Paulinho

[Senador Romario]

Lets address some mystifications here:

1- the age: players in their prime are now seem as a problem because there are a lot of imature millennials posting in football sites and they think everybody over 23 is "old".

2 - "he was a flop at Totteham"..he's not a defensive midfielder and his heat map proves he was out of position in the EPL.
Another thing: sometimes for a lot of reasons, a player can fail in some specific context.
If is a european player, lets say, KDB at Chelsea, he will play in another european league and can back to the higher level again.
But if is an Argentinian or Brazilian, the "market" will see the player as a flop.

3 - about the ridiculous posts in this thread(99.9%), i'm goimg to say only this: this current Barcelona side is weak, the full backs and midielders are nothing special.
It looks different because Pelé is playing here...

You guys in general are kids that tend to rate players based on video games...
Stop lying to yourselves; Paulinho is the best midfielder of the south american qualifier and is better than any starter in this Barca midfield.

And none of those fancy new toys people are talking here, linked with Barca, have talent and balls to smash three goals against Uruguay in the Centenario.

 

[Lelouch vi Britannia]

Lets address some mystifications here:

1- the age: players in their prime are now seem as a problem because there are a lot of imature millennials posting in football sites and they think everybody over 23 is "old".

2 - "he was a flop at Totteham"..he's not a defensive midfielder and his heat map proves he was out of position in the EPL.
Another thing: sometimes for a lot of reasons, a player can fail in some specific context.
If is a european player, lets say, KDB at Chelsea, he will play in another european league and can back to the higher level again.
But if is an Argentinian or Brazilian, the "market" will see the player as a flop.

3 - about the ridiculous posts in this thread(99.9%), i'm goimg to say only this: this current Barcelona side is weak, the full backs and midielders are nothing special.
It looks different because Pelé is playing here...

You guys in general are kids that tend to rate players based on video games...
Stop lying to yourselves; Paulinho is the best midfielder of the south american qualifier and is better than any starter in this Barca midfield.

And none of those fancy new toys people are talking here, linked with Barca, have talent and balls to smash three goals against Uruguay in the Centenario.

>Defending this signing
>Defending Fartomeu

 

[JamDav1982]

>Defending this signing
>Defending Fartomeu

No it is called having opinion.

Folk like you trying to shut it down as something else is pathetic.

Wont change how he plays so if he is wrong it will play out.

 

[Nothanks]

the problem with paulinho is that he wont be liked no matter what

its like acouple of seasons ago when we really needed a centerback but got alex song, thats how people will view this transfer
we needed a iniesta replacement and got paulinho

 

[God Serena]

Lets address some mystifications here:

1- the age: players in their prime are now seem as a problem because there are a lot of imature millennials posting in football sites and they think everybody over 23 is "old".

Wrong. He's 29 years old. Players who are about to turn 30 are generally seen as old because 30 year old players start to decline and very few players are good enough to perform on a high level when they're past 32 years old. Your arbitrary 23 years old argument is blatant hyperbole, nobody has ever complained about a 24 year old player being "too old".

2 - "he was a flop at Totteham"..he's not a defensive midfielder and his heat map proves he was out of position in the EPL.
Another thing: sometimes for a lot of reasons, a player can fail in some specific context.
If is a european player, lets say, KDB at Chelsea, he will play in another european league and can back to the higher level again.
But if is an Argentinian or Brazilian, the "market" will see the player as a flop.

Him being a flop at Tottenham (A club significantly lower standard than Barca mind you), paired with him going to the Chinese retirement league for the rest of his career, is a clear indicator that he's not Barca quality. Nobody who flops for a club like Valencia is suddenly good enough to start for Man City, and nobody who flops for Tottenham is good enough to play for Barcelona. Especially if they spend the time in between playing in a league of nobodies.

3 - about the ridiculous posts in this thread(99.9%), i'm goimg to say only this: this current Barcelona side is weak, the full backs and midielders are nothing special.
It looks different because Pelé is playing here...

That has literally nothing to do with Paulinho.

You guys in general are kids that tend to rate players based on video games...

And you're an idiot who has never watched a football game before. See how little of an argument this is?

Stop lying to yourselves; Paulinho is the best midfielder of the south american qualifier and is better than any starter in this Barca midfield.

