Moises Caicedo | Chelsea agree £115M fee | signed for Chelsea

[gajender]

Well he was not released so quite obviously we want him to sign, also ETH repeated this end of season more than once

Well he wasn't on the retained list either and his contract expires by end of the month I don't exactly see Club really fighting to keep him frankly speaking they seems just indifferent .

My personal opinion we have seen the last of De Gea in United Colours and all the talk by Ten Hag about De Gea never seemed genuine to me as well .

 

[Cassidy]

Well he wasn't on the retained list either and his contract expires by end of the month I don't exactly see Club really fighting to keep him frankly speaking they seems just indifferent .

My personal opinion we have seen the last of De Gea in United Colours and all the talk by Ten Hag about De Gea never seemed genuine to me as well .

Can only be on retained list if he's signed a contract, he's obviously refused to sign what he's been offered, yet we did not release him.

I'm not convinced we've seen the last of him because I am 100% sure if ETH has to choose between a no9 and a keeper, he will choose a no 9. Its totally up to the board and budget if we have seen the last of him or not

 

[gajender]

Can only be on retained list if he's signed a contract, he's obviously refused to sign what he's been offered, yet we did not release him

Has he even been offered a formal Contract offer last We read from Ducker was that he agreed on broad framework for new contract and since then no news .

 

[Jericholyte2]

Caicedo v Mount ?
We're looking at two entirely different roles to be filled in the squad.
Whether we get Mount or not, the CDM vacancy desperately needs to be filled ASAP.
It's an area where we've been very weak, for quite a number of seasons, until we acquired Casemiro last year; but he alone isn't the solution, as we saw towards the end of the season.
Good midfield teams have just walked straight through our middle and Casemiro has had to resort to desperate lunges and tackles, if he hasn't been left standing as our midfield has been overrun.
There's a need for a player that can both play alongside Casemiro and to also provide cover for him, for injuries etc.
Almost everyone agrees, that have no alternatives of the required standard in the current squad.
Caicedo would be one young player who could fit the bill, but Lentwood makes perfectly sound cautionary points (on the previous page) and Caicedo would be a huge gamble at the price being asked.


.

Whilst there’s always a risk, the attacking freedom by having Casemiro & Caicedo behind Bruno would be improved. Dalot & Shaw would have the freedom to double up with Antony/Rashford on opposing FBs and Bruno/ST can stay forward. Caicedo can even cover Dalot as needed if he commits to going forward.

Then in a couple of years when we want to phase Casemiro out, we already have the ready-made replacement, with a view to then putting a more creative CM next to him.

I just don’t see the specific risk people cite.

 

[Lentwood]

I know you can write more objectively than that... if you want to.

Might as well have just said: the case for Mason Mount as you've not presented balanced reasoning here, if you were indeed intending to.

I'm not trying to hide that I would prefer Mount though - I suppose the point(s) I am making are that I have this ongoing concern that this forum has the capacity to wildly overrate some players and underestimate others.

I see people talking as if Mount is some kind of 2nd rate purchase but his record/achievements are actually much better than Caicedo's. Since they cost about the same money (Caicedo possibly even more), you're basically gambling on the idea that Caicedo has a higher ceiling. Seems risky to me at the prices quoted.

They are also completely different players, so that was another reason I didn't bother with the "well player X is better at Y" type argument.

What we undoubtedly SHOULD have done is sign Caicedo before he went to Brighton. That's what we need to get better at - picking up the gambles when they are a gamblers price. Now you're taking a gamble but at a "sure thing" price.

 

[united_99]

Some risks are worth taking though. Plus although we need to get better at buying and developing hidden gems, it’s also up to the players. They initially prefer to play regularly in low pressure environment before moving to a bigger club. Otherwise why did City not buy Haaland from Molde? Why did Madrid not buy Bellingham for peanuts before he moved to Dortmund?
Equally Caicedo may not have developed with us the same way he has at Brighton.
There are 10 years between him and Case, plus I am sure ETH can find a way to play both together. Present and future at DM sorted. For me it is worth paying the additional money to buy him instead of spending 55-60 mil on Mount.

