Arda Turan

Raketa10

Raketa10

Senior Member
LeeRomeno said:
Say what? When Lucho joined, we made transfers for Suarez (then 27), Mathieu (30), Vermaelen (28), Rakitic (26) and Bravo (31) and then Douglas and Ter Stegen, who were young. All those big signings were more or less at their prime age, except for maybe Rakitic, who could be still considered younger player. This is clear strategy of making the current team stronger, not investing into youth. This strategy proved to be correct one. Suarez formed MSN, Bravo was excellent in his first year, Rakitic was perfect fit for midfield and well, Verminator was Verminator. We won treble.
Then we faced transfer ban, Turan was more or less only top player who accepted to sit half a year doing nothing (now we know why). Vidal was probably signed more or less for same reason. Lucho wanted someone with similar qualities to Alves to cover right side and thought Vidal could do the job, similarities were there (Sevilla, being played as WB) + he was ex La Masia. To compensate loss of Pedro, both Sandro and Munir were introduced from La Masia. Everything went well for half a year or so, but team dropped in form heavily and we only won 2 major trophies.
Still noticing that maybe there is an issue with motivation, we totally changed our transfer strategy, instead of buying experienced players like in previous years, we bought 6 22-23 year olds, to insert fresh blood who had not won everything over and over again. We all know how that experiment went.
So if u actually take time, you will realize that our transfer policy has always MADE SENSE. Issue here is that the people who we have picked have just not been the correct ones. What you are doing here is trying to be smart afterwards, as always. It is so easy to claim Turan was always going to be flop now. Just go read this topic when he was signed and before. Tone of voice apart from very few single posters is rather positive and many even claim he will be definitely a starter.
Also goddamn Grimaldo, dude is either on bench or injured most of his career. Has he lit the world on fire in Benfica? No. Has any La Masia player, who has left during last 4 years been a sensation anywhere? NO.
La Masia quality is totally different topic and serious issue, but just giving chances to players, because they are in La Masia is bullshit. Ever since we had that golden generation, there is a group of people on this forum and overall as well, who seem to think that La Masia is some kind of quality sign. IT IS NOT. Majority of the hyped players are just hyped, in reality they are just as average as the ones coming from other academies. Samper is good example of it. Alena is pretty much only player who i can see playing a role in first team at the moment. Munir? He is mid-table La Liga level, like Sandro, Grimaldo, barely even so.

And no, i am not arguing here that our transfers have been poor, yes they have, it is issue with both requests from coaches, also scouting department, maybe some other things as well. But majority of our transfers have actually made sense at the time if you only put little bit of thinking into. You will never get everything right, no teams never do, you will always have flops. You do not know the future. (and yes i do realize Douglas signing was as bizarre as it could get and something shady was going on in backround).
Click to expand...

Well I agree with you partially but regarding Turan there were at least 3 visible problems.

1. There wasn't a clear idea what will he play? What is he? He is not a CM and if he is a winger he couldn't be a starter for us with MSN so this transfer doesn't make sense to me at all. He was always playing RM in 4-4-2 system which we never utilize.
2. During his last year in Atletico he was much worse than in years before so this again had to be a warning sign for us.
3. He was signed so Bartomeu could present him as his signing before elections so he made sense only in this manner.

Regarding Mathieu...sorry but buying 30 year old CB who was never a world class doesn't make sense and neither does buying a 28 year player who is injured 24/7.

I don't know what do you mean that our transfer policy always made sense but for me it absolutely didn't because:

1. Serious club can not sign a player on 5 year contract to improve a squad for only 1 year which was the case with Mathieu and Vermaelen
2. If you are saying our transfers have been poor and they have, than they didn't make sense per se. If you for example need a CM player you need to identify the exact target and not just sign a random "star" player who is available at the moment like we did with Turan or Gomes.

If "make sense" means only buying random "top" players basing just on their playing position or age than it maybe made sense but I would say that we forgot the most important thing. The most important or even crucial thing is will that player fit our system and will he be able to adapt ASAP. Turan and Gomes are clear examples that we never considered that so their signings never made sense not to mention that we signed Alcacer just because all other strikers said NO.