He's not even better than Sergi Roberto lmao

And none of those fancy new toys people are talking here, linked with Barca, have talent and balls to smash three goals against Uruguay in the Centenario.

We don't buy midfielders for goals son.

 

[Potroh]

Wrong. He's 29 years old. Players who are about to turn 30 are generally seen as old because 30 year old players start to decline and very few players are good enough to perform on a high level when they're past 32 years old.

Despite your disgusting and absolutely unnecessary personal attacks piled in a message towards a fellow forum user - you are wrong - of course.
(It seems the moderators like this kind of ordinary style, so the "you are an idiot" can just as much stay as other primitive garbage, wishing "to die of cancer" here. Very sad...)

But on the quoted sentence: if a 29 yrs old player is old but a 24 yrs one is still young with plenty of time to develop, that would mean the actual peak of a footballer is merely 4-5 years, which is far from being the truth.
I will not list all those players here who easily had ten or even more good years on the grass, will not mention the contemporary ones like Ronaldo, Alves and quite a few of other outstanding players either. I'm merely and just simply against this over-simplified notion, namely that quality and age would go side by side on a linear scale. Because they obviously do not necessarily do.

I myself have played in a WC where a great team won, a relatively old team, almost everyone 30 or above that, so everyone said afterwards: of course they won, because they are seasoned and experienced... But 4 years later a relatively young team took the Rimet-cup, so everyone started croaking just the opposite: of course they won, with such a fresh young team... (another four years later the youngsters were nowhere...)

So it's better to look at present qualities or lack of qualities, rather than giving trust for a young player - just because the mere arithmetical age, and looking down upon elderly players, who can easily be still much better than the so called "young talents"...

 

[God Serena]

Despite your disgusting and absolutely unnecessary personal attacks piled in a message towards a fellow forum user - you are wrong - of course.
(It seems the moderators like this kind of ordinary style, so the "you are an idiot" can just as much stay as other primitive garbage, wishing "to die of cancer" here. Very sad...)

I didn't even make any personal attacks. I said that in response to a general personal attack he made towards everyone on this forum who doesn't like Paulinho's signing, and that was just to make it clear that ad hominem and baseless accusations do not make for an actual argument. The only thing "disgusting" is your inability to read and comprehend.

But on the quoted sentence: if a 29 yrs old player is old but a 24 yrs one is still young with plenty of time to develop, that would mean the actual peak of a footballer is merely 4-5 years, which is far from being the truth.

You're the one pulling this arbitrary 4-5 year number out of your behind, not me. A 29 year old player is older than a 24 year old. A 24 year old will give us more years at a higher level than a 29 year old will. These are simple facts. I'm not sure what's so wrong with thinking this.

I will not list all those players here who easily had ten or even more good years on the grass, will not mention the contemporary ones like Ronaldo, Alves and quite a few of other outstanding players either. I'm merely and just simply against this over-simplified notion, namely that quality and age would go side by side on a linear scale. Because they obviously do not necessarily do.

For every example of a player lasting well past 30 and performing on a high level, I can give you at least ten who declined sharply. Still being a top player like Lahm, Alves, Ronaldo, etc. is not the norm. The norm is players like Villa, RVP, Adriano, Mathieu, etc. who decline sharply when they reach a certain age. It may not be on a linear scale (Rakitic is an example of a player who declined well before hitting 30) but in general, signing a 29 year old is not very smart business because players are generally less capable of keeping up with the average 23-24 year old when they're over 30. Maybe if Paulinho was a great player known across the football world as one of the top midfielders around you'd have a case to make, but he's a Tottenham flop who has spent all his time since then in a retirement league.

I myself have played in a WC where a great team won, a relatively old team, almost everyone 30 or above that, so everyone said afterwards: of course they won, because they are seasoned and experienced... But 4 years later a relatively young team took the Rimet-cup, so everyone started croaking just the opposite: of course they won, with such a fresh young team... (another four years later the youngsters were nowhere...)

I hate to break it to you grandpa but times have changed, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. You bringing up your time as a pro has grown tiring, it doesn't validate your opinion any more than the rest of us. A team of old men wouldn't be able to handle a team of younger, faster players unless the entire team as a whole was dominant and used better tactics, which would really be up to the manager to work out. Look at how old Spain's team was when they were the most dominant country in the world. Look at the average age of Germany in the last world cup. Do you think all these clubs and countries just don't know what they're doing, fielding all these younger players? Maybe instead of Mario Goetze they should have looked for any 30+ year old Germans who were playing in Lithuania or something.

