In a recent interview, former Newcastle United superstar Phillipe Albert revealed that he believes Chelsea should have signed Everton’s Amadou Onana in the summer transfer window.
Albert waxed lyrical on his country man, saying that ‘Physically, Amadou is a monster and technically he also has quality’. Additionally, he also believes that he is available at an affordable price.
Despite this, a report from the Daily Mail back in August indicates that Everton will demand a price in excess of £60 million for the player to depart Goodison Park.
Chelsea were believed to be interested in a move for Onana back in the Janauary transfer window – however, the player reportedly rejected their advances [via The Metro].
What did Philippe Albert say regarding Amadou Onana?
In an interview with La Capitale, Albert said: “Physically, Amadou is a monster and technically he also has quality. I am very surprised that no one paid his €85 million clause.
“When I see how easily Chelsea spend the money to buy anything and everything, I find it very strange that they don’t buy a player like Onana for less than €100 million.”
Should Chelsea have signed Amadou Onana?
Of course, Chelsea could have signed Onana if they had wished to do so – Todd Boehly’s pot of money seems to be endless. However, whether they should have is another question entirely.
With the departure of central midfielders such as N’Golo Kante and Mateo Kovacic, the Blues were left in a position where they needed to bolster their options in the middle of the park.
They accomplished this – however, Onana was not among the players that the Blues opted bring on board. Instead, they chose to sign Romeo Lavia from Southampton and Moises Caicedo from Brighton and Hove Albion.
While neither Lavia nor Caicedo have set the world alight following their moves to Chelsea, time is on their side. They are both very young – Caicedo is 21, while Lavia is just 19.
To call either of them ‘failures’ at this stage would be grossly unfair – sadly, people in the world of modern football love to throw reactionary opinions around for the slightest of errors and missteps.
Chelsea could have certainly benefitted from bringing Onana on board – but there is little evidence to suggest that he would have been a better pick than Caicedo or Lavia at this stage.