complacent and turn into Joao Mario, a walking attitude with a big mouth.

Agreed, but i think the point being made is that k-dog and mario FLOPPED. You shouldn't need 'senators' to not flop. Maybe you don't develop fast enough, but you shouldn't flop.

But imo, k-dog flopped because he just doesn't have the ability. He's a limited player for a specific role, who Mancini thought for some weird reason he could transform.

Ciao mario on the other hand has the talent, but lacks the mentality. And I doubt with better players he would be better. While for different reasons, it's similar to kova right now in RM. He's been around top talent for what, 3-4 years and is still, imo, almost the same player as he was with us.

 

[Wallace]

I am not gonna bother, time is of essence.

Basically what n4l said.

 

[Balor]

Agreed, but i think the point being made is that k-dog and mario FLOPPED. You shouldn't need 'senators' to not flop. Maybe you don't develop fast enough, but you shouldn't flop.

But imo, k-dog flopped because he just doesn't have the ability. He's a limited player for a specific role, who Mancini thought for some weird reason he could transform.

Ciao mario on the other hand has the talent, but lacks the mentality. And I doubt with better players he would be better. While for different reasons, it's similar to kova right now in RM. He's been around top talent for what, 3-4 years and is still, imo, almost the same player as he was with us.

Yes they flopped, but what the original point I made that started this entire thing is that they arrived young and had zero guidance. They had a terrible coach who has a negative attitude, negative tactics and can't motivate players. Combine that with playing for us at a time where there were no leaders on the pitch either for them to look up to or to guide them, it all added up to the point where that round of developing young players failed as it was too late by time Spalletti arrived, the damage had been done.

As for Kova, his issue has simply been playing time which he just isn't getting enough of at Real, and often when he is played it is out of position which is just no help to developing a player.

 

[qb4ever_2k]

Apparently has requested transfer and stopped training with RM. I'm not sure what's in Spaletti's plan, but if he wanted Dembele, Kova can be a much better option.