So it's better to look at present qualities or lack of qualities, rather than giving trust for a young player - just because the mere arithmetical age, and looking down upon elderly players, who can easily be still much better than the so called "young talents"...

Younger players have more room for growth and can perform at a high level for a longer amount of time. It's not all about the "Right now". That's Lucho thinking. That's the type of thinking that brings in players like Mathieu while we let Grimaldo leave without even making a first team debut. That's the type of thinking that brings in players who flopped at a mid-tier English team while our young midfielders who have room to grow get sent on loan. That's the type of thinking that lands our squad with such a terrible roster. There is no way whatsoever, that signing a 21-25 year old player who is performing decently, is worse than signing a 29-30 year old player performing on a similar level. None.

 

[DennyCrane]

Lets address some mystifications here:

1- the age: players in their prime are now seem as a problem because there are a lot of imature millennials posting in football sites and they think everybody over 23 is "old".

2 - "he was a flop at Totteham"..he's not a defensive midfielder and his heat map proves he was out of position in the EPL.
Another thing: sometimes for a lot of reasons, a player can fail in some specific context.
If is a european player, lets say, KDB at Chelsea, he will play in another european league and can back to the higher level again.
But if is an Argentinian or Brazilian, the "market" will see the player as a flop.

3 - about the ridiculous posts in this thread(99.9%), i'm goimg to say only this: this current Barcelona side is weak, the full backs and midielders are nothing special.
It looks different because Pelé is playing here...

You guys in general are kids that tend to rate players based on video games...
Stop lying to yourselves; Paulinho is the best midfielder of the south american qualifier and is better than any starter in this Barca midfield.

And none of those fancy new toys people are talking here, linked with Barca, have talent and balls to smash three goals against Uruguay in the Centenario.

I like your contrarian point of view. If he plays for Barca as he does for Brazil, he can be added value. If Valverde goes for the double pivot approach (a favourite of his) somewhere down the line, there's a spot for him.

 

[Zuti]

Lets address some mystifications here:

1- the age: players in their prime are now seem as a problem because there are a lot of imature millennials posting in football sites and they think everybody over 23 is "old".

2 - "he was a flop at Totteham"..he's not a defensive midfielder and his heat map proves he was out of position in the EPL.
Another thing: sometimes for a lot of reasons, a player can fail in some specific context.
If is a european player, lets say, KDB at Chelsea, he will play in another european league and can back to the higher level again.
But if is an Argentinian or Brazilian, the "market" will see the player as a flop.

3 - about the ridiculous posts in this thread(99.9%), i'm goimg to say only this: this current Barcelona side is weak, the full backs and midielders are nothing special.
It looks different because Pelé is playing here...

You guys in general are kids that tend to rate players based on video games...
Stop lying to yourselves; Paulinho is the best midfielder of the south american qualifier and is better than any starter in this Barca midfield.

And none of those fancy new toys people are talking here, linked with Barca, have talent and balls to smash three goals against Uruguay in the Centenario.

Oh ,look, another brazilian fanboy telling us how things stand, poor clueless us, what would we do without people like you that drop in to tell us how good a player noone outside of Brasil rates is.
Calling other people on the internet that you don't agree with kids, is the most childish of all "arguments".

 

[BarçaBarça]

Lets address some mystifications here:

1- the age: players in their prime are now seem as a problem because there are a lot of imature millennials posting in football sites and they think everybody over 23 is "old".

Players are in their prime at 29 years old, alright. And he was playing in China. At his prime?
But anyway, if he really is in his prime then give him a contract for 2 years. Past 31 years old surely isn't prime, is it?

The reason why most in here don't want 'prime'-aged players is that Real Madrid and other teams has been successful in signing young Spanish talent and created a worldclass-team for the next 5-10 years. We buy players who are good in 2 years and then decline, but are still paid by us, and are left with a shit team. Everyone can see that we are soon facing a very old Barca-team, and that is bad planning. Signing Paulinho as an 'old', expensive, lowlevel player doesn't make any sense in that regard.

