Chelsea Transfers

[Superblue 6,370]

1 hour ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

Two equally effective players of the right quality is a big advantage I reckon. Let's get in the squad management through rotation habit. Let's enable the manager to rest players as he sees fit without having to risk jeopardising results to do it. For example, what a luxury it would be not to have to play Reece twice in Champions League weeks?

This is not just good for individuals, but it's great for squad bonding. Everyone is involved, everyone is contributing.

Agreed. All you have to do is look at City in recent seasons and their ability to rotate the squad regularly without an obvious drop off in quality. There were similar elements for ourselves in the early Abramovich/Mourinho years too. 

People can lazily point to whether a player is happy playing only half the games but it never pans out this way with injuries, suspensions and loss of form. Add in the ability to select 9 subs now, 5 of which can be fielded and there are plenty of opportunities for everyone to contribute.

It's far easier to keep a squad happy when the side is successful and that is what we need to be aiming back for first and foremost.

[Vesper 28,418]

Homegrown Chelsea stars fear Champions League failure will lead to FFP chop

A planned clear-out started with Jorginho's transfer to Arsenal in January and looks set to continue in the summer

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/02/02/Chelsea-transfer-news-homegrown-Chelsea-stars-fear-ffp-chop/

By Matt Law, FOOTBALL NEWS CORRESPONDENT

Chelsea’s homegrown stars fear the club will be forced to cash in on them if they fail to qualify for the Champions League to avoid further Financial Fair Play scrutiny.

 

Telegraph Sport has already reported on a planned clear-out at Stamford Bridge that started with Jorginho’s sale to Arsenal at the end of the January transfer window.

 

But some of Chelsea’s first-team academy graduates believe they will jump to the front of the queue of players the club look to sell if Graham Potter’s 10th-placed team miss out on Champions League qualification.

 

Experts believe Chelsea’s best way of assuring they avoid the threat of FFP consequences in such a scenario would be to sell academy products, who count as zero cost in Uefa’s calculations.

 

Uefa put Chelsea on an FFP watchlist of 19 clubs in September, but that did not stop the club taking their spending under the Todd Boehly-Clearlake Capital ownership over £600 million across the summer and January transfer windows.

 

Breaking the British record by spending just over £106 million on Enzo Fernández has put more scrutiny on Chelsea, amid fears the club will sail close to the wind over FFP even though they are unlikely to immediately breach Uefa’s rules.

 

Chelsea considered trying to sell the likes of Conor Gallagher and Ruben Loftus-Cheek in the January window, while other academy graduates such as Trevoh Chalobah could face a struggle for game time once all of the injured players return.

 

Mason Mount is yet to sign an extension on his contract that will have one year to run at the end of the season and offers are likely to be considered for Callum Hudson-Odoi once he returns from his loan at Bayer Leverkusen.

 

While some of Chelsea’s homegrown players fear they could be sacrificed to meet FFP rules, the club are likely to look to offload the likes of Hakim Ziyech, who is back at Chelsea after his deadline day loan move to Paris St-Germain broke down, Christian Pulisic, César Azpiliceuta and possibly summer signings Pierre Emerick-Aubameyang and Kalidou Koulibaly.

 

Chelsea entertain Fulham on Friday night with the club 10 points behind fourth-placed Manchester United and face Borussia Dortmund in the last-16 of the Champions League on February 15.

 

The club have not given up hope of still qualifying for next season’s Champions League through either competition, but are aware that they will be under greater pressure to bring in additional revenue if they do not.

[Vesper 28,418]

Chelsea’s transfer window: Star signings, a ‘Class A circus’ and Ziyech’s plea to Boehly

https://theathletic.com/4138278/2023/02/02/Chelsea-transfer-window-boehly-circus/

In the space of just a few hours on Tuesday, Chelsea spent a Premier League record transfer fee, sanctioned the sale of their vice-captain to rivals and league leaders across the capital and managed to drive one of Europe’s biggest clubs to distraction to such an extent that they labelled Stamford Bridge a “Class A circus”.

It was anything but a deadline day to forget at Stamford Bridge.

