Right know madrids situation is more than positiv regarding finances and transfers. They can afford buying such projects like rodrygo because their squad can survive more seasons and still be able too compete duo their insane depth. Our squad is the opposite and we cant allow to throw money away because we are in need desperatly for proven players not just for depth but for our starting eleven too.
Rodrygo
- Thread starter khaled_a_d
- Start date
We cant really afford to splash huge amounts on superstars from rich clubs, so called "proven world class players" though.
But RM pretty much always buy players who are 24 years or younger. Their backline in the CL consisted of 3 players bought as freaking 18 year olds. The entire rest of the team were bought as young players as well, except one player (Modric bought at 26) and the goalie.
We are not signing Eriksen, Bale and the other fantasy signings people dream about. Its just not going to happen.
Thiago is a slim possibility because he was our former player, but you are making up the transfer fee from thin air, and his injuries are a major worry. Rodrygo costs like 2-3 Lenglets? Lenglet is at least 38m euros and Rodrygo is 45m. So its basically the same. Its stupid to always dismiss players who are younger than 25, simply because of their age. You've praised Neymar as better than Messi, a guy who was bought from Brazil without European experience. We have to buy players who are available in the market. We cant simply chase after PSG and Chelsea superstars every summer like you seem to prefer.
Last edited:
BarcaMessi
Banned
I think your option 2 should be the way to go.
50% on proven and 50% on lotteries.
Plus rodrygo's odds is lot better than real life lotteries.
You can't tell me the odds of Rodrygo becoming something worthy his 50m something price tag is anywhere close to 1 in a million.
Should also mention Thiago being injury prone.
Not to mention we've wasted plenty of money on so-called proven players as well. Its far from as black and white as some make it out to be. Neymar from Brazil or Umtiti from France was a much bigger success than so-called proven Ibra was for us. Or the other experienced flops we have signed.
BBZ8800
Senior Member
I am the biggest Neyclownhater in the world.
What are you talking about?
I might have said only that Neymar is the only guy whom we bought straight from Brasil who didn't fail, because he was one the best players in the world even then.
Unlike Arthur, Rodrygo and EVERY SINGLE player ever whom we bought STRAIGHT from South America.
So, our current record is 1 out of 10 directly from South America.
** Further, reports say that Rodrygo costs closer to 60m, not 45m.
Also, when you mention Real's "fantastic" record with young players, people forget how many fails they needed to make in the last 10 years:
1. Drenthe aged 20
2. Javi Garcia 21
3. Garay 21
4. Lass 23
5. Raul Albiol 23
6. Sergio Canales 19
7. Pedro Leon 23
8. Nuri Sahin 22
9. Coentrao 23
10. Illaramendi 23
11. Lucas Silva
12. Danilo 23
So, even RM is not that successful with South American talents coming STRAIGHT from South America, without European experience.
RM's success was with Spanish guys like Isco, Asensio, Carvajal, French guys Benzema, Varane, or Kovacic.
The only SA kid was Marcelo.
So, stats say:
1. buying kids is an insane gamble
2. further, if you still want to gamble, there is a higher chance to hit a jackpot with a kid from Spain, France or Europe, who are more familiar with European and Spanish football.
I know, there is always a chance that every new Brasilian kid is the next... I don't even know who's name to say, since they won't be a new Neymar and if they'll be a new Gabriel Jesus or Robinho, I'll pass on them (I am not too impressed by Jesus, btw).
So, when you want to buy kids, you need to think about a few things:
1. how much money you need for you first team RIGHT NOW and how much can you invest in kids/lottery
2. how high is a chance that your kid is the next big thing
3. there is a higher chance that a kid from Europe will make it at RM/Barca than a kid coming STRAIGHT from Brasil/Argentina.
4. Yet, on the other hand, a kid from SA has a higher chance to turn into a next Neymar than a Spanish kid, since SA kids usually have more flair.
Lots of guys here think ONLY about a point no4: SA kid could turn into an insane gem.
And forgetting points 1, 2 and 3.
I would say that Rodrygo's chances to turn into Barca's starter is around 10%.
His chances to play for a top5 team in Spain are around 20%.