 

[OrcaFat]

I'm not trying to hide that I would prefer Mount though - I suppose the point(s) I am making are that I have this ongoing concern that this forum has the capacity to wildly overrate some players and underestimate others.

I see people talking as if Mount is some kind of 2nd rate purchase but his record/achievements are actually much better than Caicedo's. Since they cost about the same money (Caicedo possibly even more), you're basically gambling on the idea that Caicedo has a higher ceiling. Seems risky to me at the prices quoted.

They are also completely different players, so that was another reason I didn't bother with the "well player X is better at Y" type argument.

What we undoubtedly SHOULD have done is sign Caicedo before he went to Brighton. That's what we need to get better at - picking up the gambles when they are a gamblers price. Now you're taking a gamble but at a "sure thing" price.

As I recall it, we tried to sign Caicedo but he preferred to go somewhere where he would certainly start every game and chose Brighton ahead of us.

 

[Ronaldinho's snakebite]

There’s a misconception that Caicedo isn’t a great passer, the reality is he is really good at it and is a key component in Brighton’s system playing out from the back.

Being a good passer is not the same as being creative.

 

[gajender]

As I recall it, we tried to sign Caicedo but he preferred to go somewhere where he would certainly start every game and chose Brighton ahead of us.

I don't believe it ever got the stage where we actually were a serious option for him . So question of Caicedo preferring Brighton over United never arose .

 

[jeepers]

As I recall it, we tried to sign Caicedo but he preferred to go somewhere where he would certainly start every game and chose Brighton ahead of us.

It's been repeated many times, just search Adnan's posts in this thread.

We decided not to get involved due to complexity of the deal because of the number of agents involved. Brighton, on the other hand, had dealt with the same agents before and had no qualms with making the deal and now they're reaping the rewards.

 

[Lentwood]

As I recall it, we tried to sign Caicedo but he preferred to go somewhere where he would certainly start every game and chose Brighton ahead of us.

Not sure if I ever believe those stories - do many young players think like that?

Imagine you're a young lad playing football in Ecuador...you're really telling me they turn down Manchester United in favour of Brighton, ever? I just can't see it.

 

[OrcaFat]

It's been repeated many times, just search Adnan's posts in this thread.

We decided not to get involved due to complexity of the deal because of the number of agents involved. Brighton, on the other hand, had dealt with the same agents before and had no qualms with making the deal and now they're reaping the rewards.

Yeah, I vaguely remember that being said.

 

[OrcaFat]

Not sure if I ever believe those stories - do many young players think like that?

Imagine you're a young lad playing football in Ecuador...you're really telling me they turn down Manchester United in favour of Brighton, ever? I just can't see it.

Apparently we didn’t get far down the line because too many agents were involved. Lazy but I suppose we didn’t think he was that good.

 

[RedBanker]

Caicedo
Osimhen
Onana

How would you rate this window?

 

[Dazzmondo]

Caicedo
Osimhen
Onana

How would you rate this window?

I'd rate that a 9 but Osimhen doesn't seem very realistic

 

[criticalanalysis]

You don't need all your creativity to come from the middle, and even then, it can come from a multitude of players - Lisandro immediately pushes up into a DLP role in our attack with those two ahead of him for example.

The bigger issue is our flanks failing in terms of creativity and penetrative actions - the onus should be on the players behind them being able to find them frequently and them progressing the play, which is in need of address big time this preseason.

In terms of retentive possession and progressing through deep midfield into the offensive midfield area, Mount is definitely not that guy, irrespective of Caciedo's perceived weakness in such a role. In fact, if you refer to a single player who will come in and be transformative to us in that exact sense, you're talking FDJ calibre, which isn't viable. Truth is, it'll take us a while to be elite at ball progression, and if not a while, then a few midfielders brought in in short order who are top end in those facets, which isn't realistic.

