Chelsea Reportedly Set for Xabi Alonso Swoop in Summer
The Real Madrid midfielder would rejoin his former manager at Stamford Bridge should Mourinho lure Alonso away from the Bernabeu, and per David Kent of the Daily Mail Online, Mourinho could be set to swoop:
Jose Mourinho has set his sights on bringing Real Madrid midfielder Xabi Alonso to Chelsea in the summer.
The deep-lying playmaker's contract runs out at the end of June and Mourinho would love to bring his former star to London, hoping to seal a free transfer in January.
Alonso has been a key part of the Madrid side since his arrival for €30 million in 2009 from Liverpool and has since passed 100 caps for the national side—a remarkable achievement.
It would be a tremendous coup for Chelsea should Mourinho manage to lure one of his former players to the capital rather than signing a new contract with Carlo Ancelotti's men—and would also likely upset Liverpool fans, who would love Alonso to return to Merseyside.
Mourinho and Alonso still share a tremendous relationship, writes Kent, and were seen embracing each other when Chelsea faced Real in a pre-season friendly this summer.
With Alonso out of contract at the end of the season, Mourinho could swoop in January and sign the Spanish international on a pre-contract agreement six months before his contract is due to end.
Despite being only 31, Alonso has a raft of honors and medals to his name in a stellar career. As well as winning the Champions League and the FA Cup with Liverpool, he has a La Liga title and a Copa Del Rey victory with Madrid.
With the Spanish national side, Alonso has also won both the World Cup and the European Championships, making him an ideal fit for any club across the world.
Even though Chelsea have a whole host of midfield options—perhaps best illustrated by the frustrations of Juan Mata—the option of signing Alonso would be too much to resist for Mourinho.
Would Alonso be an ideal signing for Chelsea? Would you love to see him play at the Bridge? Leave your comments below.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?