They will probably look to build someone up from the youth academy. Morton’s got a free run now at midfield in the cups. Bajcetic will get minutes to prove himself on loan.`
There is a general agreement among stats guys that with the possible exception of goalie, there are fewer elite deep midfielders than there are for any other position. If you as a team believe that then it makes sense you are on constant alert for when one of the supposedly elite ones seems like he might be available. It does not follow though that we are improved by going for the best available one in our rankings if he is not above a threshold level of quality.
I think we can probably interpret the Caicedo offer not as “we have 100m to spend and will spend it on a DM”, but a bit of a freak out that we unexpectedly sold our DM and he was the last player our team had identified that above the threshold level of quality who was going to be available any time soon.
That thinking helps explains why we were so proactive with this Georgian keeper when it doesn’t seem like an immediate need.
2 Likes
Right, but I didnt see good reporting that we initiated that conversation. Most of the sources I saw suggested it was Newcastle considering a way to stay in compliance with FSP and so reached out to us and we shut it down.
It is potentially relevant that Gordon played on the right yesterday so maybe we were considering him for the Chiesa role, but Im not convinced there was a real there there from us.
1 Like
The logic with Gordon seems to be that he’s going to take much less convincing to extend his contract being an Englishman. There’s always the risk of the likes of Diaz and them moving to Spain.
That’s a very valid point and I can see the thinking there. I would find it odd to think that this is our approach but in each of the last three summers we’ve been able to identify one and only one who meets our needs and thresholds. I certainly don’t think Endo fits that approach either and perhaps he was the breaking point where good was better than perfect.
I like the keeper move but I’ve a nagging feeling we might be seeing that happen because Alisson is looking for something new. Time will tell.
Yeah, I think the difference, both in terms trying to throw silly money at a deal to force it to happen and then settling for a fall back option, was the fact we had backed ourselves into a corner by letting Fabs go when we seemingly hadn’t been planning on it. We turned a want into a need with that sale, which is why it isnt a semantic difference.
1 Like
The team didn’t expect Fabinho to fall off a cliff as drastically as he did. That coupled with the fact that we got a decent deal for him from Saudi.
1 Like
I don’t think this is quite correct. We are probably identifying multiple players but either they are for different circumstances (and so we price accordingly - ie willing to spend £100m on Caicedo but reluctant to pay £40m for Lavia), they are likely to be heading elsewhere (so we don’t usually get involved) or they aren’t wanting to move (or their club sell them) that window.
1 Like
Still think the whole Caicedo bid was just a ploy by Brighton and Liverpool to screw over Chelsea more.
We got Mac at a good price and then did Brighton a favour
4 Likes
It didn’t make sense one bit to go from negotiating our top target (Lavia), having had 1 or 2 bids rejected, to then bidding double for Caicedo out the blue so I never believed we were ever in for him…more of a counter to divert Chelsea away because there’s no way we didn’t already know he’d agreed to join Chelsea.
Chelsea almost have three of the best holding midfielders at the same time while others can’t find anyone. Such a waste.
The problem is they can’t play two at the same time, let alone three. They’re too static.
It made plenty of sense. Lavia was a player initially identified that would have been a backup for at least a season, hence the club trying to get the price down from what Southampton were asking for.
Caicedo already seemed to be going off to Chelsea, so we didn’t bother going in for him. We only got involved when it was clear Southampton were not budging on price for Lavia, and Brighton were holding out for a higher price from Chelsea who said they were not going to pay it. His agent told us Caicedo would accept a move to Liverpool, so we stepped in as Caicedo’s performances at Brighton suggested he could be an immediate starter for us.
1 Like
Caicedo’s performances in Brighton can be partly explained by the presence of Mac alongside him. The best players are the ones who make people around them play better.
If we get too many CB injurys or MF injurys surely we play 226 and lump it to the forwards 
1 Like
A few points:
A) You’ve been quite happy to accept that our pursuit of a top DM in each of our last 3 summers is proof that we still need to add a DM. At the same time you are not willing to accept that same tranfer committee’s insistance that we are better off sticking with what we have when that target turns us down and we choose to go with internal options.
Why is their opinion / approach valid in one case and not the other?
B) They aren’t infallible but I think the relatively consistent success on the pitch should have at least earned the people in charge of the club a pass for a few seasons as they have consistently demonstrated that they know better than us.
Which non-cheating PL club, over the period of the last 7 or 8 years, would you say has been more successfully run than ours? And which of them seemed to manage a managerial succession plan as smoothly as ours?
Would you agree that Slot seems so far, the perfect choice as a successor to Klopp? And would you have identified and chosen him?
C) I do appreciate your perspective and that you are willing to try and back it up without calling people FSG mouth-pieces, backers, etc. Keep it up. Maybe you will prove to be correct and the wiser voice but so far Edwards / FSG and Co have proven to be smarter than almost everyone.
On squad depth (I hoped we would retain Bajcetic or even Phillips for cover btw), god forbid but we could end up with 3 injuries to our CBs this month
But even so, if we would have been better 4 out of 5 seasons by doing what we did then they made the right choice no matter which way the dominoes fall. Would you be able to accept this though?
5 Likes
It’s a fair questioning of my perspective. In short response I’d say:
A) the inverse could be said if anyone holding the opposing position. If the number bods are so confident in what we have, why try and spend £50m on an upgrade?
B) we’ve done well, extremely well. Could we have got over the line a couple more times if we’d just pushed ahead with that one extra option instead of holding off? We’ll never know but it’s a shame to feel like we’re left wondering.
C) they have been great but they’ve also not been perfect. Leaving us with three centre backs despite the known issues with Matip. Not sorting the midfield out sooner. Lots of players leaving on bosmans. Lots of players publicly pursued that we’ve then failed to secure. I don’t think their track record is beyond questioning and it’s all part of being a fan.
The thing for me is it always feels like we leave ourselves just one short of being comfortable for when the wear and tear of the season kicks in. We live in hope that they’re right and I’m wrong. I’d be far happier with that than being right.
2 Likes
On A) Because as they advertised, they really identified only one player as better than what we had rather than a question of number of bodies. They either strongly believe in their strategy or they are working against the interest of the club (if they don’t believe in the strategy they are putting in place).
History would suggest that this is the strategy favoured by Edwards not the owners. In summer 2023 when Edwards was not around the previous window… we had Plan Bs like Lavia and Plan Cs like Endo. That suggests it is not the owners but the people who they put in charge (i.e., Edwards) who are not pulling the trigger on Plan Bs… they must believe in it or be working against the club. Which do you believe?
B) Yes, sometimes I do wonder if we had strengthened a bit in Jan in some season’s past whether we would have gone all the way. I’m with you on that. But on intent, I’m not judging them… just wondering whether Edward’s model needs optimizing sometimes to take some more risk on short term targets (for immediate results) rather than just the long term.
1 Like
Was Lavia a Plan B? I thought the rumour thread on here opened months before the Caicedo one?
By my memory we were linked with both… everyone thought we would go after Lavia. Then we surprised everyone by going after Caicedo.
Only after the Caicedo bid failed did we go after Lavia.
There was definite interest in both. We didn’t want to pay the amount Southampton were demanded for Lavia and hence dragged the shit on.
Either way , Gravenberch is twice the footballer of both Lavia and Caicedo combined.