We're likely to be following the model more of a prime Klopp Liverpool midfield than a Pep (or quality in possession) one because that is what our players are more suited to as a whole.

Bruno also goes back to being a more pure type of supplier to the attacking lines with those two behind him. Either that, or put right whilst we try to get a better midfield conduit in the offensive midfield.

Our attack needs a lot more fingers pointed at it, though; they simply cannot be that poor again. If such a midfield is able to recycle ball to them frequently, they have to be able to do something with it more often than not.

It's quite astonishing how some people 'rate' Mount as a better prospective player for us simply because he's an attacking player playing further up the field and people are tired of a double pivot. It's like they think 'more attacking player = more attacking for the team' and completely forget how the ball is meant to get to said player. We already have major issues progressing the ball, so to bring in Mount, who is not elite, very good or even 'good' (in his own half) in this area will not solve the issue and if anything cause another one.

Eriksen was good to very good for the first half of the season but for many games, once Fred came in, we were arguably were more 'attacking' because of transitions and his directness; tactical flexibility and different player profiles can change many things in a game. What's more likely to happen with a player like Caicedo compared to Mount is that we will have a more naturally deeper sitting player, who favours taking the ball in deeper positions and is press resistant with very adept passing quality sitting or playing in tandem with Casemiro. This is exactly what we need and suits your Brunos and allows our full backs to push forward with more reassurance that Case/Cai will be looking after both sides. It will then allow more overlaps and hopefully bring out the better out of Antony/Sancho etc.

Mount as a 8/10, hybrid or whatever is just....puzzling. The only way it makes sense for me is that we simply do not have the funds for Caicedo and that we can only realistically bring in a 'cheaper' option like Rabiot and then a big budget like Mount to pair them together. That way I can understand the thought process and what the players bring to the table as a duo for our midfield. Yet, even then, Mount as a 'big' purchase is just so underwhelming.

 

[crossy1686]

Yeah that's why we need both the profile of a Mount AND Caicedo but budget won't allow

The budget will allow but they need to stop this notion of letting players leave when they’re ready to.

Tell the likes of Maguire and De Gea their time is up, it’s a Euro year, if you want to stand a chance of playing in it then move on now or don’t play all season, no loans, no fecking around, just get rid and raise funds.

 

[OrcaFat]

I'd rate that a 9 but Osimhen doesn't seem very realistic

Don’t think we’ll get Caicedo either.

 

[Dazzmondo]

Don’t think we’ll get Caicedo either.

Maybe not but I think that one's realistic if we don't get Mount. Unfortunately I think we probably will and Caicedo will go to Chelsea in turn, which I suspect could be viewed as a big mistake in the future.

 

[OrcaFat]

It's quite astonishing how some people 'rate' Mount as a better prospective player for us simply because he's an attacking player playing further up the field and people are tired of a double pivot. It's like they think 'more attacking player = more attacking for the team' and completely forget how the ball is meant to get to said player. We already have major issues progressing the ball, so to bring in Mount, who is not elite, very good or even 'good' (in his own half) in this area will not solve the issue and if anything cause another one.

Eriksen was good to very good for the first half of the season but for many games, once Fred came in, we were arguably were more 'attacking' because of transitions and his directness; tactical flexibility and different player profiles can change many things in a game. What's more likely to happen with a player like Caicedo compared to Mount is that we will have a more naturally deeper sitting player, who favours taking the ball in deeper positions and is press resistant with very adept passing quality sitting or playing in tandem with Casemiro. This is exactly what we need and suits your Brunos and allows our full backs to push forward with more reassurance that Case/Cai will be looking after both sides. It will then allow more overlaps and hopefully bring out the better out of Antony/Sancho etc.

