Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

breva wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Hilarious.

Higuiain cost more than any striker in Spurs history, but apparently they have some unreal budget which Napoli can't compete with.

Napoli transfer budget ~40M euro, Tottenham transfer budget ~ 90M sterling. Tottenham has nearly 3 times the budget of Napoli.  So yes, it is unreal and Naploi cannot compete with it.

Says who?  Spurs didn't spend anywhere near that amount.

Here's actual factual numbers.

Napoli spent over 40m euros on Higuain, Spurs have spent 50m on forwards in total in the last 5 years.

Stop acting like they are City or United, let your boy Sarri beat Shakhtar before you start chatting BS.

Last year, Napoli spent 60 Million Euros to Spurs 110 Million Euros. You are intelligent enough to know that one big transfer in Higuain does not make the finances of both teams comparable.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Are we actually back to the Napoli didn't try BS

They weren't good enough, simple as.

Deal with it.

Some dude claims that Napoli didn't give two fecks about CL campaign bar City when they played for honour.

It's me who claim that. And that was the truth

Luca wrote:And last season Roma did not make it past Porto just to make the CL group stage and Napoli made the round of 16

It's not about getting a pass. Sarri is a top 5 Italian manager and top 3 in Serie A. Disputable? Absolutely not. It's something as clear as day and I don't even like the guy, you guys just like to operate in such extremities that we either have to crown him as the best ever or he's the worst, there is a middle, reasonably leveled ground to be shared. Sarri does elevate this Napoli team, they do compete with Juventus with 1/3 of the budget and he does play a nice style. He's a good manager, calma.

Stop acting like Napoli is this monster of a club. People hated on Allegri at Milan and when he left, he was even poorly received by Juventus fans and blamed for at least one of the CL finals losses. Conte has a massive amount of critics and criticism. Sarri scrubbed out in the CL this season and then the EL, I'm pretty sure that's widely accepted too. It's not about receiving a pass, just no one cares because its Sarri and its Napoli. It's not like people don't rate Poch despite losing the league to Leicester and losing a tie from a winning position to Juventus

Some people here rate him as one of the best coaches in Europe. Sure he has done a great job at Napoli , playing a good brand of football but in this period of 3 years as Napoli coach, he has won 0 trophies. Even Benitez and Mazzarri have won trophies at Napoli. I really don't know what he's done to warrant such a high praise. Simeone and Klopp were operating under similar budgets and they won league titles and achieved credibility in Europe. These are also clubs which people dint initially 'care' about. I mean if people are going to put him on a pedestal , they atleast got to do it right.

If the decision to 'underperform' in European competitions was a decision taken by the club (which is a ridiculous excuse btw), then that really reflects poorly on Sarri as an authoritarian figure.

Besides if there was middle ground on this forum, there'd be no place for banter, each thread would 20-30 posts per thread max. Frenzy and Unique would then have had to buy this forum from their pocket change to rescue RG from his misery so they can have a go at each other 24/7. That would be the reality tbh.

Lord Spencer wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

breva wrote:


Napoli transfer budget ~40M euro, Tottenham transfer budget ~ 90M sterling. Tottenham has nearly 3 times the budget of Napoli.  So yes, it is unreal and Naploi cannot compete with it.

Says who?  Spurs didn't spend anywhere near that amount.

Here's actual factual numbers.

Napoli spent over 40m euros on Higuain, Spurs have spent 50m on forwards in total in the last 5 years.

Stop acting like they are City or United, let your boy Sarri beat Shakhtar before you start chatting BS.

Last year, Napoli spent 60 Million Euros to Spurs 110 Million Euros. You are intelligent enough to know that one big transfer in Higuain does not make the finances of both teams comparable.

Misleading.

Mainly because Spurs sold 3 players for nearly 100m euros.

I don't pretend that Spurs don't have more money as they do but it's nowhere near the gap Breva is acting like.

Spurs net spend every year is very low for a PL team, the gap isn't large enough to say Sarri would do a better job especially with his performance in the CL as manager so far.

Who besides Breva rates him as one of the best in Europe? It seems like everyone is just arguing against him.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:


Says who?  Spurs didn't spend anywhere near that amount.

Here's actual factual numbers.

Napoli spent over 40m euros on Higuain, Spurs have spent 50m on forwards in total in the last 5 years.

Stop acting like they are City or United, let your boy Sarri beat Shakhtar before you start chatting BS.

Last year, Napoli spent 60 Million Euros to Spurs 110 Million Euros. You are intelligent enough to know that one big transfer in Higuain does not make the finances of both teams comparable.

Misleading.

Mainly because Spurs sold 3 players for nearly 100m euros.

I don't pretend that Spurs don't have more money as they do but it's nowhere near the gap Breva is acting like.