The denouement to the winter window has left external observers wondering whether Chelsea’s new owners are implementing some kind of lavish yet inspired masterplan, or are they simply making it up as they go along? The events of January 31, 2023 certainly sustained Chelsea’s position as the most talked about club, for good and for bad.

This is the story of that day and a window that shattered all records — and left the rest of the football world dumbfounded.

---

As co-owner Behdad Eghbali and Chelsea’s recruitment team arrived at the club’s training base in Cobham, from where they would conduct Tuesday’s negotiations, there was one priority on their minds: complete a deal for Benfica’s Enzo Fernandez.

Their interest in the player had been piqued by his performances at the World Cup in December as the midfielder, who was voted young player of the tournament, emerged as a key member of Argentina’s triumphant side. Yet Chelsea’s pursuit would drag throughout the subsequent month.

On January 3, fellow co-owners Todd Boehly and José E. Feliciano had boarded a plane along with Eghbali to London. That night they met Benfica president Rui Costa and Fernandez’s agent Jorge Mendes for dinner at the Bulgari Hotel in Knightsbridge to discuss the purchase of the player. The meeting went on well past midnight and was positive, although an agreement over the fee was never close.

Benfica made it clear they wanted the €120million (£106.7m; $132.2m) release clause paid in full. Chelsea felt such a large sum was unreasonable for a player who had only moved to Lisbon from River Plate last summer in a deal worth up to €18m, and whom Wolves had come close to securing for a similar fee.

At that time, however, Chelsea had absolutely no intention of bidding for Fernandez at the value of his buyout clause. Their best offer in the early days of January was €85million plus the potential to include a selection of players either on loan or as permanent transfers in exchange.

Yet, having been made aware of Chelsea’s interest, Fernandez had already made up his mind to pursue his career in the Premier League and was waiting for a breakthrough in the negotiations.

Fast forward four weeks and little had changed. Benfica’s head coach Roger Schmidt had been critical of Chelsea’s tactics and declared publicly that Fernandez would remain at the club. The Portuguese side face Club Brugge in the last 16 of the Champions League later this month and are currently eight points clear at the top of their domestic league. From the outside looking in, all prospects of a deal had faded.

In reality, communication between the two clubs had continued throughout January. When Chelsea resumed the talks on Tuesday morning, they were determined to finalise a move.

A key decision had been made in the days preceding the deadline: Chelsea had realised that to have any chance of securing their target, they would have to meet Benfica’s asking price.

Given they had been so vehement in insisting their limit was €85million up to this point, the shift could understandably be construed as a major concession to Benfica. Yet Chelsea had learned of two clubs ready to spend £100m (€112m) on Fernandez in the summer, by which time the Londoners, 10th in the Premier League at present, might not be able to offer the carrot of Champions League football.

It was now or never.

Not that a resolution was close. The chances of Chelsea offering more than the €120million release clause as a sweetener, given their intention to pay the fee over a period of years, was never on the table. Eghbali, assisted by Paul Winstanley, the club’s recently-appointed director of global talent and transfers, lobbied instead to pay Benfica the sum in seven instalments. Boehly, working remotely, was in regular contact with his co-owner.

At around midday, news emerged that Fernandez had been left out of Benfica’s squad for their match later in the evening against Arouca, a clear indication of his state of mind. But, as 2pm approached, the Lisbon club’s hierarchy were still demanding the fee be paid up front.

Chelsea refused. They might have boasted the funds, but cash flow made paying in one tranche impossible.

Yet the talks continued and there were more optimistic noises as the afternoon went on. By 4.30pm, sources in Portugal, who have asked not to be named because of their proximity to the situation, told The Athletic that Benfica had agreed to let Fernandez undergo a medical in the event of a compromise being reached. That would, at least, speed up the process.

By 6pm, that little flurry of optimism in Cobham was petering out with Chelsea debating the possibility of sealing a purchase with the summer in mind. That was only considered reluctantly and, just an hour later, they had been offered enough encouragement to believe a January move was feasible.

