7 minutes ago, forbzy said:

If we had reached an agreement with Brighton this deal would have happened by now. Looks like we are still not in agreement on a price. Assuming Brighton are sticking to their position we may well already be looking at alternatives. Perhaps we will grab Kudus ahead of them now that Nkunku is out for months.

Brighton apparently have an agreement with A**x but not Kudus.  Seems like he's waiting for better offers before committing to Brighton.  I personally think Caicedo will go, but there's a lot of poker going on in the background not just a disagreement on the fee.  Is it possible if we jump in for Kudus Brighton will up the price or call off the Caicedo transfer?

I suspect Brighton are stalling things until Kudus is in the bag, if we had Caicedo signed, we could scupper the Kudus deal.

2 hours ago, azpi28 said:

that's a good point. Maybe Caicedo was naive in trusting a verbal agreement that he could leave in the summer

There’s no evidence this was anything more than a made up social media rumour. Similarly with the much vaunted £100M price tag. It could be £81M or £120M but only Brighton know. The only things we all know are that Brighton don’t want to sell, the players has a 4 year contract and Brighton will decide what the price is should they let him go. Everything else is bullsh*t made up by self serving artists like Ramano.

1 hour ago, DarkMata said:

Brighton apparently have an agreement with A**x but not Kudus.  Seems like he's waiting for better offers before committing to Brighton.  I personally think Caicedo will go, but there's a lot of poker going on in the background not just a disagreement on the fee.  Is it possible if we jump in for Kudus Brighton will up the price or call off the Caicedo transfer?

I suspect you’re right. Two things need to happen for Brighton to sell 1. Secure Kudus 2. Chelsea pay the asking price (whatever that may be). Otherwise Caceido will be with Brighton until next summer.

1 hour ago, Ajbod said:

I suspect Brighton are stalling things until Kudus is in the bag, if we had Caicedo signed, we could scupper the Kudus deal.

That may be part of it but I don't expect Brighton to make things any easier, even if they sign Kudus.

With Nkunku out perhaps it makes more sense to sign Kudus as an attacking mid who would weigh in with some goals, along with a cheaper defensive mid option.

10 minutes ago, Gulllible said:

I suspect you’re right. Two things need to happen for Brighton to sell 1. Secure Kudus 2. Chelsea pay the asking price (whatever that may be). Otherwise Caceido will be with Brighton until next summer.

We buy Kudus and Lavia, pocket £30m and move on from this ridiculous pantomime again for a player with one break out season under his belt.

Wasn't Wesley Fofana a generational talent that we had to have and £75m was cheap. How many games have we had from Wes so far?

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

We buy Kudus and Lavia, pocket £30m and move on from this ridiculous pantomime again for a player with one break out season under his belt.

Wasn't Wesley Fofana a generational talent that we had to have and £75m was cheap. How many games have we had from Wes so far?

I think we would be more likely to go with Kudus and Adams in that scenario though.

1 minute ago, forbzy said:

I think we would be more likely to go with Kudus and Adams in that scenario though.

Cos we have d*cked around for so long the alternatives to Caicedo have now disappeared. Adams is okay for squad depth but that's it.

22 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Cos we have d*cked around for so long the alternatives to Caicedo have now disappeared. Adams is okay for squad depth but that's it.

Agreed but he would also be available at a lowish price and allow us to explore options in future windows. Lavia will be at least 50m and has also had injury problems. I suppose those 2 criteria alone make him a good fit for us 😉

1 hour ago, forbzy said:

That may be part of it but I don't expect Brighton to make things any easier, even if they sign Kudus.

With Nkunku out perhaps it makes more sense to sign Kudus as an attacking mid who would weigh in with some goals, along with a cheaper defensive mid option.

This is the part I hate most about football fans in this generation. Getting strikers and saying you don't need attacking midfielders.

You get scorers and nobody to make passes for them. And at the end of the day, you blame the strikers for not scoring goals. 

In the days we had Fabregas and Costa. It was easy, and everybody was happy. And people are not just saying it in some corner of the world, the best clubs are even thinking like that. I wonder if people don't want to be happy again.

Now you are saying since Nkunku is out, we can get an attacking midfielder, so if he wasn't out, you would have preferred us to play two strikers without an attacking midfielder. Better to play one striker and an attacking midfielder than to play two strikers.

Even if Nkunku and Jackson were fit, I would still get an attacking midfielder, and I will only play one of Nkunku or Jackson, and play an attacking midfielder.

 

 

2 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

We buy Kudus and Lavia, pocket £30m and move on from this ridiculous pantomime again for a player with one break out season under his belt.

Wasn't Wesley Fofana a generational talent that we had to have and £75m was cheap. How many games have we had from Wes so far?

And if we want to be honest we've seen flashes of brilliance from his performances but nothing to set the world on fire or without being dramatic nothing close to what Silva has given and is universally applauded for. 

1 hour ago, hephzibah said:

This is the part I hate most about football fans in this generation. Getting strikers and saying you don't need attacking midfielders.

You get scorers and nobody to make passes for them. And at the end of the day, you blame the strikers for not scoring goals. 

In the days we had Fabregas and Costa. It was easy, and everybody was happy. And people are not just saying it in some corner of the world, the best clubs are even thinking like that. I wonder if people don't want to be happy again.

Now you are saying since Nkunku is out, we can get an attacking midfielder, so if he wasn't out, you would have preferred us to play two strikers without an attacking midfielder. Better to play one striker and an attacking midfielder than to play two strikers.

Even if Nkunku and Jackson were fit, I would still get an attacking midfielder, and I will only play one of Nkunku or Jackson, and play an attacking midfielder.

 

 

What?

