Inter Milan’s search for a reliable tactical backup to Hakan Calhanoglu has sparked intense debate, with Gianni Visnadi questioning the club’s logic in targeting external midfield reinforcements when internal options are already available. The discussion, broadcast on Radio Sportiva, centers on how the Nerazzurri plan to manage the key playmaker role in Chivu's tactical setup.
The Debate Over Calhanoglu’s Understudy
At Inter Milan, the burden of orchestrating play from the base of midfield traditionally rests on Calhanoglu, making the search for his deputy a high-priority topic for observers and analysts tracking squad management.
Speaking on Radio Sportiva, Gianni Visnadi addressed the rumored interest in external candidates, singling out links to players like Romano and questioning the strategy behind such moves. “Inter wants Romano as Calhanoglu’s vice? Another Calhanoglu vice? And how many Calhanoglu vices does Inter have? Why these convoluted operations? Who invented this?” Visnadi remarked, challenging the rationale of pursuing multiple short-term fixes in the transfer market.
Internal Solutions: Looking Past Traditional Labels
Rather than investing heavily in external acquisitions for a specialized backup role, Visnadi argued that Inter already possesses the necessary profiles within the current squad framework. Pointing directly to the roster composition, the pundit suggested the club should look inward rather than complicating squad planning with redundant signings.
“For me, Inter has the new vice—I don’t like the word—they already have the next Calhanoglu in-house, and his name is Sučić,” Visnadi stated, dismissing alternative internal suggestions such as Stanković.
Visnadi noted that Piotr Zieliński has occasionally been deployed in that deep central area, while observing that Sučić appears to have slipped down the positional hierarchy behind other recent arrivals.
Weighing the Cost of Squad Investment
A central pillar of Visnadi’s critique involves the financial and operational choices made by Inter’s management regarding squad construction. The acquisition of Curtis Jones, for instance, represented a significant capital commitment that directly impacted other areas of the roster.
“Sučić seems to have gone backward in the hierarchy compared to Curtis Jones, who cost Inter a goalkeeper,” Visnadi observed during his Radio Sportiva intervention. Highlighting the opportunity cost of the transfer strategy, he added, “Let’s see this move, in the sense that Inter chose to buy Curtis Jones instead of a goalkeeper, let’s see at the end of the season whether this move turns out to have been positive or not.”
The ultimate success of Inter’s midfield rotation and transfer choices will be judged when domestic and European competitions reach their decisive phases.