Mount as a 8/10, hybrid or whatever is just....puzzling. The only way it makes sense for me is that we simply do not have the funds for Caicedo and that we can only realistically bring in a 'cheaper' option like Rabiot and then a big budget like Mount to pair them together. That way I can understand the thought process and what the players bring to the table as a duo for our midfield. Yet, even then, Mount as a 'big' purchase is just so underwhelming.

This is a logical post but I don’t think all your assertions are correct. The reasons for being in favour of Mount are to do with the shape of the team and what he is good at within EtH’s preferred formation. There are some good posts about it (in this thread).

However I kind of agree that Mount is an underwhelming choice. He just happens to be the “best” choice at the moment.

 

[bosskeano]

to sign this guy we would have to move on from Mount and possibly sell a player or two simply b/c of our need for a CF, GK and a box to box 8 CM so bruno and casemiro can just do their job

 

[Fortitude]

It's quite astonishing how some people 'rate' Mount as a better prospective player for us simply because he's an attacking player playing further up the field and people are tired of a double pivot. It's like they think 'more attacking player = more attacking for the team' and completely forget how the ball is meant to get to said player. We already have major issues progressing the ball, so to bring in Mount, who is not elite, very good or even 'good' (in his own half) in this area will not solve the issue and if anything cause another one.

Eriksen was good to very good for the first half of the season but for many games, once Fred came in, we were arguably were more 'attacking' because of transitions and his directness; tactical flexibility and different player profiles can change many things in a game. What's more likely to happen with a player like Caicedo compared to Mount is that we will have a more naturally deeper sitting player, who favours taking the ball in deeper positions and is press resistant with very adept passing quality sitting or playing in tandem with Casemiro. This is exactly what we need and suits your Brunos and allows our full backs to push forward with more reassurance that Case/Cai will be looking after both sides. It will then allow more overlaps and hopefully bring out the better out of Antony/Sancho etc.

Mount as a 8/10, hybrid or whatever is just....puzzling. The only way it makes sense for me is that we simply do not have the funds for Caicedo and that we can only realistically bring in a 'cheaper' option like Rabiot and then a big budget like Mount to pair them together. That way I can understand the thought process and what the players bring to the table as a duo for our midfield. Yet, even then, Mount as a 'big' purchase is just so underwhelming.

Yeah, there's a reason why I avoid Mount's thread; reading how he's going to be any kind of saviour for us is baffling, particularly so when he doesn't come in and address the fundamental issues of how, like you say, he should become 'live' and optimised. You put him in the deeper midfield and you work away from his strengths and belabour the midfield with a suboptimal component; you push him further up, and, well what was the point of that, as you're then stuck in a loop that has dogged us for years now.

Caicedo seems to be underrated if anything, seemingly being reduced to this powerhouse presser rather than someone shining with his use of the ball and accuracy in the things he does with it. Creativity is obviously a broad term, and when it's mentioned, we have an idea it's not for guys like him, but it's definitely not for Mount, either. We'd need an Odegaard or any other knitter of midfield to the attack to be as superfluous as people seem to think we can be with just Mount added to the team.

We're not in a great position with the signing of any single midfielder, but some address far more needs than others, and Caicedo is definitely in the category of Swiss Army Knife in the amount of uses he has, not least his ability to play with, or cover for, Casemiro, which is, at base ends, an essential in our threadbare squad. Casemiro is the biggest single point failure we have, and that needs to be addressed promptly. Without him, we're the same dross we've been in midfield for years. That needs to be sorted once and for all, in fact it's a travesty we're still talking about that going into the 2023/'24 season.

Caicedo would be an intrinsic component for us; I don't see how Mount would be, but I will try to remain open-minded on that front.

 

[OrcaFat]

Yeah, there's a reason why I avoid Mount's thread; reading how he's going to be any kind of saviour for us is baffling, particularly so when he doesn't come in and address the fundamental issues of how, like you say, he should become 'live' and optimised. You put him in the deeper midfield and you work away from his strengths and belabour the midfield with a suboptimal component; you push him further up, and, well what was the point of that, as you're then stuck in a loop that has dogged us for years now.

