Why do you have to postulate a historical average (which by the way we don't even know if accurate) as if it is an unshakable law of nature?
It's not gravity. It can change with better planning and better decision.
Look at the success rate of Liverpool signings under Benitez and up to Rodgers, and compare it with the one under Klopp. Night and day.
It doesn't take the skills of a genius to predict that under an incompetent management, with no strategic planning, with no logic or rationale in making signings, that most will fail. Let alone that some of them (like Semedo, Arthur) showed even in these circumstances signs of potential that could not be exploited due to being mismanaged and played wrongly.
OK, this argument can be said to be entirely within the domain of pseudo-science, or pseudo-psychology.
The burden of proof lies with the one making the argument.
You have to show why this is the case.
In particular, why a psychological trait (which is ill-defined above) has any impact on the ability on the pitch.
(Haaland is not cocky by the way. Maybe brave, not cocky.
Also all the players you mention are widely different in terms of character. And i don't know how you define cocky but it must be broad to include all of these)
Are you very young or what?
If our record over the last 20 years is 30% of success, that means that there are 100s of reasons for that and not a stupid alibi: Barto and EV are guilty for everything.
1. over those 20 years, we had several presidents
2. we had 10+ coaches
3. we had several sporting directors
4. we have bought around 100 players and tried 100+ La Masia products
And again, if a success rate of new signings is around 30% and if a success rate of La Masia (Best talents) is between 5-10%, it has nothing to do with Barto, EV or BBZ.
Of course that those numbers can go up, like in once in a lifetime Pep's era.
But then, you need to know that those numbers can go DOWN, way more than today.
Further, about might Liverpool, lol.
It is way easier to build a team when:
1. you are down, and when you suck
2. when the expectations are low
3. when you have 2-3-4-5 years to develop a team, with no pressure over results
Let's go to Barca now:
1. we are not down, we don't suck. We are years away from that position
2. expectations are not low. I mean, a lot of fans are hoping that we can win a CL in a few weeks
3. we don't have 3-4 years to develop a team
So, you can't take the best example in the world, Liverpool, who started a new project and didn't have any pressure over immediate results, with Barca.
That will never happen here.
We are too rich and too successful.
About cockiness, that's my term.
For your attitude:
1. I am not afraid on anyone
2. I don't respect the older opponents, I will not sulk, I will dribble past anyone and shoot against anyone
I am reading and analyzing these traits for years among friends, people, coworkers and women.
I wrote after 2 weeks that Dembele is dumb as fuck, when no one has ever mentioned that on our forum.
About Arthur, I said from the early days that there is no way that eh will improve his attacking game because that's his football DNA (his natural game and his natural instincts)=to slow down and pas sideways.
I have also said about Dembele, apart from his IQ, and that he can't be a leader of big clubs because he has a too timid personality.
About Fati, he is not as timid as Dembele, but he is kinda shy to average guy at best.
People don't like my numbers, but let's say, in my view, that Fati is at 4/10 in terms of cockiness, bravery, leadership, for now.
Now, look at best players in the world in the last 20 years:
Figo, cocky, brave and kinda an asshole
R9, brave from the age of 17
Owen, kinda timid, like La Masia guys and Fati
Shevchenko, average to brave
Ronaldinho, brave, leader, cocky
Cr7, lol. No comments needed.
Messi, shy, but he had Goat skills. And still suffered a lot due to a lack of mental strength in lots of moments, especially in away games after 2012.
Or from other Barca's attackers: Etoo, Henry, Villa, Kluivert, Rivaldo.
They were all very brave and somewhat cocky and arrogant.
In my view, as an attacker= that is a proactive position.
You are always in charge of creating things out of nothing.
And to some extent, you need to "provoke" opponents, dribble past them making fool out of them, and not caring about their feelings/career too much.
You need to have something ruthless in your personality to succeed on that level, to have bravery for these things and to survive pressure, haters, media and opponents.