At this stage of the day, Chelsea had already given the green light to Jorginho’s departure for Arsenal for an initial £11million with potential add-ons — £1million for winning the Premier League and £1million for qualifying for the Champions League. The Italy midfielder, who had joined Chelsea in 2018 and claimed a Champions League and a Europa League title in the club’s colours, had undergone his medical across the capital earlier in the morning.

In truth, Jorginho’s sale was not dependent on the Fernandez transfer going through. The decision to let him leave with just five months of his contract remaining was considered to be a “no-brainer”. There was no desire on either side to extend his stay at Stamford Bridge and, for all that, they parted on good terms. There remains scope for Jorginho to return in some capacity once his playing days are behind him.

Even so, the timing of Arsenal’s announcement that Jorginho had joined their bid for a first league title since 2004 coincided with media in Portugal reporting Fernandez was to remain at Benfica for the rest of the season. Talks had stalled, possibly for good. Chelsea sensed that Benfica were attempting to run down the clock to the deadline. It was only at around 9.15pm that Portuguese resolve cracked.

Chelsea would pay the full sum of the release clause in six instalments, rather than one lump sum. The first down-payment would be £30million. A deal sheet was submitted to grant all parties slightly longer to dot the ‘i’s and cross the ‘t’s. Benfica released their statement confirming the sale at 12.16am.

Fernandez was a Chelsea player.

The delegation in Cobham were ecstatic, though not everyone was feeling quite so overjoyed.

Just how all-consuming those negotiations had been only became clear as others sifted through the wreckage of their deadline day.

Take, for example, Hakim Ziyech. The Moroccan, a World Cup semi-finalist in December, is due to report back for Chelsea training on Thursday, but he will do so reluctantly, having seen his hopes of a move to Paris Saint-Germain dashed in bizarre circumstances that left both the player and the Ligue 1’s champions infuriated.

As Chelsea focused on acquiring Fernandez, Ziyech had travelled to Paris to secure a loan to PSG until the end of the campaign. He was in the French capital by lunchtime on Tuesday. It seemed the only formality to resolve was whether the deal would include an option for PSG to make the move permanent.

The 29-year-old was in attendance in PSG’s offices, waiting for positive news, by the early evening. He was eager to be reunited with his compatriot Achraf Hakimi and to experience life alongside Lionel Messi, Kylian Mbappe and Neymar at Parc des Princes. But there had been no news from Chelsea for a while and, as time ticked on towards the deadline, Ziyech’s agent was becoming increasingly agitated.

Ziyech took to messaging Boehly directly, pleading with the co-owner to speed the process along. As it was, the situation descended into a farce.

At 9.40pm, having been given the go-ahead to conclude a loan until June, PSG sent Chelsea a markup of their agreement.

The document needed to be signed and returned to be lodged with the Ligue de Football Professionnel (LFP). Instead, they were greeted by radio silence. According to a PSG source, granted anonymity to protect relationships, a succession of attempts were made to contact Chelsea by telephone with the deadline minutes away, but the Premier League club could not be raised.

Just before 11pm, an email was received but the attachment was not the correct document. It was also unsigned.

PSG re-sent the loan agreement, signed by the club and Ziyech and, once again, received an erroneous document by return — again unsigned. The right form was sent at the third attempt, at 11.03pm, and the contract was downloaded on the French league’s system a minute later. But the deadline had been missed. The source described Chelsea as “a circus”.

“Actually,” they added, “make that a Class A circus.”

Chelsea’s version of events differ slightly: they claim they pushed the button on two signed forms, though the first failed to send for technical reasons and the second was dispatched at 11pm. They were mystified by suggestions that no one had responded to a phone call. Regardless, their player had effectively been left stranded in Paris looking for somewhere to stay for the night.

PSG did appeal to the LFP on Wednesday to have the move ratified. Chelsea even sent an account of the events of the previous night in support of their bid, but all to no avail.

Ziyech, who had sought an explanation from Chelsea, was livid.

---

To have one loan deal collapse late on is maybe unfortunate. Two, however, smacks of carelessness.

Omari Hutchinson, who made his senior debut last month, happens to be good friends with Ziyech and also sees the right wing as his preferred position. To get more first-team football though, he was ready to play elsewhere for the rest of the season. A number of clubs in the Championship and across Europe expressed an interest but, in the end, West Bromwich Albion emerged as the strong favourites.

