- Jul 29, 2005
- 1,247
- 406
I do think it is fair to question whether or not Baldini has delivered value for money.
Yes, his net spend may be "0" - but equally he has been handed a transfer budget of £100m to spend. The question is not whether the side is better or worse as a result of that trade (that was not his decision); but rather whether, given he has a transfer budget of £100m has he spent it well.
Even the most optimistic of you must say the Jury is at least out on that.
It's all very well to say his signings are running the team; but the question is whether they should be?
It is impossible to know whether he could have done better or not; because we don't know who else we could realistically have signed.
However, when I compare his signings to other similar outlays (not just individually but in aggregate), I do have some concerns. I am not just talking about the individual signings (Soldado; Lamela; and so on) - but the strategy behind the signings. For example:
- did he sign too many at once? Would it not have been better to sign a few world class players in key positions rather than half a dozen in similar ones?
- did he sign too many players without Premiership experience?
- did he forget about the defence and miss key weaknesses in the full back position - so critical to modern football?
3 managers later with little obvious progress, I think it is fair to start asking some questions about the squad; how it was assembled; and the quality (or at least value) of some of the individual signings. Baldini is the guy holding those reins....
Yes, his net spend may be "0" - but equally he has been handed a transfer budget of £100m to spend. The question is not whether the side is better or worse as a result of that trade (that was not his decision); but rather whether, given he has a transfer budget of £100m has he spent it well.
Even the most optimistic of you must say the Jury is at least out on that.
It's all very well to say his signings are running the team; but the question is whether they should be?
It is impossible to know whether he could have done better or not; because we don't know who else we could realistically have signed.
However, when I compare his signings to other similar outlays (not just individually but in aggregate), I do have some concerns. I am not just talking about the individual signings (Soldado; Lamela; and so on) - but the strategy behind the signings. For example:
- did he sign too many at once? Would it not have been better to sign a few world class players in key positions rather than half a dozen in similar ones?
- did he sign too many players without Premiership experience?
- did he forget about the defence and miss key weaknesses in the full back position - so critical to modern football?
3 managers later with little obvious progress, I think it is fair to start asking some questions about the squad; how it was assembled; and the quality (or at least value) of some of the individual signings. Baldini is the guy holding those reins....