Xtratime Community banner

21 - 40 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,497 Posts
So the Milan coach is an Inter fan
inter coach a Juve fan
juve coach a Napoli fan
Napoli coach a Milan fan!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
And the whole of Italian coaches know nothing about whether a coach is good or not. Ancelotti, Sacchi, Prandelli, Maldini, Boban, Capello, Mancini, Sarri, they all know nothing. They are BS, they lie deliberately or say rubbish because they aren't competent enough to know. They all had a meeting to speak with one voice in order to prop up Giampaolo. But van on Milan forum knows better than them.

Plus is this the first time a squad doesn't suit a particular coach style? Don't let us show our ignorance please. Why is it that all the coaches immediately they take up a job they request for certain players to suit their style? Guardiola, Mourinho, Conte, Sarri, Ancelotti. Tell me one coach who doesn't request for specific players to suit his game? So what's mysterious about what Prandelli said? Was it because it concerned the much-hated Giampaolo? What's strange about saying a squad does not suit a coach?
Rarely have I seen a manager attack another manager on his record, unless it was before their own clash. And when it comes to firing they always support each other by always saying the same things. Always the same excuses, needs more time, not a good fit, didn't have the right players. Never he fcuked up, he's a loser or he can't handle the pressure. It's like these people can't fcuk up? Or that's reserved exclusively for the rest of us.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,618 Posts
And the whole of Italian coaches know nothing about whether a coach is good or not. Ancelotti, Sacchi, Prandelli, Maldini, Boban, Capello, Mancini, Sarri, they all know nothing. They are BS, they lie deliberately or say rubbish because they aren't competent enough to know. They all had a meeting to speak with one voice in order to prop up Giampaolo. But van on Milan forum knows better than them.

Plus is this the first time a squad doesn't suit a particular coach style? Don't let us show our ignorance please. Why is it that all the coaches immediately they take up a job they request for certain players to suit their style? Guardiola, Mourinho, Conte, Sarri, Ancelotti. Tell me one coach who doesn't request for specific players to suit his game? So what's mysterious about what Prandelli said? Was it because it concerned the much-hated Giampaolo? What's strange about saying a squad does not suit a coach?
I truly have nothing against Giampaolo. I am sure he is a nice guy. And as I have said many times, I don't doubt he can do well elsewhere, like Atalanta's coach after failing at Inter and so many others. He just was not ready for this job, as has been painfully obvious, literally from matchday 1.

The talk about him being "one of the greats" has no base on results. Or does it? Look at his damn record. What is great about it? The only great thing so so far are words about him. His campaigns with Empoli and Ascoli were good -- midtable good. The rest is mediocrity. Prove it otherwise if you disagree.


The points are:

1) He did not have the CV to justify Milan hiring him. Especially to qualify to CL with this squad. Nothing in his history indicated he could do that. He has always been at best a mid table manager. That is fact.

2) He sucked at Milan. You can twist a million ways, but he did much worse that the previous manager with the same squad. He also did much worse than was expected. There was nothing good about his job at Milan. He was sacked after seven games. We have repeated ad nauseam all that was wrong that cannot be blamed on the squad. It was looking really terrible and there were no signs of progress at all.

3) The guy was sacked. Not by "van in the Milan forum". By the people in charge. In three months, they decided he was not going be able to do the job and cut their losses. Only his colleagues defend him, 99% of experts agree he was just doing terribly bad and deserved the sacking.

4)
In fact, the current Milan fit the kid of team Giampaolo had always managed, and arguably had better players than he's ever had. Therefore as was expectable from looking at his record, he was well poised to finish in the mid table at best and at worst get sacked, like it's happened in all his other jobs before.