Their head coach Carlos Corberan spoke to Hutchinson about what he had planned for the 19-year-old. The player was reassured by the fact West Brom had compiled an in-depth report into his game, which laid out where they saw him fitting in.

A formal medical was not required because Chelsea had already sent West Brom relevant medical documents and they were happy to proceed. Just after 7pm on deadline day, papers to finalise the switch were sent. And yet it all came to nothing.

At first glance, it appears to be a repeat of the Ziyech situation. But it was actually far more complicated.

To bring Hutchinson in, West Brom had to shift out their forward, Karlan Grant. Swansea had spent all month pursuing Grant, but left it to the final stages of the window before making their move, which merely served to confuse matters further.

West Brom also wanted Leicester’s Marc Albrighton, whom they did eventually sign on loan. Corberan was still keen to secure Hutchinson only to find progressing that deal was complicated by Chelsea also working on the Fernandez and Ziyech moves, as well as the reality that clubs in the EFL cannot apply for a deal sheet to give them more time. The deadline was 11pm, and it was not met.

Unlike PSG, West Brom bear no ill will toward Chelsea or Swansea for how things went awry. Yet Hutchinson, who will knuckle down and seek to impress at Under-21 and senior level, was joined in his deadline-day frustration by another academy player, Xavier Simons, who saw his bid to join Hull City on a permanent basis flounder on the deadline. He will remain at the KC Stadium on his pre-existing season-long loan agreement.

Theirs were tales of frustration. Ultimately, though, Fernandez is the story that will be remembered from a deadline day like no other — a suitably jaw-dropping finale to what has been the most lavish winter spending spree in the history of the sport. One that was worth around £290million.

Even so, the fates of Ziyech, Hutchinson and Simons confirm that the cost to Chelsea was not just measured in pounds.

---

Chelsea have had the fortune to call upon a number of highly-potent partnerships since the turn of the century: Gianfranco Zola and Tore Andre Flo, Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink and Eidur Gudjohnsen, Didier Drogba and Nicolas Anelka, Diego Costa and that fire extinguisher at The Hawthorns in 2017.

Many in football can testify that Behdad Eghbali and Paul Winstanley have themselves become quite the double act in discussions and formal negotiations with agents and rival executives over the last two months.

Both were heavily involved in the many transfer meetings that took place in Qatar during the World Cup, as Eghbali and Boehly frequently flew between Doha and Chelsea’s warm-weather training camp in neighbouring Abu Dhabi. When it was decided that Chelsea would go all out to hijack Arsenal’s move for Mykhailo Mudryk, it was Eghbali and Winstanley who flew to Turkey and persuaded both the winger and the Shakhtar Donetsk hierarchy over eight to 10 hours of presentations and talks to deal with them instead.

That experience prepared them well for more than 12 hours of rollercoaster negotiations with Benfica on deadline day.

Fernandez and Mudryk headline an exciting and youthful list of acquisitions that include defender Benoit Badiashile, winger Noni Madueke, midfielder Andrey Santos and forward David Datro Fofana. Joao Felix was also secured on a lucrative five-month loan from Atletico Madrid, and full-back Malo Gusto has been loaned back to Lyon until the summer.

It was clear as early as those December meetings in Doha that the Chelsea ownership intended to jump into this January transfer market with both feet. The winter World Cup afforded them a luxury they never enjoyed on acquiring Chelsea from Roman Abramovich in June: real time to discuss and form a coherent recruitment plan, with the help of Winstanley and incoming technical director Christopher Vivell.

Unfavourable circumstances led to a spectacularly erratic transfer policy in the summer of 2022, with predictably underwhelming results. Boehly and Eghbali were determined that Chelsea’s signings in January would all fit their broader vision to build a squad of young, hungry footballers with elite talent.