Nkunku is an attacking midfielder that can play as a striker. His position is as a 10, attacking midfielder.

6 hours ago, hephzibah said:

This is the part I hate most about football fans in this generation. Getting strikers and saying you don't need attacking midfielders.

You get scorers and nobody to make passes for them. And at the end of the day, you blame the strikers for not scoring goals. 

In the days we had Fabregas and Costa. It was easy, and everybody was happy. And people are not just saying it in some corner of the world, the best clubs are even thinking like that. I wonder if people don't want to be happy again.

Now you are saying since Nkunku is out, we can get an attacking midfielder, so if he wasn't out, you would have preferred us to play two strikers without an attacking midfielder. Better to play one striker and an attacking midfielder than to play two strikers.

Even if Nkunku and Jackson were fit, I would still get an attacking midfielder, and I will only play one of Nkunku or Jackson, and play an attacking midfielder.

 

 

Well said. That is why I don’t get the argument for Vlahovic from a section of the fans. You can’t go out and buy Vlahovic because Nkunku is out injured. We already had a need for a RW as competition for Madueke prior to Nkunku’s injury, now we need a RW and a creator. 

8 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

What?

Nkunku is an attacking midfielder that can play as a striker. His position is as a 10, attacking midfielder.

Sorry, didn't know. Thought he was a striker. Thanks.

3 hours ago, ducavis said:

Well said. That is why I don’t get the argument for Vlahovic from a section of the fans. You can’t go out and buy Vlahovic because Nkunku is out injured. We already had a need for a RW as competition for Madueke prior to Nkunku’s injury, now we need a RW and a creator. 

We should be talking about getting an attacking midfielder to play when Nkunku is injured like this. Every club tries to have plans for each position if the first choice is injured.

I'm thinking we are planning for Gallagher to start on Sunday when there are options like Veiga etc, we could have gone for since.

3 hours ago, ducavis said:

Well said. That is why I don’t get the argument for Vlahovic from a section of the fans. You can’t go out and buy Vlahovic because Nkunku is out injured. We already had a need for a RW as competition for Madueke prior to Nkunku’s injury, now we need a RW and a creator. 

We should be talking about getting an attacking midfielder to play when Nkunku is injured like this. Every club tries to have plans for each position if the first choice is injured.

I'm thinking we are planning for Gallagher to start on Sunday when there are options like Veiga etc, we could have gone for since.

We could get Vlahovic as option for Jackson, that is normal. Jackson is the only striker we have.

1 hour ago, hephzibah said:

We could get Vlahovic as option for Jackson, that is normal. Jackson is the only striker we have.

We have broja.

2 hours ago, ALTE said:

We have broja.

And Chukwuemeka will be our backup number 10.  Pointless having these players if we aint gonna play them when an opportunity arrises.

17 hours ago, Gulllible said:

I suspect you’re right. Two things need to happen for Brighton to sell 1. Secure Kudus 2. Chelsea pay the asking price (whatever that may be). Otherwise Caceido will be with Brighton until next summer.

you secure Kudus only if Chelsea back off. No way he will prefer Brighton over Chelsea. You are still Brighton and we are Chelsea

6 hours ago, azpi28 said:

you secure Kudus only if Chelsea back off. No way he will prefer Brighton over Chelsea. You are still Brighton and we are Chelsea

Fair comment,  but my point is that Brighton will only sell Caceido if they have a suitable replacement guaranteed (and they get their valuation which i suggest is based on a ‘crazy offer too good to refuse’). They don't want to sell and don't have to sell. As always we are talking about rumours, but if Kudos is the player Brighton see as the replacement then they will not sell Caceido if Chelsea sign Kudos.

On 08/08/2023 at 19:23, Gulllible said:

There’s no evidence this was anything more than a made up social media rumour. Similarly with the much vaunted £100M price tag. It could be £81M or £120M but only Brighton know. The only things we all know are that Brighton don’t want to sell, the players has a 4 year contract and Brighton will decide what the price is should they let him go. Everything else is bullsh*t made up by self serving artists like Ramano.

If they don't want to sell then they shouldn't have explicitly told the world he would be leaving this summer, same as McAllister. 

But late to pull the rug out from under a disillusioned player now. 

No wonder Kudus doesn't want to join them. 

55 minutes ago, Gulllible said:

Fair comment,  but my point is that Brighton will only sell Caceido if they have a suitable replacement guaranteed (and they get their valuation which i suggest is based on a ‘crazy offer too good to refuse’). They don't want to sell and don't have to sell. As always we are talking about rumours, but if Kudos is the player Brighton see as the replacement then they will not sell Caceido if Chelsea sign Kudos.

Kudus isn't a dm, what are you on about? 

1 minute ago, BordeauxBlue said:

If they don't want to sell then they shouldn't have explicitly told the world he would be leaving this summer

But they didnt

1 minute ago, BordeauxBlue said:

Kudus isn't a dm, what are you on about? 

I’ll make the point again….. everything is rumour and 99% of it bullsh*t. The current rumour, being treated as fact by many, is that Brighton have Kudus lined up as a Caceido replacement. Neither of us have any idea whether thats true and so he could be a goalkeeper for all it matters!

 

11 minutes ago, Gulllible said:

I’ll make the point again….. everything is rumour and 99% of it bullsh*t. The current rumour, being treated as fact by many, is that Brighton have Kudus lined up as a Caceido replacement. Neither of us have any idea whether thats true and so he could be a goalkeeper for all it matters!

 

are you on the tony bloom payroll 

tell him i have compromising pictures of him and he better sell Caicedo for 60 million pounds + an apology

Edited August 9, 20232 yr by azpi28