More than anything that was because he got injured long term in pre-season training.... it certainly wasn't Llorente or anyone else non-Tevez being too hot to handle.
Now you seem to be being stubborn about this with that remark, when what i'm saying is the most non-controversial point ever.
Morata had no expectation to be a straight starter, Dybala should not expect that either. He's a young player who's had a good season but is not established. If Dybala wants a starting place he will have to earn it the same way Morata did.
He will have chances to play, that i don't doubt at all regardless of the amount we paid for him.
...and again I will counter by saying that he is the biggest signing we have made in a decade, moneywise. It matters.
And i will state for the record that you're attributing more to this factor than i think is logical, when we both know Tevez will be gone in a year, and that Dybala at his age and profile, is not going to kick up a fuss if he has to play second fiddle to a striking duo which could possibly net us a historic treble.
If he does, he doesn't have the right mentality for this club.
Fair enough. For me "trequartista" has particular meaning, not least for a team with the versions we've had.
Back to my objection.... with us paying what we did for Dybala, and what we will pay for Berardi (if nothing else to maintain control of him, never mind if he is on the roster), as well as some kind of expense for Khedira or another midfielder to replace Pirlo as regards capable starter material, never mind likely also making one purchase for the defense - perhaps a wing back - is it likely that we can find the money to also get someone good enough that it is preferable keeping a player like Dybala (and/or Berardi) on the bench?
Because that is the tradeoff here. I assume you will be quick to agree that a Tevez/Morata/Dybala trident is preferable to playing Pereyra as an AM/playmaker. Or Vidal in that position for instance (will be an option from time to time anyway). Unless the player coming in is really good (not Shaqiri), I think it would be better to play three strikers, at least until the Tevez leaving scenario is upon us.
As i've said previously, there has been no indication recently that we're willing to play a trident up front. It limits Tevez into a more rigid role, and i think it goes contrary to one of the areas which has played into our success, namely dominating midfield. I also do not have the impression that Dybala is hardworking enough to play out wide in a trident.
Well, domestic double and CL final notwithstanding.... in principle I would like such a player too.
But even Barca have to make do to keep their star players happy. If Messi or Neymar are not there, you get Pedro, OK (and he likely wants to leave to get first team football). After that.... nothing. There is not even an out and out striker there should Suarez be unavailable... then they put Messi up front. Ultimately, you have to accept very much declining returns on the forwards if you want to maintain a long line of them and only wants to play two in the startling lineup. Juventus habitually have five, and it is always the death of one or two of them career wise. Except when Lippi played DP, Vialli and Ravanelli of course, with Amoruso a talented youngster and Padovano who didn't complain.
But my point is not that i want great depth for the trequartista position, we already have guys like Pereyra and Vidal to deputize. My point is i want someone who is actually an AM to be the starter in our formation if it remains the same, because we lose a lot by playing players in that position who aren't suited to it like Vidal, or are patently not good enough to play it such as Pereyra.
And of course it rings hollow to say we won't have the funds to go for an AM, if we spend 13m on in the same mercato to secure Pereyra.