Chelsea don't need to sell Abraham to sign Halaand. If he decides he's going to them they'll spend what they have to sales or no sales.

goon wrote:

Just 5 weeks remaining - still lots to do. Only thing they really concerns me though is the lack of any real news around a CM.

Pretty worrying that we don't seem close to a CM. Its looking like we'll start the new season without one which none of us wanted. It really should have been sorted by now.

Qwiss! wrote:

Chelsea don't need to sell Abraham to sign Halaand. If he decides he's going to them they'll spend what they have to sales or no sales.

I mean to say: If Abraham is deemed not good enough by Tuchel, Chelsea sell him to us and go and sign Haaland - we shouldn't be whining in 3 months when we're nowhere near them in the League. We'd have no right to be.

If a PL team gets Halaand we certainly wont be competing with them any time soon whether its Chelsea, City or United. TBH I don't think anyone expects us to be competing for the title at the moment anyway, getting into the CL spots is the goal for this season.

goon wrote:

Just 5 weeks remaining - still lots to do. Only thing they really concerns me though is the lack of any real news around a CM.

less then 5 weeks to get transfers done but less then 3 weeks till we start the season, yet again we won't be ready to go from the start.

[/Twitter]

ode rumours heating up, more local journos chiming in

odegard or maddison? maddison carries more of a goal and set piece threat, and as talented as ESR and saka are neither are prolific. only pepe, auba and laca are real goal threats. whereas I like odegaards creativity and workrate far more than maddisons

I'll take one Ødegaard.

My preference is Maddison but I'd happy take either.

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

I'd have ESR over either of them. They're both good players but so is Emile, neither of them are particularly prolific. I think ESR could easily manage to score and assist as much as Maddison given a full season in a fully functioning side. If I had to choose between the 2 it'd be Maddison though, we seen what Odegaard can do in this team and doesn't raise our game much.

Ricky1985 wrote:

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

Gazza M wrote:

Ricky1985 wrote:

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

I'm going by Maddison himself describing his role for Leicester this past season as definitely an '8' and not a '10'.

I agree that Maddison has the greater goal threat though, but I think that ball striking and final pass can still be useful from a deeper starting positon, again, sort of like Modric. Whereas Ødegaard is too unathletic to be able to be of much use without the ball, even I don't doubt his application and work rate.

It may be on the back of his Leicester City shirt, but James Maddison does not want to be labelled as a number 10.

The midfielder says his best position is the box-to-box number eight role he now most regularly plays under Brendan Rodgers.

When he first arrived from Norwich, Maddison was considered an out-and-out attacking midfielder and spent much of his maiden City campaign in the hole behind Jamie Vardy.

But he now feels that the number 10 tag is not an accurate reflection of his qualities, with the 23-year-old adding a defensive nous to his game this term, when only Ricardo Pereira and Wilfred Ndidi have made more tackles for City.

“Number eight definitely,” Maddison said when asked for his preferred position. “I played as a number 10 at the start of last season, and then when the gaffer [Rodgers] came in, I transitioned into a number eight, and sometimes I play off the left.

“I don’t want to be labelled as a number 10. I’m not a number 10. I can’t remember a game where I’ve played as a number 10 this season, maybe West Ham at home.

“Being a number eight has made me add that defensive side to my game. I’m never going to be a big tackler, I’m never going to go around smashing people. It’s that awareness and that responsibility of getting little toes in, little interceptions, because as a number eight you find yourself deeper a lot, so I’ve had to add that.”

www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-citys-number-10-insists-4217730.amp

Gazza M wrote:

Ricky1985 wrote:

I'd prefer Maddison because I think he has potential as a Modric-style '8' in a 3-man midfield, whereas Ødegaard is a '10' and only a '10'.

So, if we were to move for the Norwegian, Arteta will need to decide how much moving Smith Rowe permanently to the left wing is going to hurt his effectiveness. I like him out there - he reminds me of Pires in that role, but I can see why when playing at '10' his ability move freely across the width of the pitch to create overloads in the wide areas, as well as his dangerous running beyond the ball in central areas are vital parts of his game that are diminished when he starts wide.

Ødegaard is excellent, but much less athletic and doesn't give that Ramsey-like threat beyond the ball that Smith Rowe does. Arteta can shape the team to allow for that though, I suppose.

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

Agree, Odegaard could slot into a midfield three at some point while Maddison is almost a forward. Both are best as CAM but Ode could move back while Maddison could be a backup on the wing, he's both more explosive and has an overall lower work rate

Ricky1985 wrote:

Gazza M wrote:

funny, I thought the opposite. odegaard drops deeper and has the workrate to plug in as an 8 moreso than maddison, who I see as more of a goal threat closer to the strikers

I'm going by Maddison himself describing his role for Leicester this past season as definitely an '8' and not a '10'.

I agree that Maddison has the greater goal threat though, but I think that ball striking and final pass can still be useful from a deeper starting positon, again, sort of like Modric. Whereas Ødegaard is too unathletic to be able to be of much use without the ball, even I don't doubt his application and work rate.

It may be on the back of his Leicester City shirt, but James Maddison does not want to be labelled as a number 10.

The midfielder says his best position is the box-to-box number eight role he now most regularly plays under Brendan Rodgers.

When he first arrived from Norwich, Maddison was considered an out-and-out attacking midfielder and spent much of his maiden City campaign in the hole behind Jamie Vardy.

But he now feels that the number 10 tag is not an accurate reflection of his qualities, with the 23-year-old adding a defensive nous to his game this term, when only Ricardo Pereira and Wilfred Ndidi have made more tackles for City.

“Number eight definitely,” Maddison said when asked for his preferred position. “I played as a number 10 at the start of last season, and then when the gaffer [Rodgers] came in, I transitioned into a number eight, and sometimes I play off the left.

“I don’t want to be labelled as a number 10. I’m not a number 10. I can’t remember a game where I’ve played as a number 10 this season, maybe West Ham at home.

“Being a number eight has made me add that defensive side to my game. I’m never going to be a big tackler, I’m never going to go around smashing people. It’s that awareness and that responsibility of getting little toes in, little interceptions, because as a number eight you find yourself deeper a lot, so I’ve had to add that.”

www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-citys-number-10-insists-4217730.amp

Interesting interview although I have to say I never perceived him that way in any Leicester game I've seen, and tbf English midfielders are notorious for misunderstanding their own position on the pitch.

Maddison is still pretty young and I think ESR will turn into a similar (although better) player with a high goal output. He has a great strike on him even if he hasn't gotten to show it too often yet, but he will probably grab the opportunities as gets more experienced. With Ødegaard we'd have a lot more variety in our attacking options than with Maddison in my opinion.

I think Odegaard is a very Arteta player but that means he slows down our play outside the box and often gets into that pattern of passing around the box in the horse shoe shape. He almost always prefers that safe pass out to the wing, Maddison is much more direct.

People dislike safe passing and love direct players more than anything but I think we have enough direct players in Pepe ESR and Saka. What we need is someone who can recycle the ball further up the field and who can pick out a pass from 20 yards or more and we have nobody in the squad but Partey who does it and he does it from much deeper usually. Odegaard would fit our current needs better than Maddison, although to be fair that mostly depends on ESR staying fit.

I agree with that. I think if we bring in Odegaard, we go 4-2-2-2 with 2 of ESR, Saka and Ode acting as wide playmakers and moving laterally across the pitch and 2 of Auba, Pepe, Balo, Marty acting as the 2 forwards. In theory (and minus Arteta) should be as fluid a frontline as any.