True alex deserved to play .. But we really needed to win so vucinic imo would have been a better option.. Tbh, all of our STs suck . Borrielo thou was beast vs napoli and is improving day by day.. quag and matri are shit . And no, quag was never the same before his injury.

WE WANT HIGUIAN/CAVANI/DAMAIO/ RVP(IMPOSSIBLE) IF WE DONT GET ANY OF THESE THEN WE ARE DOOMED NEXT SEASON

I am proud with this new JUVENTUS story but

but our strikers are horrible

what all of our strikers done all season MESSI can do that for a half season

it have created us a believe limitation that we think VUCINIC is world class just because he scored something like 11 goals and made 11 assists

MESSI can score 11 goals and make 11 assists for 3 games

The_ItalianFool wrote:
Clueless and lack of judgement?

The fact is that we can sell Matri for a much higher price than Quag, and if we can redeem Borriello for half of the agreed amount, it would be worth it to spend 4-5 mil on Borriello, sell Matri for like 18 mil, and having more money to invest or to bring the club out of debt.

The main point that you seem not to acknowledge is this: is Matri really that much of a step up on Borriello when it comes to being a 2nd or 3rd choice striker?

-here, read this. maybe it will enlighten you a bit: http://banana-kick.net/player-of-the-alessandro-matri-all-he-needs-is/

That article shows that Matri is good when he gets a lot of playing time. With the purchase of one, maybe even 2, as Gigi suggests, top strikers, do you see Matri getting a lot of time? I doubt it.

All I see is a player worthy of a starting spot on another team sitting on our bench who generally (with the exception of the Milan match) is not an impact player to come off the bench. Waste of money and talent.

Oh, and not to mention that Matri is better at fast counter attack plays rather than slow build up playing like Juventus employs.

Yes. Ill say it again... - Clueless and lack of judgment. Boriello is Plain average and not worth wasting any more money on.

You say Matri isnt much better? Maybe not, but hes scored 20 goals for us in a season and a half - a MODEST goal count AT BEST, but much better than the 2 goals in half a season that Boriello has scored. Id much rather keep Matri than Boriello.

I dont care if Boriello "leaves his heart on the field" - i couldnt care less. as a striker he needs to score. Id rather he didnt leave his heart on the field and score 25+ goals.

Apart from Vucinic, I wouldnt disagree with any of our forwards being sold on. If all this frees up funds for quality signings, im on board. If Matri will free up most funds - then he can go, Quags can go, Boriello MUST go. Immobile must return. and 2 new forwards must come.

Lynx100 wrote:

The_ItalianFool wrote:
Clueless and lack of judgement?

The fact is that we can sell Matri for a much higher price than Quag, and if we can redeem Borriello for half of the agreed amount, it would be worth it to spend 4-5 mil on Borriello, sell Matri for like 18 mil, and having more money to invest or to bring the club out of debt.

The main point that you seem not to acknowledge is this: is Matri really that much of a step up on Borriello when it comes to being a 2nd or 3rd choice striker?

-here, read this. maybe it will enlighten you a bit: http://banana-kick.net/player-of-the-alessandro-matri-all-he-needs-is/

That article shows that Matri is good when he gets a lot of playing time. With the purchase of one, maybe even 2, as Gigi suggests, top strikers, do you see Matri getting a lot of time? I doubt it.

All I see is a player worthy of a starting spot on another team sitting on our bench who generally (with the exception of the Milan match) is not an impact player to come off the bench. Waste of money and talent.

Oh, and not to mention that Matri is better at fast counter attack plays rather than slow build up playing like Juventus employs.

Yes. Ill say it again... - Clueless and lack of judgment. Boriello is Plain average and not worth wasting any more money on.

You say Matri isnt much better? Maybe not, but hes scored 20 goals for us in a season and a half - a MODEST goal count AT BEST, but much better than the 2 goals in half a season that Boriello has scored. Id much rather keep Matri than Boriello.

I dont care if Boriello "leaves his heart on the field" - i couldnt care less. as a striker he needs to score. Id rather he didnt leave his heart on the field and score 25+ goals.

Apart from Vucinic, I wouldnt disagree with any of our forwards being sold on. If all this frees up funds for quality signings, im on board. If Matri will free up most funds - then he can go, Quags can go, Boriello MUST go. Immobile must return. and 2 new forwards must come.

I didnt say anything about Borriello 'leaving his heart on the field.' It's all simple economics, something you know nothing of apparently.