2 - "he was a flop at Totteham"..he's not a defensive midfielder and his heat map proves he was out of position in the EPL.
Another thing: sometimes for a lot of reasons, a player can fail in some specific context.
If is a european player, lets say, KDB at Chelsea, he will play in another european league and can back to the higher level again.
But if is an Argentinian or Brazilian, the "market" will see the player as a flop.

Are you comparing Paulinho with Kevin De Bryune? Seems like you are. Please give me some of De Bryunes stats in Wolfsburg (where he was a top-player in the Bundesliga, a top league) and compare them with Paulinhos stats in China (where he is a top-player, in a shit-league).

And as others have said: Please give an example of a Premier League-flop, like a really bad flop, who made it into a world-class player in Barca or Real Madrid?
If you want a good argument you could give an example of a southamerican one, because they are always judged unfairly according to you.

3 - about the ridiculous posts in this thread(99.9%), i'm goimg to say only this: this current Barcelona side is weak, the full backs and midielders are nothing special.
It looks different because Pelé is playing here...

Our midfield is a problem, everyone knows that. That is no excuse for buying a bad midfielder?

You guys in general are kids that tend to rate players based on video games...
Stop lying to yourselves; Paulinho is the best midfielder of the south american qualifier and is better than any starter in this Barca midfield.

And none of those fancy new toys people are talking here, linked with Barca, have talent and balls to smash three goals against Uruguay in the Centenario.

Many players can step right into our midfield as a starter, because it's not very good right now. Maybe Paulinho will be decent, maybe he will be a new (more expensive) Song. But decent is not enough. And that he is good for Brazil hasn't transformed into his club-career, so why should it start now? That is what you think will happen, but we have no evidence whatsoever.

If we sold Rafinha, Turan and Denis, and Paulinho came on a free transfer, I don't think people would be so sceptic. But Barcelona are the FIRST CLUB IN THE WORLD to buy players for big money from chinese clubs. It is the same as buying some 32 year old former PL-star from the MLS.

 

[Potroh]

I hate to break it to you grandpa but times have changed, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. You bringing up your time as a pro has grown tiring, it doesn't validate your opinion any more than the rest of us. A team of old men wouldn't be able to handle a team of younger, faster players unless the entire team as a whole was dominant and used better tactics, which would really be up to the manager to work out.

- Regardless if you are right or wrong, a bunch of your posts clearly show that you are capable of writing pragmatic messages, with somehow logical reasoning, therefore it is absolutely unnecessary to name someone else an "idiot". It says nothing, apart from your own rude emotional state at the moment of writing. Hurting others is far from reasoning.

- Times have changed, they always do, but we are chatting about football and not gymnastics, where the 25kg and 12 yrs old girls seem to have a definite advantage over "normal" humans, not coming out of an artificially created breed.
If you think someone is a demented fossil - just because he is above a certain age - you make the exact mistake of our age, namely that knowledge and experience means nothing, compared to the mere young age. If Indian, Japanese and quite a few other cultures still respect and admire age in itself, there is a reason behind that. You shouldn't be too "American" in this regard, even if this time they managed to elect a 70+ medical case as president.

- I might be a "grandpa" regarding my age, but I lived my entire life among football players, which gives an advantage, perhaps by knowing them a tiny bit better than the average lurkers, who more or less watch the game as if it was a pancratium, and their opinions - with the beer in a hand in front of the TV - would represent ultimate truth and professional views.
Hence, if you knew these players as private humans or often as just ambitious sportsmen on the field, you would also know that "age" in itself means little. There are "fresh" players in their 30's and there are 22 yrs old "talents" who will never ever develop or play better.

The 30+ Buffon, Ronaldo, Messi, Cavani and hordes of others can play just as good (if not better) as youngsters do, IF they psychologically speaking did not lose their actual ambitions, be it trophies, money, fame or anything else for that matter.
Try to absorb that average players in average teams always age faster (nothing to achieve anymore, no national teams or aims, etc.) whereas elder but charismatic players can easily extend their carriers for couple of years, if they have the inner urge and ambition.
A footballer ALWAYS starts to age in his head first.

 

[Zuti]

- Regardless if you are right or wrong, a bunch of your posts clearly show that you are capable of writing pragmatic messages, with somehow logical reasoning, therefore it is absolutely unnecessary to name someone else an "idiot". It says nothing, apart from your own rude emotional state at the moment of writing. Hurting others is far from reasoning.

