- Joined
- Jul 3, 2018
- Messages
- 6,395
- Likes
- 9,380
- Favorite Player
- CARLOS
I’m ready for Inzaghi to spill the beans. Can we really be more surprised about how much shit inter is in at the financial/ upper management level?
But why does he say it as if Scudetto caused some financial problems? Or is this some lost in translation stuff?He's obviously referring to our spending before Scudetto. He isn't wrong but he got advantage of that spending too with the squad he inherited.
Could it be as straight forward as it is? like we only won one trophy, so we are low on prize money? LOL Just spitballingI don't get this "Inter have won one Scudetto, which then caused some financial problems for the team"
But why does he say it as if Scudetto caused some financial problems? Or is this some lost in translation stuff?
In reallity Inzaghi got already sacked and that guy from yesterday was Conte, hidden in a Inzaghi costume.Maybe, but this is my favourite post game he’s given at Inter.
Be fucked off, be petty, be angry towards the ownership. Compact the team behind you and create that “against everyone and everything” mentality.
Probably what Biasin is talking about:But why does he say it as if Scudetto caused some financial problems? Or is this some lost in translation stuff?
As long as I don't like the rigid system of Conte, I cannot deny how good he is in assessing which players will work well for him.
This is just a opinion of yours, without any valid arguments. Anyway, I'm almost agree apart from some picks. Lazaro was never a Conte's choice. Lazaro just said that Conte had a big part of his choice to accept Inter, but not that Conte insisted for him. Sanchez and Darmian were Conte's demands too. For example, he also wanted Kulushevski, but during that time, the most reports were that Marotta is after Kulusevski. So, basically apart from Lukaku, all others are just blind guessing.Conte asked and received Lukaku, Valentino Lazaro, Victor Moses, Ashley Young, Arturo Vidal and Aleksandar Kolarov.
The likes of Barella, Sensi, Eriksen, Godin, Darmian and Hakimi were not his choices.
Lukaku was a great deal. He came for 75 mln, scored a lot of goals, formed a great duo with Lautaro, and got sold for 115 mln, which is 40 mln profit. One of the best Inter's deals.Vidal was decent at best, very streaky.
Lazaro was a failure.
Lukaku was great statistically but not really a great deal.
Kolarov was a weak transfer.
Young was decent for maybe 12-14 months, but nothing special.
Moses was okay for depth as a quick fix.
How this is related to the topic at all?Marotta was saying in both 2019-20 and 2020-21 that our target was not the Scudetto, even when we were first with a healthy advantage.
Marotta was saying in 2021-22 that Scudetto was our goal from day 1, even if the team had regressed.
How was Lukaku not a great deal? We sold him for $50mil more than what we paid for him, and he carried us to the league.Conte asked and received Lukaku, Valentino Lazaro, Victor Moses, Ashley Young, Arturo Vidal and Aleksandar Kolarov.
The likes of Sanchez, Barella, Sensi, Eriksen, Godin, Darmian and Hakimi were not his choices.
I think group 2 is far better.
Vidal was decent at best, very streaky.
Lazaro was a failure.
Lukaku was great statistically but not really a great deal.
Kolarov was a weak transfer.
Young was decent for maybe 12-14 months, but nothing special.
Moses was okay for depth as a quick fix.
Marotta was saying in both 2019-20 and 2020-21 that our target was not the Scudetto, even when we were first with a healthy advantage.
Marotta was saying in 2021-22 that Scudetto was our goal from day 1, even if the team had regressed.