Caicedo seems to be underrated if anything, seemingly being reduced to this powerhouse presser rather than someone shining with his use of the ball and accuracy in the things he does with it. Creativity is obviously a broad term, and when it's mentioned, we have an idea it's not for guys like him, but it's definitely not for Mount, either. We'd need an Odegaard or any other knitter of midfield to the attack to be as superfluous as people seem to think we can be with just Mount added to the team.

We're not in a great position with the signing of any single midfielder, but some address far more needs than others, and Caicedo is definitely in the category of Swiss Army Knife in the amount of uses he has, not least his ability to play with, or cover for, Casemiro, which is, at base ends, an essential in our threadbare squad. Casemiro is the biggest single point failure we have, and that needs to be addressed promptly. Without him, we're the same dross we've been in midfield for years. That needs to be sorted once and for all, in fact it's a travesty we're still talking about that going into the 2023/'24 season.

Caicedo would be an intrinsic component for us; I don't see how Mount would be, but I will try to remain open-minded on that front.

All that is very reasonable but it assumes 4231 but EtH wants to play 4141 (or 4123).

 

[Adnan]

Caicedo
Osimhen
Onana

How would you rate this window?

That would be a fantastic window considering the financial constraints. But i'd swap Osimhen with Hojlund and that may allow us to sign another player. Caicedo and Onana would make a considerable difference to our build up play, which in-turn would allow us to play the game higher up the pitch. And if you can play in a compact unit higher up the pitch, the pressing from the front will also be a lot more effective due to the volume of players committed in the opponent's half.

Also a double pivot is fantastic if you have the right players and look to build play from the back. It can be a very attacking way to play the game.

 

[JuriM]

Caicedo
Osimhen
Onana

How would you rate this window?

I would be rather sus where did we find the money for all that?

 

[Fortitude]

All that is very reasonable but it assumes 4231 but EtH wants to play 4141 (or 4123).

It doesn't assume a formation, per se, but it immediaely identifies roles, and Caicedo, being an eclectic midfielder, assumes one or the other with or without Casemiro in the team.

 

[Keiro]

Apparently we didn’t get far down the line because too many agents were involved. Lazy but I suppose we didn’t think he was that good.

There were question marks over third party ownership. That’s why we walked away.

 

[sixdwarf]

Well expect GK situation not to improve much

Well if De Gea stays it clearly won't improve. Because w

Goals and assists for a cm. Keane and Carrick would have been seen as total mugs by some of you lot Not worth continuing this conversation with you

I think you are missing the point old chap.

 

[The Irish Connection]

It's quite astonishing how some people 'rate' Mount as a better prospective player for us simply because he's an attacking player playing further up the field and people are tired of a double pivot. It's like they think 'more attacking player = more attacking for the team' and completely forget how the ball is meant to get to said player. We already have major issues progressing the ball, so to bring in Mount, who is not elite, very good or even 'good' (in his own half) in this area will not solve the issue and if anything cause another one.

Eriksen was good to very good for the first half of the season but for many games, once Fred came in, we were arguably were more 'attacking' because of transitions and his directness; tactical flexibility and different player profiles can change many things in a game. What's more likely to happen with a player like Caicedo compared to Mount is that we will have a more naturally deeper sitting player, who favours taking the ball in deeper positions and is press resistant with very adept passing quality sitting or playing in tandem with Casemiro. This is exactly what we need and suits your Brunos and allows our full backs to push forward with more reassurance that Case/Cai will be looking after both sides. It will then allow more overlaps and hopefully bring out the better out of Antony/Sancho etc.

100%

So much of the game nowadays is about transition. Aggressive ball winning and breaking the lines.
Caicedo is brilliant at passing it forward through or around pressure.
We have seen that Rashford is lethal when in transition /1 v 1. Caicedo and a footballing keeper would improve us massively and allow us to break the lines of the first press to then release rashford and hopefully a new striker.

