so according to you over 50% possession is ultra defensive(you used that word not me and you accepted the fact that it was for 90% of the games over 50% )
Huh? You seem to have reading comprehension difficulties. I'm referring to post-Monto injury games starting with Lazio away. Seedorf dropped the idealistic possession football idea and shifted to an at times extreme opposite. We had 51% in that Lazio game, which is a lot less than the 60% we usually have against them even in Olimpico, but after that it went even below 50% against minnows like Genoa, which was unthinkable with Allegri.
Point was you can't say "we played better football under Seedorf" without specifying which one. The idealistic one lost us a lot of games and the few ones it won were very unconvincing(late winners). It wasn't better football at all. The defensive/provincial one was more efficient but it was hardly something to be optimistic about and I think we'll see Pippo going that route as well if his preferred ideas fail badly.
conte who broke up with juve's management who were 'gentlemen' compared with 'crazy' (i give zero but i demand barca lvl attack power)
is also an unprepared noob
and seedorf is Dr Evil himself who can easily manipulate a mafia-member billionaire for his own good.
You can't be serious..
Conte is a hothead, but he won the whole club over immediately, revived the team and won the Scudetto in all his seasons before he quit - he didn't stupidly get himself fired, he quit - while the Azzuri manager spot was vacant.
B&G are more difficult to handle than Agnelli and Marotta, but you adapt to your work environment and as a rookie you need to have some humility.
Not like Seedorf was completely unfamiliar with Silvio, Galliani, Barbara, Tassoti, etc, or established as a coach or was forced to accept the offer.
PS seedorf played as cam only in christmas tree 4-3-2-1...at diamond 4-1-2-1-2 he was lcm mainly(but when attacking formations are much more fluid than in paper....)
Call it Christmas Tree, 4-3-1-2 or whatever, but it was 4-3-1-2 in B's eyes and Seedorf kept pushing to be fielded up there even though he failed miserably each time and only succeeded in deeper roles, which eventually led to a destroyed relationship with Allegri that left doubts about him being called up for the farewell game(and uncertainties about it being his farewell game as well, he left in an a lot uglier way than the other senatores who left same summer).
secondly i rate monto high and as the second best mid(by far from the rest) in the squad after ndj.
That's not rating high..
in my books ndj is better mid than monto(though monto is more complete).ndj is top 3 ball winning mids in the world along with vidal.monto at whatever(of the many things he does) is not top 10 in the world(or is #10 in 1-2 of them).so i would choose ndj over monto(in my ideal mid none would be part of the team though...but we are talking about our roster)
Again, "strange, narrow view" when it comes to midfielders/the midfield.
De Jong is very good at winning balls on his own, but to assess a midfielder, or even just DMs, there are a lot more qualities and traits that need to be considered, which combined are a lot more important and can heavily reduce the significance of the aforementioned quality.
As an anchor, De Jong is poor at organizing/leading the team, cooperating with the CBs and contributing offensively, lacks the typically anchor height and aerial prowess and really limits the team. That makes him inferior in this role to Montolivo and countless others.
For a box-to-box DM role a la Vidal or Fernandinho, he's no way near being dynamic enough and he's never been the Gattuso type to chase opponents around the pitch even though idealistic RnB De Jong fans like him because that's how they want him to be. He's more like(or wants to be like) Van Bommel, but without the ability to nullify almost everything that's heading - aerially and on the ground - towards the defense and really dominate that horizontal space in front of the defense without needing to make gazillion tackles and interceptions, which VB was doing so beautifully for us. Montolivo came much closer to Van Bommel in that sense, i.e. the way he protected the back-four, and is obviously also superior to De Jong as a box-to-box mid as well.
The only times I've seen De Jong being a given starter in successful teams are with incohesive defensive teams - Netherlands and City(10/11) - who have an overabundance of quality and creativity up front which they can depend on and then there's De Jong who is very good at recovering balls on his own and playing safe accurate passes amidst all the disorder in the team.
De Jong can be very useful and I think City miss him as a rotational player, but he is extremely overrated by Milan fans and his part to the disaster that was last season has been overlooked or extremely underestimated. Montolivo is simply superior and the one we should build our midfield around(actually, should have already after the 12/13 season).