Do you really think his job consisted in turning last season's Milan into this season's Milan because they don't fit his "style"? His job was to make Milan more competitive, not to try to impose a style and make the whole operation crash and burn if he could not. One thing is saying the squad is not good enough for the objective (poor argument given how close the squad was last season, but at least it is reasonable), but it is another to invent a theory about the kinds of players and the kinds of styles and justify calamitous results like that. Not sure you need to go around calling people ignorant. The guy was hired to do a job and he kew the deal: what players, what money, and what expectations. He had to adapt to that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,892 Posts
Rarely have I seen a manager attack another manager on his record, unless it was before their own clash. And when it comes to firing they always support each other by always saying the same things. Always the same excuses, needs more time, not a good fit, didn't have the right players. Never he fcuked up, he's a loser or he can't handle the pressure. It's like these people can't fcuk up? Or that's reserved exclusively for the rest of us.
And rarely have I seen a unanimous verdict on a coach like in this case of Giampaolo. Yes coaches back up each other as a form of professional courtesy, but this is different though. It's not one coach or two speaking up for him. It's a whole congregation of the Italian coaching world. Even those who ordinarily don't even talk about Milan, this time around they spoke up for him.

Does it really pain to agree that he's a good coach who found it hard to meet expectations (albeit judged in just seven weeks)? And he won't be the last coach or player who is actually good but a change of scenery didn't work out for. So again what's the gain in insisting that he isn't good? What's the end point?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,892 Posts
I truly have nothing against Giampaolo. I am sure he is a nice guy. And as I have said many times, I don't doubt he can do well elsewhere, like Atalanta's coach after failing at Inter and so many others. He just was not ready for this job, as has been painfully obvious, literally from matchday 1.

The talk about him being "one of the greats" has no base on results. Or does it? Look at his damn record. What is great about it? The only great thing so so far are words about him. His campaigns with Empoli and Ascoli were good -- midtable good. The rest is mediocrity. Prove it otherwise if you disagree.

The points are:

1) He did not have the CV to justify Milan hiring him. Especially to qualify to CL with this squad. Nothing in his history indicated he could do that. He has always been at best a mid table manager. That is fact.

2) He sucked at Milan. You can twist a million ways, but he did much worse that the previous manager with the same squad. He also did much worse than was expected. There was nothing good about his job at Milan. He was sacked after seven games. We have repeated ad nauseam all that was wrong .
Just one question - what CV does Allegri have when we hired him and he went on to win our last league trophy? Tell me. Is having a CV the prerequisite for success? Zidane did what no coach had ever done in the CL for Real. He came back and he being horrible. What does that make him? A bad coach? How come his CV didn't come to his rescue in the early stages of his second coming? How come he needed time and patience to turn things around now? Please nothing is in black and white. And it won't hurt you to accept he's a good coach who run into a rough patch, although he wasn't given time. I would always say it, given time there's every likelihood he'd turn it around.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,618 Posts
I truly have nothing against Giampaolo. I am sure he is a nice guy. And as I have said many times, I don't doubt he can do well elsewhere, like Atalanta's coach after failing at Inter and so many others. He just was not ready for this job, as has been painfully obvious, literally from matchday 1.

The talk about him being "one of the greats" has no base on results. Or does it? Look at his damn record. What is great about it? The only great thing so so far are words about him. His campaigns with Empoli and Ascoli were good -- midtable good. The rest is mediocrity. Prove it otherwise if you disagree.

The points are:

1) He did not have the CV to justify Milan hiring him. Especially to qualify to CL with this squad. Nothing in his history indicated he could do that. He has always been at best a mid table manager. That is fact.

2) He sucked at Milan. You can twist a million ways, but he did much worse that the previous manager with the same squad. He also did much worse than was expected. There was nothing good about his job at Milan. He was sacked after seven games. We have repeated ad nauseam all that was wrong .
Just one question - what CV does Allegri have when we hired him and he went on to win our last league trophy? Tell me. Is having a CV the prerequisite for success? Zidane did what no coach had ever done in the CL for Real. He came back and he being horrible. What does that make him? A bad coach? How come his CV didn't come to his rescue in the early stages of his second coming? How come he needed time and patience to turn things around now? Please nothing is in black and white. And it won't hurt you to accept he's a good coach who run into a rough patch, although he wasn't given time. I would always say it, given time there's every likelihood he'd turn it around.
The problem is what you’re saying cannot be proven and everything points to the opposite conclusion — except people who agree with you also based on nothing.