I'd be gutted if Chelsea get Caicedo.
We already have players for the 10 position.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

That Romano tweet is bollocks

United fan, on record saying playing for United is his dream, United are in the Champions League, would play every game…

Yet he wants us to believe the player prefers to go to Chelsea

 

[OrcaFat]

It doesn't assume a formation, per se, but it immediaely identifies roles, and Caicedo, being an eclectic midfielder, assumes one or the other with or without Casemiro in the team.

I see. Apologies. Put another way, if we are playing 4123, both Casemiro and Caicedo are most suited to the “1” (the no6). Mount is suited to play one of the “2” (a generally more advanced no8).

Caicedo would be very useful as competition for Case (eventual successor) and as a utility player but if everyone one is fit and we can add either Mount or Caicedo but not both, then we need Mount more because of Eriksen’s decline.

If we get Caicedo he covers more bases and, for sure, he is a very good player but he doesn’t get EtH any closer to his preferred way of playing. You might say that doesn’t matter but why appoint him if not to do it his way?

 

[criticalanalysis]

This is a logical post but I don’t think all your assertions are correct. The reasons for being in favour of Mount are to do with the shape of the team and what he is good at within EtH’s preferred formation. There are some good posts about it (in this thread).

However I kind of agree that Mount is an underwhelming choice. He just happens to be the “best” choice at the moment.

First off, none of us really know the transfer budget/strategy and ETH's plans. So for myself at least, I am definitely baselessly assuming what's best and talking absolute shite even if I try to use logical reasoning etc. In the Mount thread, I even went as far to say circa 'if this is truly ETH's request, it will be the biggest doubt I have of him since he's been at the club and that includes the 7-0 (which I was able to set aside as a 'slight bump' even if it was so hurtful)'. That's how baffling Mount as a proposition is to me.

I fully understand the tactical fluidity of a more conventional vertical 8 that would sit ahead of Casemiro and be closer to the front line along Bruno etc. I have no issue with the idea of that but my gripe is the implementation of that with a player like Mount, who doesn't address any of our issues that Fortitude explains really well below.

If I had to simplify it:
Supporting ETH's vision (if it's true) to have two 8s = good.
Thinking Mount is still a better transfer target than Caicedo despite knowing the above = bad.

Whether Caicedo is a realistic target etc is a different discussion of course.

Yeah, there's a reason why I avoid Mount's thread; reading how he's going to be any kind of saviour for us is baffling, particularly so when he doesn't come in and address the fundamental issues of how, like you say, he should become 'live' and optimised. You put him in the deeper midfield and you work away from his strengths and belabour the midfield with a suboptimal component; you push him further up, and, well what was the point of that, as you're then stuck in a loop that has dogged us for years now.

Caicedo seems to be underrated if anything, seemingly being reduced to this powerhouse presser rather than someone shining with his use of the ball and accuracy in the things he does with it. Creativity is obviously a broad term, and when it's mentioned, we have an idea it's not for guys like him, but it's definitely not for Mount, either. We'd need an Odegaard or any other knitter of midfield to the attack to be as superfluous as people seem to think we can be with just Mount added to the team.

We're not in a great position with the signing of any single midfielder, but some address far more needs than others, and Caicedo is definitely in the category of Swiss Army Knife in the amount of uses he has, not least his ability to play with, or cover for, Casemiro, which is, at base ends, an essential in our threadbare squad. Casemiro is the biggest single point failure we have, and that needs to be addressed promptly. Without him, we're the same dross we've been in midfield for years. That needs to be sorted once and for all, in fact it's a travesty we're still talking about that going into the 2023/'24 season.

Caicedo would be an intrinsic component for us; I don't see how Mount would be, but I will try to remain open-minded on that front.