- Times have changed, they always do, but we are chatting about football and not gymnastics, where the 25kg and 12 yrs old girls seem to have a definite advantage over "normal" humans, not coming out of an artificially created breed.
If you think someone is a demented fossil - just because he is above a certain age - you make the exact mistake of our age, namely that knowledge and experience means nothing, compared to the mere young age. If Indian, Japanese and quite a few other cultures still respect and admire age in itself, there is a reason behind that. You shouldn't be too "American" in this regard, even if this time they managed to elect a 70+ medical case as president.

- I might be a "grandpa" regarding my age, but I lived my entire life among football players, which gives an advantage, perhaps by knowing them a tiny bit better than the average lurkers, who more or less watch the game as if it was a pancratium, and their opinions - with the beer in a hand in front of the TV - would represent ultimate truth and professional views.
Hence, if you knew these players as private humans or often as just ambitious sportsmen on the field, you would also know that "age" in itself means little. There are "fresh" players in their 30's and there are 22 yrs old "talents" who will never ever develop or play better.

The 30+ Buffon, Ronaldo, Messi, Cavani and hordes of others can play just as good (if not better) as youngsters do, IF they psychologically speaking did not lose their actual ambitions, be it trophies, money, fame or anything else for that matter.
Try to absorb that average players in average teams always age faster (nothing to achieve anymore, no national teams or aims, etc.) whereas elder but charismatic players can easily extend their carriers for couple of years, if they have the inner urge and ambition.
A footballer ALWAYS starts to age in his head first.

You are missing the point here.
It's not about his age, obviously signing a 29 year old proven player is nothing outrageous, and is done by many top clubs often.
All the factors combined regarding Paulinho's transfer make it a ridiculous signing( if he might prove to be valuable player for us after all, doesn't matter in this argument, and obviously as a fan I hope he will).
So it's not about arguing about one point but about the whole, which is a 29 year old, high price tag, from Chinese league, not proven in Europe.
You can't take one point out of these and argue it's flaws, it's the whole package.

 

[Barcilliant]

Despite your disgusting and absolutely unnecessary personal attacks piled in a message towards a fellow forum user - you are wrong - of course.
(It seems the moderators like this kind of ordinary style, so the "you are an idiot" can just as much stay as other primitive garbage, wishing "to die of cancer" here. Very sad...)

But on the quoted sentence: if a 29 yrs old player is old but a 24 yrs one is still young with plenty of time to develop, that would mean the actual peak of a footballer is merely 4-5 years, which is far from being the truth.
I will not list all those players here who easily had ten or even more good years on the grass, will not mention the contemporary ones like Ronaldo, Alves and quite a few of other outstanding players either. I'm merely and just simply against this over-simplified notion, namely that quality and age would go side by side on a linear scale. Because they obviously do not necessarily do.

I myself have played in a WC where a great team won, a relatively old team, almost everyone 30 or above that, so everyone said afterwards: of course they won, because they are seasoned and experienced... But 4 years later a relatively young team took the Rimet-cup, so everyone started croaking just the opposite: of course they won, with such a fresh young team... (another four years later the youngsters were nowhere...)

So it's better to look at present qualities or lack of qualities, rather than giving trust for a young player - just because the mere arithmetical age, and looking down upon elderly players, who can easily be still much better than the so called "young talents"...

Ok, young man. Which WC did you play in and which club and country did you play for?

Serious questions. No trolling. I'm almost 50 and the best I could do were trials with Queens Park rangers in the old first division.

 

[michelco]

Con-Paulinho posters: lists a million sound reasons on why this guy shouldn't even be near a team of Barcelona's stature

Pro-Paulinho posters: Bu-bu-but he's decent once in a while with the national team stop hating on him you evil haters

 

[blaugrana1987]

Paulinho MIGHT come good actually. He looks solid and hardworking, something we definitely need. Thats a plus.

What is minus is that he is nearing his 30, and he is on 5yr contract. On top of that he was paid 40 FUCKING million. He simply cant do good enough for long enough for that to be considered smart buy. Should have gone for Fabinho. 7 years younger, could have gotten him for 50m max at start of the window.