Also: the things you’re asking me to say. Why would I say Giampaolo is a good coach? He may be, but I have seen nothing from him. I won’t say he is good just because other people say so.

Never said he cannot prove to be good either. But he has not done it yet.

We have already discussed these things. Allegri and Zidane had brilliant squads. It makes sense to bet on an unproven but promising manager if you have Zlatan and Nesta, Cristiano Ronaldo and Ramos, Van Basten and Baresi.

For this job in this Milan a midtable manager was just a very very poor decision. I said it when he was announced. His terrible performance and sacking have not precisely convinced of the opposite.

What does not make sense at all is to insist that a manager is “great” based on just words. Not even Sampdoria fans say he is great. When we signed him Toni came here to say Mihajlovic is better. The results are not great.

Giampaolo so far is not a great manager under any reasonable criteria.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
And rarely have I seen a unanimous verdict on a coach like in this case of Giampaolo. Yes coaches back up each other as a form of professional courtesy, but this is different though. It's not one coach or two speaking up for him. It's a whole congregation of the Italian coaching world. Even those who ordinarily don't even talk about Milan, this time around they spoke up for him.

Does it really pain to agree that he's a good coach who found it hard to meet expectations (albeit judged in just seven weeks)? And he won't be the last coach or player who is actually good but a change of scenery didn't work out for. So again what's the gain in insisting that he isn't good? What's the end point?
If I had seen the good, I would absolutely acknowledge it. I didn't see single gram of good in this Milan. We talk about the players, but what about Sampdoria? Sampdoria did have the right players, but we do not? If that's the case he should have taken them above Milan last season. This is ridiculous, he didn't have the right players? Who comes up with these excuses. Make a tactic that suits the teams.


Good coach? Depends on the perspective. For Serie A, he's average at best. Now he might be a master tactician or even the best theory tactician in the history of Coverciano, but that doesn't make him a good coach. The results do. And if his winning % is on the lower end than how can he be a good coach?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,892 Posts
The problem is what you’re saying cannot be proven and everything points to the opposite conclusion — except people who agree with you also based on nothing.

Also: the things you’re asking me to say. Why would I say Giampaolo is a good coach? He may be, but I have seen nothing from him. I won’t say he is good just because other people say so.

Never said he cannot prove to be good either. But he has not done it yet.

We have already discussed these things. Allegri and Zidane had brilliant squads. It makes sense to bet on an unproven but promising manager if you have Zlatan and Nesta, Cristiano Ronaldo and Ramos, Van Basten and Baresi.

For this job in this Milan a midtable manager was just a very very poor decision. I said it when he was announced. His terrible performance and sacking have not precisely convinced of the opposite.

What does not make sense at all is to insist that a manager is “great” based on just words. Not even Sampdoria fans say he is great. When we signed him Toni came here to say Mihajlovic is better. The results are not great.

Giampaolo so far is not a great manager under any reasonable criteria.
You dodged the question. You said Giampaolo has no good CV and so hiring him was bs because of that as he won't succeed. You made that clear from day one. Then I asked, what CV does Allegri possessed when we hired him and he went to be quit successful and established himself as one of the best in the world? Then I mentioned Zidane. He was the best in the world just a year ago. Then he came back to the same familiar place and struggled horribly, hanging on with his finger nails. All these to prove to you that 1), having a CV isn't the all-and-be-all of if a coach would succeed in a new place.
2), even the best out there do struggle and find it difficult tough when they jobs. Doesn't mean they are bad coaches.

And if we gonna argue till thy kingdom come, I would still maintain my stance that seven games (during which a coach won 3 and lost 4) isn't enough time to judge a coach and come to a conclusion.

Btw, isn't it ironic that you kept defending Suso here for years, providing all sorts of excuses for him, despite him turning out shit performances week in week out? And yet you were up in arms at someone for "failing" in just a month and a half!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,830 Posts
Not only douge but tend to defend points based on what had already happened.
Trying to put across the arguments to make himself look bright.

Well I have seen a few of this.
They tend to be quiet on occasion and make themself heard after things happened with I told you so kind of argument.