And yes some people here were excited about some of them but people who are in charge for leading FC Barca should know better than some random people from barcaforum.
 
Last edited:
R

reaper

Guest
Raketa10 said:
Well I agree with you partially but regarding Turan there were at least 3 visible problems.

1. There wasn't a clear idea what will he play? What is he? He is not a CM and if he is a winger he couldn't be a starter for us with MSN so this transfer doesn't make sense to me at all.
2. During his last year in Atletico he was much worse than in years before so this again had to be a warning sign for us.
3. He was signed so Bartomeu could present him as his signing before elections so he made sense only in this manner.

Regarding Mathieu...sorry but buying 30 year old CB who was never a world class doesn't make sense and neither does buying a 28 year player who is injured 24/7.

I don't know what do you mean that our transfer policy always made sense but for me it absolutely didn't because:

1. Serious club can not sign a player on 5 year contract to improve a squad for only 1 year which was a case with Mathieu and Vermaelen
2. If you are saying our transfers have been poor and they have, than they didn't make sense per se. If you for example need a CM player you need to identify the exact target and not just sign a random "star" player who is available at the moment like we did with Turan or Gomes.

If "make sense" means only buying random "top" players basing just on their playing position or age than it maybe made sense but I would say that we forgot the most important thing. The most important or even crucial thing is will that player fit our system and will he be able to adapt ASAP. Turan and Gomes are clear examples that we never considered that so their signings never made sense.
Click to expand...

Top post, agree with everything.
 
LeeRomeno

LeeRomeno

Active member
Raketa10 said:
Well I agree with you partially but regarding Turan there were at least 3 visible problems.

1. There wasn't a clear idea what will he play? What is he? He is not a CM and if he is a winger he couldn't be a starter for us with MSN so this transfer doesn't make sense to me at all.
2. During his last year in Atletico he was much worse than in years before so this again had to be a warning sign for us.
3. He was signed so Bartomeu could present him as his signing before elections so he made sense only in this manner.

Regarding Mathieu...sorry but buying 30 year old CB who was never a world class doesn't make sense and neither does buying a 28 year player who is injured 24/7.

I don't know what do you mean that our transfer policy always made sense but for me it absolutely didn't because:

1. Serious club can not sign a player on 5 year contract to improve a squad for only 1 year which was a case with Mathieu and Vermaelen
2. If you are saying our transfers have been poor and they have, than they didn't make sense per se. If you for example need a CM player you need to identify the exact target and not just sign a random "star" player who is available at the moment like we did with Turan or Gomes.

If "make sense" means only buying random "top" players basing just on their playing position or age than it maybe made sense but I would say that we forgot the most important thing. The most important or even crucial thing is will that player fit our system and will he be able to adapt ASAP. Turan and Gomes are clear examples that we never considered that so their signings never made sense not to mention that we signed Alcacer just because all other strikers said NO.
Click to expand...

1) I am pretty sure that not knowing where a versatile signing, who can play multiple positions, will play, is a problem. I think his versatility and ability to play in both front 3 and behind them was actually one of the qualities why we made the signing in the first place. I would not say not knowing where S.Roberto will play in next match is an issue. Arda played both LW/RW as well as AM for Atletico and was heavily used as CM in Turkish National team. You should know that Lucho had a fetish for versatile players anyways, not only Turan.
2) I really do not really follow Atletico that much to claim if it is true or not, no ideas, maybe, at least this never came out as an issue when people discussed this transfer back then
3) Sure, this played some part in it as well. Like i said, i think the number of top players who were willing to sit out half a year was probably very limited and we chose the best from the bunch.

Arsenal has a history of having extremely bad medical team. There are many cases where players have left the team and are suddenly not injured at all anymore. Van Persie was constantly injured, went to ManU and was healthy almost all season. Pretty sure Vermalen was sort of calculated risk and having high confidence in our medical team. I mean during Peps time, one of the main reasons why we were so good was because most of our key players managed to say relatively uninjured. 28 is nothing for CB as well and Vermalen before his injuries was one of the best CBs in Premier league.
Mathieu was maybe never world class level, but in 2014 he finally broke to France National team and actually had a good season with us. What we needed was a powerful, fast and La Liga-experienced "versatile" CB and LB backup. Length of his contract is different thing. I also do not think we need to have such long-term contracts for 30 year olds, but his signing once again MADE SENSE at that time.