Now, apart from Messi, try to find some shy and overly nice guys who made it the highest level as world class attackers.
For example, you need to be extremely brave, confident and cocky to every try a shit like this in a WC quarters, aged 22, way before coming to Barca:
** Btw look at the look in his eyes, celebration, smile and some cockiness after scoring.
That's what I am talking about.
That's the trait of true attacking geniuses and leaders:
Or attempting a shot like this on your Camp Nou debut:
Some of you guys will now say: he doesn't need to be Ronaldinho.
Fine.
But in our history, we always had one R9, Romario, Ronaldinho or Rivaldo.
We sucked without these leaders (and attackers).
So, my point is: even if Fati will improve a lot in footballing terms, he probably won't be a leader/attacker-leader of our team like guys mentioned above.
That means that even if he will improve a lot, we would need to buy one new Ronaldinho/Ricaldo next to him to take that leadership/creative/bravery burden.
On the other hand, one more thing to consider, in the last 30 years of La Masia, only 2 attackers made it:
Messi, who is the one and only.
And Pedro, who isn't La Masia product at all since he was bought aged 18.
So, historically, La Masia is good at producing midfielders for our team.
But in terms of attackers, our record is abysmal.
Something is seriously wrong in that combo: La Masia - attacking skills - mentality of players.
Imo, some of the problems are:
1. for an attacker/winger, you need a raw physical power like pace and explosivness
Yet, at La Masia, we usually rely on shorter, technical players and I am not too sure whether we do too much with their pace and physical skills in their early age
2. another problem is relying on education of players. In documentaries, I have seen that one of the main goals of La Masia is to create: nice guys, well educated, who are nice, humble and similar.
While being humble and nice is an awesome trait for being a good and reliable friend, imo, it is not too compatible with being am extremely driven, brave, leader, overly confident future Ballon D Or winner and a leader of your team in tough moments.
So, this is not about Fati.
For every young attacker in the future who will be too nice and too humble, my answer will be: he will never reach extreme heights due to too nice/shy personality.
Sport is kinda like entertainment and like being a rockstar.
You need to have a driven and extremely confident personality to reach absolute heights.
About other skills, lol.
He is not fast.
It's not that he is slow, but he is average.
And then, studies have shown that wingers and attackers are in their prime in terms of explosiveness in late teen years and in early 20s.
So, imagine Fati after the age of 25 when his pace will start to decline.
So, no, he is not too fast and his pace could be a huge problem for your dreams of him becoming some sort of Barca's leader.
About jumping, lol.
The fact that he can jump doesn't make him an aerial beast.
also, take a look at his shots.
Majority of shots are like Pippo Inzaghi's shots.
Precise, weak, ricochet lucky shots. And mostly shots on the ground when the ball is rolling extremely slow and you don't know whether it will reach the goal line at all.
It's not as if he has Batistuta's shooting power...
And pardon me if after years of watching R9, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho, Messi, I am not impressed at all by our supposed "next gem" Fati or his pace, dribbles and shooting:
Also, another thing which is forgotten. IN the autumn when he started to play, he scored some goals, but was mostly invisible, a turnover machine, the worst player on the field with questionable decision making. He played like Dembele on his worst days.
Just read comments from that era:
http://www.barcaforum.com/showthread.php/15648-Anssumane-Fati/page35
Then after corona, we played without fans, and majority of teams played in some sort of weird off-season-friendly mode with 50% of motivation.
So, it is hard to tell whether lately Fati played well:
1. because he has improved
2. or because nobody cared both in our team and in opponent's teams
Every coin always has two sides.
You guys as always, want to see only one side, the happier side.
So, yes:
1. you are overrating him a lot
2. you don't want to see his flaws
3. and the funniest, you are made when someone actually points to his objective and clear flaws
You'll now ask: but why are you pointing ONLY flaws?
= well, because a majority of posters are mentioning only good sides.
What's the point of repeating the same?
It's of more worth to add more value with flaws to see the whole picture.