Eg...Formation is just a formation argument and twist when it benefit the moment.

Let it go, have fun instead
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,203 Posts
I don't know what the point of Inas arguing is... Does he want Giampy to have finished the season?

Have he seen is play? Have he read the press conference and interviews?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43,494 Posts
He's saying there may well be reasons for Giampy's lack of success at Milan which aren't about him being a shit coach.

One one hand, there's something to be said for hype about coaches. We fell for it when it came to Tardelli (aptly named), who was shown to be tactically clueless. His "CV" was his success with the Italian U-21 team. Even then, it was pretty clear that the team had many solid players who were already signed to big clubs. Pirlo and (pre-injury) Ventola were the stars of the squad. Then you had other players who were highly rated talents at the time, like Cristiano Zanetti, Gattuso, Abbiati, Baronio, Perrotta and Matteo Ferrari. It later became more than clear that Tardelli was the Roger Lemerre of his team.

Additionally, it seems to me that coaches tend to speak positively about other coaches (unless there is pre-existing beef) in the way that people of specific professions tend to do (e.g. doctors). There are obviously exceptions to this since, unlike certain professions, there isn't that high standard of ethics where violations may lead to being struck off. The UK contains a lot of these exceptions, where there have been a number of straight-talkers (like Roy Keane).

On the other hand, Inas has a good point about squads not being compatible with every coach and that most coaches would need changes in place before they can do their thing. Do you think Conte or Mourinho, had they arrived a few years ago, would have been able to help Inter make large strides if the top brass wasn't willing to splash to improve the squad?

On that note, I'll leave you with a beautiful image...that of the lovely-locked Roberto Mancini. When he arrived at Inter, the club was active in making quality signings without spending too much as part of a new policy. Players like Cambiasso (free transfer) and Veron (loan) were brought in. Figo arrived on a free transfer in 2005 as well. Quite quickly, the results and performances improved significantly.

When Mancini returned to Inter, the club's willingness and/or ability to sign new players was very different. He had to just deal with what he was given. It didn't end well.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,618 Posts
The problem is what you’re saying cannot be proven and everything points to the opposite conclusion — except people who agree with you also based on nothing.

Also: the things you’re asking me to say. Why would I say Giampaolo is a good coach? He may be, but I have seen nothing from him. I won’t say he is good just because other people say so.

Never said he cannot prove to be good either. But he has not done it yet.

We have already discussed these things. Allegri and Zidane had brilliant squads. It makes sense to bet on an unproven but promising manager if you have Zlatan and Nesta, Cristiano Ronaldo and Ramos, Van Basten and Baresi.

For this job in this Milan a midtable manager was just a very very poor decision. I said it when he was announced. His terrible performance and sacking have not precisely convinced of the opposite.

What does not make sense at all is to insist that a manager is “great” based on just words. Not even Sampdoria fans say he is great. When we signed him Toni came here to say Mihajlovic is better. The results are not great.

Giampaolo so far is not a great manager under any reasonable criteria.
You dodged the question. You said Giampaolo has no good CV and so hiring him was bs because of that as he won't succeed. You made that clear from day one. Then I asked, what CV does Allegri possessed when we hired him and he went to be quit successful and established himself as one of the best in the world? Then I mentioned Zidane. He was the best in the world just a year ago. Then he came back to the same familiar place and struggled horribly, hanging on with his finger nails. All these to prove to you that 1), having a CV isn't the all-and-be-all of if a coach would succeed in a new place.
2), even the best out there do struggle and find it difficult tough when they jobs. Doesn't mean they are bad coaches.

And if we gonna argue till thy kingdom come, I would still maintain my stance that seven games (during which a coach won 3 and lost 4) isn't enough time to judge a coach and come to a conclusion.

Btw, isn't it ironic that you kept defending Suso here for years, providing all sorts of excuses for him, despite him turning out shit performances week in week out? And yet you were up in arms at someone for "failing" in just a month and a half!
The CV argument is obviously crucial when you are saying someone is “great” at their job. What the hell makes Giampaolo “great”? Not his CV, not what we saw at Milan. Then what?