His chances to turn into Barbosa/Halilovic are 80%.
The same applies for every talented SA kid coming straight out of SA, unless if he is out of this world aged 18.
You are vehemently against signing players from Europe who are young as well. You always criticize it and suggest going for superstars from rich clubs instead. The reality is that every player RM has were bought as 24 year old or younger. Modric at 26 is the exception. You hate such a transfer policy. But praise RM. And you praised Neymar as far better than Messi earlier in the day where you called Griezmann a clown. Who has RM bought from SA? Casemiro, Lucas Silva and Marcelo? Who else? They paid almost nothing for these players and they've been insanely successful with a 66% success rate.
BarcaMessi
Banned
I hope your percentages turn out accurate as Barca would not have missed anything in Rodrygo.
He's just making stuff up as he purely judge players based on age. Its meaningless. I am sure he said the same about Neymar as well. Now he praises him as far better than Messi. If he had his will, we would chase after Ibrahimovic clones every transfer window. Tall, strong, thug and superstar. A guaranteed success.
JamDav1982
Senior Member
You have been having a go at Barca foe the Artur signing and players from Brazil and now seem to praise Real for spending close to 100m on a 16yr old and 17 yr old from Brazil.
Any angle to moan.
BarcaMessi
Banned
young lotteries are less expensive, older eastablished are lot more expensive.
Either way can work out or fail.
No need to cruxify each other over which way is the way go.
Either way can work out or fail.
No need to cruxify each other over which way is the way go.
Yeah, its stupid to call anyone in the early 20s as lotteries while portraying experienced players as guaranteed success. Thats far from the case.
BBZ8800
Senior Member
Barcelona's history, this century, players bought STRAIGHT from South America:
2001: Cf Saviola (Arg), 36m back then. That is like 100-150M today. So, he was Dembele/Mbappe of that time.
-- stayed 3 seasons. Never reached potential. Never had a career after Barca.
2001: Cm Fabio Rochemback (Bra), 9m back then. That is like 30-40m in today's market. So, let's say Arthur.
-- stayed 2 seasons. Average career after Barca: Sporting Lisabon and Middlesbrough.
2001: winger Geovanni Deiberson (Bra), 21m back then. Around 60-80m today. Something like Brasilian Lemar today.
-- stayed 2 seasons. Average career after Barca.
2002: Cam Riquelme (Arg). 10m back then. Like 30-40m today.
-- stayed 1 season. Very good career at Villareal after that.
2008: defender Henrique (Bra). 10m, like 30M today (Lenglet)
-- played 0 matches. Played for Leverkusen, Santander, Napoli
2009: Cf Keirrison (Bra) 16m. Like 50m today.
-- played 0 matches. Poor career after Barca.
2014: Rb Douglas (Bra). 4m.
2018: Mina (Col). 10m
2013: Neymar (Bra). Paid probably 800 millions in the end, by Barto
So, we bought 9 players straight from South America in this century, without European experience.
Only 1 out 9 guys, Neymar, made it here and in Europe, but he was already one of the best players in the world.
Another interesting fact, not only that other 8 guys failed at Barca, none of them EVER played as a starter in any other big European club.
So, basically, all these players turned to be a tier of midtable La Liga teams, or at best, players for Roma, Everton and Sporting Lisabon.
In general, Brasilians were good for Barca, but mostly Brasilians who were proven on a worldclass level and in Europe like R9, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho.
And look, all these fails looked good back then.
Except Douglas.
Mina was the best defender in SA.
Saviola was the next Maradona.
Geovanni was the next Figo.
Saviola at U20 in 2001, and we bought him because of this for 100+ Millions:
I didn't measure other stats, but not ALL percentages for success are the same.
Older players are also a risk, but a success rate for young players is lower. Especially for young players coming from out of Europe.
So, roughly, let's say that a success rate for already proven players is 30-40-50%.
While a success rate for unproven potentials is probably 10-15%, so 1 out of 10 or 1 out of 5-6 at best.
So, yes, both can fail.
But chances for Thiago/Coutinho making it here are way higher than for Rodrygo, Arthur, Vinicius or even Dembele. He at least has 2 European seasons behind him.