But how this has anything to do with the Inzaghi comparison? Conte had more resources on his disposal. In this comparison perspective, it doesn't matter how much these players were sold afterwards. It doesn't help Inzaghi at all that we made a massive Lukaku sale for 115m if the replacement is then Dzeko and Correa for 32m.Conte spent a lot, but in reality the club got a nice profit from his purchases. We bought Lukaku and Hakimi for about 120 mln, but sold them for more than 170 mln. Barella is another player that came under Conte, and cost us 40 mln, but his value now is 70+. As long as I don't like the rigid system of Conte, I cannot deny how good he is in assessing which players will work well for him. Spalletti also had his word about the transfers, and we got Politano, Nainggolan and Vecino. That were more than 60+ mln wasted on low quality players. Only Politano was sold without a loss, as we gathered same money that we invested in him. Inzaghi demand was useless Correa for 30 mln. I'm a bit happy that we didn't have more money, because it was quite possible to get stuck with some expensive but worthless wishes of Inzaghi.
Conte didn't left Inzaghi with problems as well. We had good, mentality strong group, which just became a champion. The problems were the lack of investments by Zhang, not because Conte left some kind of a mess. Spalletti left huge mess behind him, which was fixed very quickly by Marotta and Conte, but I guess no one will remember this.
Doesn't help, because almost nothing was invested in the squad. This is not Conte's fault as Biasin trying to mask it. The half of 170 mln is 85. If that sum was invested in few proper players, the team could have been strengthened, and still to have a good profit + getting rid of two the highest salaries.But how this has anything to do with the Inzaghi comparison? Conte had more resources on his disposal. In this comparison perspective, it doesn't matter how much these players were sold afterwards. It doesn't help Inzaghi at all that we made a massive Lukaku sale for 115m if the replacement is then Dzeko and Correa for 32m.
Squad is definitely worse compared to Conte era (the second season).
But Di Canio is right with his comments that Inzaghi shouldn't talk like he won the Champions League when he boasts about the trophies he has won. It has been a good achievement, the trophies and the CL knockouts but that's about it. No need to expect everyone to suck your dick because of that, this is not Lazio.
What 170m?Doesn't help, because almost nothing was invested in the squad. This is not Conte's fault as Biasin trying to mask it. The half of 170 mln is 85. If that sum was invested in few proper players, the team could have been strengthened, and still to have a good profit + getting rid of two the highest salaries.
Money gathered from Lukaku and Hakimi's sales. They are more, but we got at least 170mln.What 170m?
But you miss the point that Suning wanted to invest in better players and that was possible after two consecutive CL qualifications. Anyway, you make it to look worse than in reality though. Spalletti left a broken squad - Perisic wanted to leave, because of the Icardi's saga, with the latter on his way out as well. Balde was on loan. Candreva was pure trash as a winger, and Conte did great job resurrecting him as WB. Our other RW was Politano, who is medicare at best, but let's assume that he covers the back up position there. Then, you need a new RB as well + 40 mln for Barella, who was already agreed. Oh, and new CF as Lautaro was too green to be a starter there. Now, please calculate how much we have to spend for decent forward, two quality wingers (+one back up winger), new RB, and for an AM as well, cuz Ninja failed completely there. This is huge money, regardless who is a coach. Conte converted Candreva in RWB, introduced Bastoni as a LCB, found two cheap patches like Young and Moses for the wingbacks, when Lazaro didn't work. He got Sanchez for free. The only big spending was Lukaku, because I've already said Barella was agreed earlier.We raised our salary budget as well.
We committed funds for the long run based on those moves. Signing a player doesn't have a one off cost.
We "spent", committed, spell it however you want, 500m under Conte.
That amount is below 200m when it comes to either Spalletti or Inzaghi...
Where is our profit from Ciao Mario 3.5 mln net salary + 45 mln transfer fee. Gone for zero? Ninja 4.5 mln net + big transfer money + the loss of Zaniolo, left for zero? Kondogbia? Correa? Other losers?On Lukaku, @CafeCordoba said it how it is about the sporting parts.
On the financial side.
We gave around 25m to Lukaku, gross. Over two seasons.
We gave Manchester United arouns 85m.
65m base fee, ~15m in bonuses and 5m upon his transfer to Chelsea.
We sold him for 115m.
That's like a 5m cash profit, book value is another story.