Not everyone thing Pazzini-Cassano is a wise deal, or it is polarized by which team they support.
To me, it is another derby in UEFA Financial Fair Play. Firstly, it was so surprised that Milan balanced their book in 2012 calender year, which if excluding the ~30M EURO profit from Silva and adding Silva and Zlatan were left in mid-2012 thus saved a large sum of wage for half a year, the result was magnificent . However on Inter side, failed to sell Julio Cesar, Maicon and Sneijder for the right time, were only a few minor mistake. More mistake was on buying old age striker such as Palacio, as well as long delay of replacing Milito.
It is logical that selling Pazzini to save cost. Pazzini's transfer fee was 19 million and 4/1/2 year contract, thus, a 4.222 million amortization was on Pazzini. However either Pazzini was a flop, or Inter did not suit him, selling him for 13 million EURO is wise (13 minus residual accounting value 12.666, still some profit). However, the direct replacement of Pazzini was Cassano and/or Cassano+Palacio seems not a maths of 2 under quality striker is better than 1.
Nothing wrong in Cassano deal. 5.5M transfer fee and 2-year contract, thus 2.25M amortization, lesser than 4.222 million to compensate the undisclosed wage gap between Cassano and Pazzini. However adding Palacio and Milito into consideration, three old forward (or unbiased term: in downwards slope) with star-level wage, the result would be horrible injury crisis of this season.
Football is crazy. There were reliable few years ago, but did not prove the were still energetic in their 30s. Moreover, except Real Madrid and Barca had one of the top super strikers (and YOUNG except Villa), not every team could shown a maths that add up of 3 reliable strikers means more reliable. It did not have any thing to backup the thought that 3 players had difference rise and down period.
Football should be mean. Milito was a average buy in 2009 as it cost 28M in 4-year contract (plus 2M unknown cost shown in 2009-10 Inter audit report), the treble should made that year amortization be 14M not 7M (eventually Milito extended a year in during that season), as Milito should always a front loaded asset, every time he celebrate his birthday is bonus to the team.
However in football club the accountants seldom use impaired clause. It is not logical that Milito still "worth" 12M on 30 June 2012, still, some crazy man willing to offer the transfer fee and also meet the wage demand. Inter should offload him long ago instead of let go of Livaja. The let go of Milito save cost, and moreover, grow more young striker that Inter missed, such as Destro for only 4.5 Million, which current raised to 15 million, or more. Inter should aimed for UEFA FFP, that, should have more balanced wage structure to be more competitive. Inter with Messi nor Brazilian Ronaldo did not proven success, as the era of Beckham(or Figo)-Pavon policy have proven football is a team sports, 1 star and 10 players from lower divisions would not a champion team. With a huge net loss in 2011-12 season, how Inter could improve immediately is nearly a crazy agenda. The new blueprint of Inter, should be avoid the loophole of kick out from UCL thus without income, without income cut cost (as FFP prevent fresh "investment" from owner to cover net loss), cut cost than more difficult to go back to UCL. MM may think FFP was a tool to kick out Milan, Chelsea and Manchester City thus they support the idea, but he did not notice that, high chance to be kicked out, was Inter.
No comments:
Post a Comment