Listen, of course seven games is very little. I would usually advocate more time too. However this time I disagreed with the hiring and the signs were there since game one and it did not get better.

It was a brutal seven games which combined with the fact that the manager had no trajectory to justify the faith in him, warranted a sacking. Even your argument about incompatible players (which I don’t agree with, even less fir a manager like Giampaolo who’s never had a stronger squad) adds to the sacking being a good idea.

I did answer your question directly, not sure what you’re on about. I even gave you examples. You can bet on a unexperienced manager in certain conditions. We’ve been doing that for years. It worked in the right conditions many times in the 80s and 90s, sucks now. A manager with a mediocre CV (or no experience like Pippo and others) given an unexperienced squad but high pressure is a recipe for a situation like this.

The Suso comparison is neither here nor there. That’s just you making it personal about me. Suso has not turned shit performances for years, in my opinion, so I never sad anything about patience... You may not like him but he has produced for the team. Completely different.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,618 Posts
Not only douge but tend to defend points based on what had already happened.
Trying to put across the arguments to make himself look bright.

Well I have seen a few of this.
They tend to be quiet on occasion and make themself heard after things happened with I told you so kind of argument.

Eg...Formation is just a formation argument and twist when it benefit the moment.

Let it go, have fun instead
What the hell are you talking about?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,618 Posts
He's saying there may well be reasons for Giampy's lack of success at Milan which aren't about him being a shit coach.

One one hand, there's something to be said for hype about coaches. We fell for it when it came to Tardelli (aptly named), who was shown to be tactically clueless. His "CV" was his success with the Italian U-21 team. Even then, it was pretty clear that the team had many solid players who were already signed to big clubs. Pirlo and (pre-injury) Ventola were the stars of the squad. Then you had other players who were highly rated talents at the time, like Cristiano Zanetti, Gattuso, Abbiati, Baronio, Perrotta and Matteo Ferrari. It later became more than clear that Tardelli was the Roger Lemerre of his team.

Additionally, it seems to me that coaches tend to speak positively about other coaches (unless there is pre-existing beef) in the way that people of specific professions tend to do (e.g. doctors). There are obviously exceptions to this since, unlike certain professions, there isn't that high standard of ethics where violations may lead to being struck off. The UK contains a lot of these exceptions, where there have been a number of straight-talkers (like Roy Keane).

On the other hand, Inas has a good point about squads not being compatible with every coach and that most coaches would need changes in place before they can do their thing. Do you think Conte or Mourinho, had they arrived a few years ago, would have been able to help Inter make large strides if the top brass wasn't willing to splash to improve the squad?

On that note, I'll leave you with a beautiful image...that of the lovely-locked Roberto Mancini. When he arrived at Inter, the club was active in making quality signings without spending too much as part of a new policy. Players like Cambiasso (free transfer) and Veron (loan) were brought in. Figo arrived on a free transfer in 2005 as well. Quite quickly, the results and performances improved significantly.

When Mancini returned to Inter, the club's willingness and/or ability to sign new players was very different. He had to just deal with what he was given. It didn't end well.
There are two different discussions though.

Of course a manager will do better with better squads and with his ideal signings. That is completely evident.

On the other hand, justifying failure on the grounds of a lack of fit from the squad is trickier, much less self-evident. This squad had decent results last season. Better than Giampaolo has had with any squad in his career. And arguably it also had better players than any squad he has ever managed. So blaming the squad is pretty weak, particularly taking into account everything else: crazy selection, unstable tactics, weird things said in press conferences, etc. The guy could have built on what worked and progressively impose his style instead of turning the team into a fragile mess in three months.

And ultimately any position you take, along with the awful performances and poor results, it adds up to this: Giampaolo was not the right hire for this Milan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,337 Posts
On the other hand, Inas has a good point about squads not being compatible with every coach and that most coaches would need changes in place before they can do their thing. Do you think Conte or Mourinho, had they arrived a few years ago, would have been able to help Inter make large strides if the top brass wasn't willing to splash to improve the squad?
Mourinho of old yes. Mourinho after being back stabbed by his players at Real Madrid? Maybe not. But if he would have gotten the love he received at Inter I'm sure he would have turned the team around. Spalletti did it with his own ways.