Spurs net spend every year is very low for a PL team, the gap isn't large enough to say Sarri would do a better job especially with his performance in the CL as manager so far.

Not an argument I care about, but how is what he said misleading compared to what you say? You bring up Higuain as the most expensive when he was signed for less money that the player they sold (Cavani).

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

Lord Spencer wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:


Says who?  Spurs didn't spend anywhere near that amount.

Here's actual factual numbers.

Napoli spent over 40m euros on Higuain, Spurs have spent 50m on forwards in total in the last 5 years.

Stop acting like they are City or United, let your boy Sarri beat Shakhtar before you start chatting BS.

Last year, Napoli spent 60 Million Euros to Spurs 110 Million Euros. You are intelligent enough to know that one big transfer in Higuain does not make the finances of both teams comparable.

Misleading.

Mainly because Spurs sold 3 players for nearly 100m euros.

I don't pretend that Spurs don't have more money as they do but it's nowhere near the gap Breva is acting like.

Spurs net spend every year is very low for a PL team, the gap isn't large enough to say Sarri would do a better job especially with his performance in the CL as manager so far.

They actually operate in very similar spheres of spending

Napoli bought Cavani for 17M, sold for 40+
Bought Higuain with those funds, sold for 94M

Jorginho, Allan, Koulibaly all bought for low fees and became top players under Sarri

I think Sarri vs. Poch is an interesting debate, not a whole lot between them. I rate Poch higher but they're both promising with lots of time to prove themselves and join the really elite managers- they're a notch below for me

Yeah what I said was misleading as well lol, I'll accept that.

It's not about "underperforming" on purpose. It's about not giving 2 shits.

They just didn't give their 100% energy on the field, even sometimes not the Best XI as starters. The attitude wasn't the same and you could see it. In Serie A they act as conquerors, while in CL they just put a normal performance and accept their fate.

By no means i want to defend Napoli they are cucks. But i give Sarri the credit he deserves for bringing those cucks where they are, to overachieve and come close to winning the scudetto.

Back to Conte, where do people judge his time at Chelsea?

Obviously he came in and changed the Chelsea squad immensely last season in terms of attitude, play, etc.

Anyone would have brought Chelsea back to fighting for top 4 since they just needed a different manager, and they had enough talent to fight for the top four, but Conte went beyond that and won the league with a very high number of points, and popularized the back three in the EPL as well. He also got to the FA cup final, though Chelsea lost. It's worth mentioning that Chelsea didn't have any European commitments.

In his second season, undermined most definitely in part by the board, Chelsea did well for half the season but have since absolutely collapsed. They're now 8 points out of top 4, and out of the CL after an admittedly difficult draw. They're in the FA cup semis again though and likely to be in the final after getting the easy draw.

I don't think you can say he's been unsuccessful, he won the league after all, but his success mirrors that of recent Chelsea managers, it seems. One good season followed by one disastrous one. Though he does still have a chance of winning the FA cup, so perhaps its best to wait until after that, unless he's sacked beforehand (I doubt it)

The first season emphasized his strengths. He brought a complacent group back together and led an emphatic charge to claim the title, all while everyone was busy talking about Pep and Mou.

Now this season emphasizes his lows. Transfer dealings, my god have you ever seen a club get it more wrong than this that's not named Milan? Sorry, I had to. Falling out with Diego Costa, pawning off Matic, spending a summer going for Alex Sandro only to not sign him, going with Morata as your starting striker, not giving Batshuayi a look in, Bakayoko, etc. He nearly flopped in the CL group stage, made it through and honestly put in a decent showing against Barcelona for me, the first match should have been a Chelsea win and the second match was just about as poor as it gets in terms of self-inflicted wounds. Now, he's looking like he'll miss the top 4 and an FA cup wouldn't mask a poor showing. Chelsea as a club got it all wrong, Conte will fall on the sword surely. I think their squad is poor, their transfers sucked and Conte, good at being the glue to bring it together, is hard pressed to be the guy to bring a club to the next level after that. He had a defeatist attitude with Juventus saying we could not compete in Europe- having no money to eat at the restaurant from what I recall, Allegri took those bastards to immediate new heights in just his first season.

They are not exactly overachieving in my opinion. He's done a great job to achieve consistency but overachieving would be something else, like winning trophies. Just look at the competition. We don't have Man City's and Chelsea's with unlimited budgets competing for the title. At worst, this squad would finish 2nd or 3rd.

It's only this season that they're running Juve close. Without being unbiased, last 2 seasons wasn't much of a title race once we got into full gear. It was always a question of when  we were going to secure the league.

If he wins the league this year, full credit to him otherwise it's no different to when Spalletti was leading Roma to multiple 2nd place finishes behind Inter. And Spalletti doesn't get much credit for that anyway which he shouldn't of course.