Barcelona's history, this century, players bought STRAIGHT from South America:
2001: Cf Saviola (Arg), 36m back then. That is like 100-150M today. So, he was Dembele/Mbappe of that time.
-- stayed 3 seasons. Never reached potential. Never had a career after Barca.
2001: Cm Fabio Rochemback (Bra), 9m back then. That is like 30-40m in today's market. So, let's say Arthur.
-- stayed 2 seasons. Average career after Barca: Sporting Lisabon and Middlesbrough.
2001: winger Geovanni Deiberson (Bra), 21m back then. Around 60-80m today. Something like Brasilian Lemar today.
-- stayed 2 seasons. Average career after Barca.
2002: Cam Riquelme (Arg). 10m back then. Like 30-40m today.
-- stayed 1 season. Very good career at Villareal after that.
2008: defender Henrique (Bra). 10m, like 30M today (Lenglet)
-- played 0 matches. Played for Leverkusen, Santander, Napoli
2009: Cf Keirrison (Bra) 16m. Like 50m today.
-- played 0 matches. Poor career after Barca.
2014: Rb Douglas (Bra). 4m.
2018: Mina (Col). 10m
2013: Neymar (Bra). Paid probably 800 millions in the end, by Barto
So, we bought 9 players straight from South America in this century, without European experience.
Only 1 out 9 guys, Neymar, made it here and in Europe, but he was already one of the best players in the world.
Another interesting fact, not only that other 8 guys failed at Barca, none of them EVER played as a starter in any other big European club.
So, basically, all these players turned to be a tier of midtable La Liga teams, or at best, players for Roma, Everton and Sporting Lisabon.
In general, Brasilians were good for Barca, but mostly Brasilians who were proven on a worldclass level and in Europe like R9, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho.
And look, all these fails looked good back then.
Except Douglas.
Mina was the best defender in SA.
Saviola was the next Maradona.
Geovanni was the next Figo.
Saviola at U20 in 2001, and we bought him because of this for 100+ Millions:
I didn't measure other stats, but not ALL percentages for success are the same.
Older players are also a risk, but a success rate for young players is lower. Especially for young players coming from out of Europe.
So, roughly, let's say that a success rate for already proven players is 30-40-50%.
While a success rate for unproven potentials is probably 10-15%, so 1 out of 10 or 1 out of 5-6 at best.
So, yes, both can fail.
But chances for Thiago/Coutinho making it here are way higher than for Rodrygo, Arthur, Vinicius or even Dembele. He at least has 2 European seasons behind him.
So you admit that RM have had a massively better success rate with buying players from Brazil? You claimed that their success rate was really bad, but we agree that it is 66%? Two huge success (Marcelo, Casemiro) and one flop (Lucas Silva) with almost no money spent? Yet, you said that their success rate with young players from Europe was even higher than 66%? That is extraordinary if true. Since young players only cost a fraction of older superstars from rich clubs and are far easier to sign, and they can play for far longer, its is excellent value for them. You generally always say that if someone thinks its a good idea to buy someone who is not a superstar from a rich club, you bring up 10% success rate we have and then bring up Halilovic etc. If RMs success rate is so extraordinary as you claim, why is that? We know that they pretty much never buy players who are 25 years or older and have done so for a long time. You constantly praise what they have achieved with this transfer strategy with 3 CLs in a row.
Last edited:
MTL_Barca
Well-known member
Not that i would've signed Rodrygo for 60M but it doesn't make sense to just look at numbers and how many turned out to be shit. Good players can be found anywhere but if you only pick the bad ones the record will be shit.
It's a bigger risk if the player doesn't know highest level football so SA players are always more lottery like but us signing scrubs like Douglas doesn't prove that only 1 out of 10 or so make it, i'm sure there are clubs that have very good records when it comes to SA signings.
It's a bigger risk if the player doesn't know highest level football so SA players are always more lottery like but us signing scrubs like Douglas doesn't prove that only 1 out of 10 or so make it, i'm sure there are clubs that have very good records when it comes to SA signings.
Home of Barca Fans
