This is for me the strangest one of the window - not the principle of the loan for Caicedo but the destination. For those saying "its all part of the club's strategy and they know what they're doing" yes that is true, but we can all make mistakes. Every year there is a significant proportion of our loan moves which don't work out or were a bit pointless and it would be a real pity if one of those this year is Caicedo, given his talent. As a general rule, given the numbers of talented young players at the club, one bad loan spell and your first team prospects are bleak.
From Ecuador's star player at the Copa America, supposedly being scouted by Man U and being touted as one of the great talents in South America... to the team at the bottom of the Belgian league. Surely if he was all that we could find him a better loan on reputation alone. Those on here who watched him play Copa America said he performed well, as he has in cup matches, so what gives?
From the outside in, we don't know what's been going on but I would have thought a club in the Championship, at the bottom of La Liga or the top of the Spanish second tier would have made more sense (we found Arce a loan in the Spanish second tier before and Caicedo has a much better reputation).
Perhaps visas had something to do with it being Belgium - as a non-EU player being loaned from a non-EU club, maybe the EU visas are easier to get at short notice for Belgium than elsewhere. But then why Beerschot and not USG? Again, if this kid is as good as we're led to believe, he should walk into that USG side...
I hope they all prove me wrong in any case.
The downside with loaning him to a big league is that its not certain that he will play, plus that he will probably not improve his English a lot. In Spain he would probably keep speaking Spanish. In Germany they speak a lot of German and in France they speak French. In a smaller country like Belgium where all the squads have a lot of foreign players and a high number of players coming and leaving, I would imagine a lot of the coaching and talking is done in English.
I think one thing we can all agree on is that Caicedo to Beerschot is controversial. I don't think anybody could seriously dsagree with that. You'd have thought that Newport, Rochdale, Swindon or Doncaster, for example, who have all taken care of our loanees and sent them back better would have been considered - maybe they were, but rejected or not available for one reason or another - we'll never know. We'd all love the club to come out and explain why Beerschot - but we know they they won't! Can we all perhaps agree that we hope they've got it right? Somehow .........................
Well, maybe not quite all of us. Denmark doing OK tonight?
I dont think its controversial to loan anyone to Belgium. Its a country with only 12 million people, yet they produce top quality players for fun. Certainly seems to know a thing or two about coaching youngsters over there. The Belgian league also has a style not too different from the PL.
All in all, the important thing is that Caicedo gets to play football in Europe. South American, including Ecuadorian, football is violent and every game there is a bunch of tackles that would be red carded anywhere in Europe. As a defensive midfielder its important to adapt to the European way of duelling.