1. having a contract for CB until age of 33 is not that extraordinary, Vermalen was a gamble that never paid off, Mathieu gave us 1 good and 2 decent years, good enough for me.
2. our transfers have been poor in hindsight, at the time of transfers happening, they made sense. That is my point. It has not been random at all.

As for fitting our system. OUr system was in constant chance since Lucho joined and then in last year it was in phase of stagnation. We did not really have a system like Pep had a system and players of certain type fitting there or not (Zlatan and Yaya being good examples). Our system was called give ball to MSN and let them do their thing.
Oh and yes, sometimes u need to really work the market. Finding a striker to join knowing MSN are guaranteed to start every meaningful game is difficult, no matter how much every player wants to come. Alcacer was most probably the best option we had considering the situation, not necessarily the option we wanted in the first place.
 
Raketa10

Raketa10

Senior Member
LeeRomeno said:
1) I am pretty sure that not knowing where a versatile signing, who can play multiple positions, will play, is a problem. I think his versatility and ability to play in both front 3 and behind them was actually one of the qualities why we made the signing in the first place. I would not say not knowing where S.Roberto will play in next match is an issue. Arda played both LW/RW as well as AM for Atletico and was heavily used as CM in Turkish National team. You should know that Lucho had a fetish for versatile players anyways, not only Turan.
Click to expand...

1. Versatile is someone who can actually play great in numerous positions and not someone who can play them in theory. Is Denis versatile? Is Rafinha versatile? No! They are just equally bad in midfield and on the wing. That is not versatility! Arda was absolutely horrendous for Turkey in the last couple of years and he was mainly utilized as RM for ATM who play TOTALLY different than we do. In the end that versatility shit is just an excuse nothing more. I would rather have a world class CM player or a world class winger than "versatile" good CM-CAM-RW player who isn't perfect for any of those positions.

2. Sorry but signing someone for 5 years and than he ends up being good for only ONE season is not good enough for me. This is just bad short term planing which brought us here! (Mathieu)
 
Last edited:
LeeRomeno

LeeRomeno

Active member
Raketa10 said:
1. Versatile is someone who can actually play great in numerous positions and not someone who can play them in theory. Is Denis versatile? Is Rafinha versatile? No! They are just equally bad in midfield and on the wing. That is not versatility! Arda was absolutely horrendous for Turkey in the last couple of years and he was mainly utilized as RM for ATM who play TOTALLY different than we do. In the end that versatility shit is just an excuse nothing more. I would rather have a world class CM player or a world class winger than "versatile" good CM-CAM-RW player who isn't perfect for any of those positions.

2. Sorry but signing someone for 5 years and than he ends up being good for only ONE season is not good enough for me. This is just bad short term planing which brought us here! (Mathieu)
Click to expand...

1. Yes, perfect way to continue this argument is to bring in the subjective opinion of someones skills. All those players are versatile, they can play different positions. If they are good or not is not relevant as it is matter of context. They would all be best players in all those positions in Estonian league, hence they are versatile.
2. Once again, irrelevant to this discussion as he actually played 3.
 
R

Rajoda

Banned
Well if Suarez still deserves a chance after his terrible performances the last 1.5 seasons then Arda deserves one, too
 
R

Rajoda

Banned
During Arda's time at Barcelona, the 2nd half of 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 Suarez was nothing more but a flop. If Arda has to leave then there are 5-6 other players that have to leave, too. It's not like he's among our biggest problems, he's a sub, look at the starters lol. The last season it was being said that Lucho didn't give Vidal the chance he deserved and that the way he treated him was a mess, now you don't hear the same stuff about Valverde :D Why don't people say that Valverde didn't give Arda the chance to prove himself with Valverde's Barca ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Home of Barca Fans

Top