Conte? It's a **** yes on that. Look at Sensi looking like a world class player. He was a decent player at Sassuolo, technically gifted, but nobody was going crazy over him. Had Sensi come to Milan? He would have been a back up to Biglia or Hakan. And people would still say, this Milan team didn't have the right players for Giampaolo. Give Leao and Piatek to Conte and let's talk again about the right players. Conte would probably find the cure for Calhanoclue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43,494 Posts
Mourinho of old yes. Mourinho after being back stabbed by his players at Real Madrid? Maybe not. But if he would have gotten the love he received at Inter I'm sure he would have turned the team around. Spalletti did it with his own ways.

Conte? It's a **** yes on that. Look at Sensi looking like a world class player. He was a decent player at Sassuolo, technically gifted, but nobody was going crazy over him. Had Sensi come to Milan? He would have been a back up to Biglia or Hakan. And people would still say, this Milan team didn't have the right players for Giampaolo. Give Leao and Piatek to Conte and let's talk again about the right players. Conte would probably find the cure for Calhanoclue.
Fair enough but, then again, Conte specifically chose Sensi. He also got rid of what he thought were troublesome players causing the rot, like Icardi and Nainggolan. I don't think he'd be able to get the same type of results with a team where he's not able for whatever reason to make key changes and is forced to play a declining Borja Valero in 27 Serie A games.

Tactics and motivation are fine but you need other boxes checked at the same time.

Anyway, next coach after Pioli should be a proven name so that he has respect the moment he arrives and he should be given full authority in terms of discipline and a wide scope for transfers for his project. Giampy is like Rodney Dangerfield. :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,830 Posts
Icardi is a great player but could also be the caused of Inter not being able to progress. Inter is bound for great leap now.

I will say it again, I will fire my best salesman if the rest of the team is affected due to his individuality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,830 Posts
Pioli could rest assured that he will only be fired when the season end. That’s an insurance that he got where Giampaolo don’t

Unless he is so shit that he, together Maldini and Boban will be shown during winter break


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,892 Posts
He's saying there may well be reasons for Giampy's lack of success at Milan which aren't about him being a shit coach.



One one hand, there's something to be said for hype about coaches. We fell for it when it came to Tardelli (aptly named), who was shown to be tactically clueless. His "CV" was his success with the Italian U-21 team. Even then, it was pretty clear that the team had many solid players who were already signed to big clubs. Pirlo and (pre-injury) Ventola were the stars of the squad. Then you had other players who were highly rated talents at the time, like Cristiano Zanetti, Gattuso, Abbiati, Baronio, Perrotta and Matteo Ferrari. It later became more than clear that Tardelli was the Roger Lemerre of his team.



Additionally, it seems to me that coaches tend to speak positively about other coaches (unless there is pre-existing beef) in the way that people of specific professions tend to do (e.g. doctors). There are obviously exceptions to this since, unlike certain professions, there isn't that high standard of ethics where violations may lead to being struck off. The UK contains a lot of these exceptions, where there have been a number of straight-talkers (like Roy Keane).



On the other hand, Inas has a good point about squads not being compatible with every coach and that most coaches would need changes in place before they can do their thing. Do you think Conte or Mourinho, had they arrived a few years ago, would have been able to help Inter make large strides if the top brass wasn't willing to splash to improve the squad?



On that note, I'll leave you with a beautiful image...that of the lovely-locked Roberto Mancini. When he arrived at Inter, the club was active in making quality signings without spending too much as part of a new policy. Players like Cambiasso (free transfer) and Veron (loan) were brought in. Figo arrived on a free transfer in 2005 as well. Quite quickly, the results and performances improved significantly.



When Mancini returned to Inter, the club's willingness and/or ability to sign new players was very different. He had to just deal with what he was given. It didn't end well.
Thank you! I think you've said it all
 
21 - 40 of 41 Posts
Top