Chelsea's squad was already not good enough and then they had an all time terrible transfer campaign to weaken the squad. United, City and Spurs all have better teams than Chelsea. Liverpool is the one where its debatable and Klopp has done good work. Last season was more overachieving for Chelsea than this season is underachieving. The management just screwed the team over.

rincon wrote:Chelsea's squad was already not good enough and then they had an all time terrible transfer campaign to weaken the squad. United, City and Spurs all have better teams than Chelsea. Liverpool is the one where its debatable and Klopp has done good work. Last season was more overachieving for Chelsea than this season is underachieving. Conte's transfer decisions just screwed the team over.

Fixed that for you

Selling Costa was a mistake

As he has said time and time again, he doesn't call the shots at Chelsea since they have a sporting director, and he complains over and over how they don't consult him and don't listen to him over transfers.

rincon wrote:As he has said time and time again, he doesn't call the shots at Chelsea since they have a sporting director, and he complains over and over how they don't consult him and don't listen to him over transfers.

Actually, he wanted Lukaku, and wanted some other weird transfers according to media. I don't know how correct these reports are, but judging by the outrage in public + initial happiness with Morata, I think that Conte selling Costa is true.

Yeah he fell out with Costa, I don't know or care why. The problem is going from someone like Costa to Morata. Going from Matic to Bakayoko. All around not improving a squad that was already weak. Which he has publicly said many times.

Never will i believe Zappacosta (for example) was a transfer submitted by Abramovich, unless he's deluded.

Conte maybe didn't call every shot but he certainly had a say about transfers. Hard to be taken seriously when you complain like that as Chelsea coach. Even at Juve he was unsatisfied while Marotta had better ideas than him.

Zappacosta is a back up right back. Hardly the problem. That he isn't great at transfers or that Marotta is great doesn't in any way mean that he is at fault for things he doesn't do. Just like he wasn't in charge at Juve, he isn't in charge at Chelsea and the triumphs and failures of both clubs transfers campaigns can't be attributed to him.

If he is at odds with the club over transfers to the point of saying it to media then he cannot have agreed with what the club has done in the transfer campaigns.

Surely he had some influence

Chelsea ended up buying a few Serie A scrubs iirc? Something they never done at all but all of a sudden Conte comes and they do.

Zappacosta, Alonso, Morata, Rudiger, all clearly Conte signings. The only way they shafted him was selling Matic when he didn't want to. Other than that they had a lot of funds available, just spent them on shite. Zappacosta was like 25m, Drinkwater 35m, etc. Luiz like 50m or something. Bakayoko 42m.

Again, won't discredit him winning the league, first season and all, it's still a legit achievement, it's just not that amazing when they're playing once a week. For instance we were utterly decimated that season competing in all competitions and our squad was so thin to the point we had to start youth jobbers multiple times in big league games.

Conte's lads stayed fresh the entire season with their schedule. Helped tremendously.  They weren't especially impressive football wise, but always seemed to get the win.

Costa's first half of insane form won them the title that year. And Conte got rid of him lol.

Tomwin Lannister wrote:Surely he had some influence

Chelsea ended up buying a few Serie A scrubs iirc? Something they never done at all but all of a sudden Conte comes and they do.

Then what would be the point of going against the board for the supposedly not listening to him? Why would Chelsea not respond if he was just lying?

That a player comes from Serie A doesn't say that he it was him. Zappacosta he trained in the NT so it seems clear. Marcos Alonso and Rudiger? when did Conte ever say anything about them?

Luiz, Bakayoko, Barkley, Drinkwater, etc.

Lord Spencer wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

breva wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:Hilarious.

Higuiain cost more than any striker in Spurs history, but apparently they have some unreal budget which Napoli can't compete with.

Napoli transfer budget ~40M euro, Tottenham transfer budget ~ 90M sterling. Tottenham has nearly 3 times the budget of Napoli.  So yes, it is unreal and Naploi cannot compete with it.

Says who?  Spurs didn't spend anywhere near that amount.

Here's actual factual numbers.

Napoli spent over 40m euros on Higuain, Spurs have spent 50m on forwards in total in the last 5 years.

Stop acting like they are City or United, let your boy Sarri beat Shakhtar before you start chatting BS.

Last year, Napoli spent 60 Million Euros to Spurs 110 Million Euros. You are intelligent enough to know that one big transfer in Higuain does not make the finances of both teams comparable.

Spurs also sold 92m, leading to a net transfer of 17.5m. Napoli by contract purchased 62m worth of players and only sold 8m, leading to a net transfer of 54m, roughly three times as much.

Please see yourself out

The idea that Spurs are these heavy spenders is ridiculous, they have a hard enough time giving their existing players raises to keep them around and financing their new stadium.