There is realistically no chance that we are going to sell ALL our forwards, as you propose.... and you call me clueless and lack of judgement. Apart from the need for you to criticize my view in order for yours to look good, do you really see us getting rid of all of ADP, Borriello, Matri, and Quagliarella??? If Matri is "maybe not much better than Borriello," why wouldnt you sell him for about 100-200% or more than what we would pay for Borriello????? Bad business on your end.

Now, from my point of view (a realistic one), we could let go of 1, maybe 2 of our forwards. ADP, already decided that he is leaving. Now, since we want to get a STARTING CF (or maybe 2 as you say), who would you get rid of in order to balance our finances AND have a good striker depth. Our starting CF, Matri(worth 15-20 million) or Quag(worth 5-10 million?) or Borriello (worth nothing if we let him go)?

Your view represents the least economic path. We keep our most valuable sellable assest on the bench, we send back the loanee we got (and lose our initial investment in him), or we sell Quagliarella, an asset who has yet to truly show its worth and will sell for less than 10 million. On top of that, you ask that our club invest at least 50 million in 2 new strikers YET we are in the red financially...

According to that article I showed you, which you failed to acknowledge, Matri is good when he gets 75 minutes or more on the field. According to our administration, we are looking to get a TOP CLASS CF. Do you see Matri getting 75 mins or more? Im pretty sure Conte starts making attacking subs around 60-70 minutes if we are down...

Now, how do you figure the best option is to keep the guy who needs the most playing time (and is also worth the most on the market) on the bench, and give away Borriello (who fits Conte's system, and who Conte admires) or sell a striker (Quagliarella) for under his actual value?

Clueless and lack of knowledge? How about stop the petty attacks and debate using reason and logic?

:bball:

The_ItalianFool wrote:

Lynx100 wrote:Careful Juve-Gigi..

Half the forum here has started to warm up to the Absolute Clown that is Boriello - infact, some of the oldest and founding members of this forum think Boriello would be useful. Goes to show some serious lack of judgment. People claiming to "sell all our 3 forwards and keep Boriello because he works so hard" and asking for Boriello loan extension Clueless...

MMM wrote:
I don't see a huge difference between Borriello, matri and quagliarella therefore the idea can be keeping borriello for around 5 millions and sell one or even both matri and quagliarella to generate more money. I am a big fan of quaglia but before he loses more market value it's better to replace him. keeping him as our 3rd choice cf/ss is another choice.

Clueless and lack of judgement?

The fact is that we can sell Matri for a much higher price than Quag, and if we can redeem Borriello for half of the agreed amount, it would be worth it to spend 4-5 mil on Borriello, sell Matri for like 18 mil, and having more money to invest or to bring the club out of debt.

The main point that you seem not to acknowledge is this: is Matri really that much of a step up on Borriello when it comes to being a 2nd or 3rd choice striker?

-here, read this. maybe it will enlighten you a bit: http://banana-kick.net/player-of-the-alessandro-matri-all-he-needs-is/

That article shows that Matri is good when he gets a lot of playing time. With the purchase of one, maybe even 2, as Gigi suggests, top strikers, do you see Matri getting a lot of time? I doubt it.

All I see is a player worthy of a starting spot on another team sitting on our bench who generally (with the exception of the Milan match) is not an impact player to come off the bench. Waste of money and talent.

Oh, and not to mention that Matri is better at fast counter attack plays rather than slow build up playing like Juventus employs.

I think you have made a valid argument Fab in terms of selling Matri. Yes, he would bring back a much higher value than Quagliarella at this time and also you can use that money to purchase a top striker. So I would be in agreement to sell Matri to the highest bidder in order to recoup funds to get that world class striker we so desperately need.

However, I do have to vehemently disagree with you on Borriello. Lynx and I are in agreement and I believe it is the right agreement. At this point in time, Borriello is a waste of a roster spot, has contributed nothing to Juventus in half a season that he was here, and Marotta would be nuts to purchase him for his current buyout clause of $8 million. In fact, if we could get Borriello for free I still wouldn't do it. I would rather have Amauri for free than Borriello. Seriously. Or better yet, I would rather just bring Immobile into the fold and have him backup our new world class striker.

I agree with the fact that in no way should we sign Borriello for the agreed price. Cut his price and wages in half, then he would be a valid 3rd or 4th striker imo.

I would love Immobile back, but considering we are getting a top class CF, he might not get a lot of playing time so it might be better to loan him out again to further develop. If Conte thinks he would actually use him then by all means bring him back, but I dont wanna see him wasted on the bench.