Yes, perfectly put. He's a high calibre jack of all trades that could tie a lot of pieces together for us really well if we get him and ETH plans to play him with Casemiro. It also suits the profile for the rest of our current squad and should intangibly bring out more from Sancho and Antony. Mount at his best would have to be cannibalising the areas that Bruno and Rashford thrive and he's definitely not good enough to replace them and even if he was, what's the point of prioritising that?!

I've told myself like you to stay away from Mount's thread but I can't stop reading the forums and the muppet/fan in me makes it hard not to ignore some takes. I really should take a breather for my own mental health

 

[OrcaFat]

First off, none of us really know the transfer budget/strategy and ETH's plans. So for myself at least, I am definitely baselessly assuming what's best and talking absolute shite even if I try to use logical reasoning etc. In the Mount thread, I even went as far to say circa 'if this is truly ETH's request, it will be the biggest doubt I have of him since he's been at the club and that includes the 7-0 (which I was able to set aside as a 'slight bump' even if it was so hurtful)'. That's how baffling Mount as a proposition is to me.

I fully understand the tactical fluidity of a more conventional vertical 8 that would sit ahead of Casemiro and be closer to the front line along Bruno etc. I have no issue with the idea of that but my gripe is the implementation of that with a player like Mount, who doesn't address any of our issues that Fortitude explains really well below.

If I had to simplify it:
Supporting ETH's vision (if it's true) to have two 8s = good.
Thinking Mount is still a better transfer target than Caicedo despite knowing the above = bad.

Whether Caicedo is a realistic target etc is a different discussion of course.



Yes, perfectly put. He's a high calibre jack of all trades that could tie a lot of pieces together for us really well if we get him and ETH plans to play him with Casemiro. It also suits the profile for the rest of our current squad and should intangibly bring out more from Sancho and Antony. Mount at his best would have to be cannibalising the areas that Bruno and Rashford thrive and he's definitely not good enough to replace them and even if he was, what's the point of prioritising that?!

I've told myself like you to stay away from Mount's thread but I can't stop reading the forums and the muppet/fan in me makes it hard not to ignore some takes. I really should take a breather for my own mental health

I appreciate the post. I suppose the proof of the pudding will be in the eating!

 

[criticalanalysis]

I see. Apologies. Put another way, if we are playing 4123, both Casemiro and Caicedo are most suited to the “1” (the no6). Mount is suited to play one of the “2” (a generally more advanced no8).

Caicedo would be very useful as competition for Case (eventual successor) and as a utility player but if everyone one is fit and we can add either Mount or Caicedo but not both, then we need Mount more because of Eriksen’s decline.

If we get Caicedo he covers more bases and, for sure, he is a very good player but he doesn’t get EtH any closer to his preferred way of playing. You might say that doesn’t matter but why appoint him if not to do it his way?

That's a good albeit existential question. I would counter that with, I believe ETH has been great for us but he's not perfect and I would question Mount the same way I'd questioned his reliance on playing Eriksen post injury when it was clear we needed Fred. And liken it with the same way Salah wasn't Klopp's guy or that Guardiola wanted Maguire. However, perhaps I'm just cynical and jaded and can't see the wood for the trees.

 

[JuriM]

 

[Mainoldo]

They can’t afford him now. Oh what a shame

 

[davidmichael]

The irony in them not wanting to pay £80 million for a 21 year old on the back of a breakout season with years on his contract yet wanting £65 million for a 24 year old who doesn’t want to there and who is on the back of his worst season with a year left on his contract, hopefully we go all in for Caicedo now then Mount right at the end of the window.

 

[Nero]

Chelsea saving face because Caicedo has told them to do one as he's on his way to United.

 

[dinostar77]

Chelsea pulled out of ugarte deal. They need a player in mould of ugarte / caiciedo to do the work that enzo cant. Your not going to get the best out of enzo without a ugarte/caiceido alongside him in midfield.

Be interesting to see who they go for if not caiceido

 

[jderbyshire]

Is Caicedo even going to move in this window - he's just signed a new deal this year hasn't he?

He's going to cost too much at the moment, even for Chelsea.