Fernandez ticked those boxes. When prising the Argentinean out of Benfica had felt unlikely over the course of the month, they explored alternative midfield options, both abroad and in England. Brighton swiftly rebuffed a £55million offer for Moises Caicedo, insisting the Ecuador international would not be sold mid-season. Having already negotiated with Brighton owner Tony Bloom and CEO Paul Barber for defender Marc Cucurella, their former head coach Graham Potter and his backroom team at Chelsea, as well as Winstanley, Boehly and Eghbali, had built up enough familiarity to recognise when their unwillingness to enter a deal was genuine.

In the end, Chelsea’s ownership decided that making a historic financial commitment to secure Fernandez, the man at the top of their midfield wish list, was more worthwhile than settling for anything less now or in the summer.

A similar calculation was made with Gusto, acquired at the high end of his market value and loaned back for the remainder of the season at Lyon’s insistence; the belief that he was the right player ultimately overcame the desire to supply Potter with more immediate cover and competition for Reece James.

Along the way, Chelsea’s recruitment drive generated a lot of noise. This was partly a result of the head-spinning money at play and partly due to the way Winstanley likes to operate.

One source familiar with his work at Brighton, who was granted anonymity in order to protect their position, detailed how Winstanley would often speak to a large number of transfer targets in significant depth — even to the point of discussing contracts and potential fee schedules — before presenting the options to those above him to make a final decision on which deals to proceed with.

As a system, it generally worked until the pursuit of Fernandez ensured Chelsea were significantly less adept at plate spinning on deadline day.

Jorginho was at least sold, another move that further underlined Boehly and Clearlake’s desire to continue the transformation of Chelsea’s squad at lightning speed, even at the risk of strengthening a London rival chasing a Premier League title. But if you are prepared to spend more than £600m on new players in just two transfer windows, such sweeping change is possible.

Now, though, the eyes of the football world are firmly focused on Chelsea.

---

The question is simple: how are Chelsea making this unprecedented — and surely unsustainable — level of transfer spending work within UEFA’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations?

The answer, as you might expect, is complicated.

Chelsea supporters have been given a crash course in amortisation over the past month, as Boehly and Clearlake have pushed the boundaries of what is possible with player contract lengths. By signing Fernandez to a deal that runs until June 2031, for example, they enable his €121million transfer fee to be spread across eight-and-a-half years on the books rather than a more conventional four or five, thereby greatly reducing his yearly cost on the accounts.

Mudryk, Badiashile, Madueke, Gusto and summer-signing Wesley Fofana are on similarly long deals. This amortisation trick — which could end up backfiring if the players on these super-sized contracts fall short of expectations on the pitch — is one of the conditions Boehly and Clearlake have exploited in order to maximise their opportunity to front-load the level of spending that most elite clubs would stretch over three or four summer windows. But it is not the only one.

Another comes from the other half of how football clubs report transfers in their accounts. Transfer fees for purchased players might be amortised over the length of their contracts, but transfer fees for players sold are booked immediately in one lump sum (minus their remaining amortised cost on the books).

These differing accounting practices can make it surprisingly easy for clubs to significantly offset or even completely balance several high-profile signings with as few as one reasonably-sized sale in their annual results — particularly if the player or players sold are already fully amortised or academy graduates, who represent pure profit in the books.

An important example from recent Chelsea history: for the financial year ending June 2022, despite signing Romelu Lukaku in a disastrous £97.5million deal from Inter Milan, the club actually made a huge profit from player sales in the accounts — estimated by respected football finance analyst Swiss Ramble to be £160million — due to the departures, among others, of Tammy Abraham to Roma, Kurt Zouma to West Ham, Fikayo Tomori to AC Milan and Marc Guehi to Crystal Palace.

Chelsea’s overall financial results for 2021-22 are not yet public; the club has until March 31 to file their accounts with Companies House. But in past years, big profits from player sales have been enough to lift the club into the black overall, despite match day and commercial revenue that consistently lags behind their Premier League rivals — most recently in 2019-20, when a £143million profit from player sales contributed to an overall pre-tax profit of £36million.

Swiss Ramble estimates that Chelsea’s pre-tax profit for 2021-22 will be £19million. Between those two years in the black is a huge £156million loss in 2020-21, partly resulting from the mammoth spending spree of summer 2020 that brought Kai Havertz, Timo Werner, Ben Chilwell, Ziyech and Edouard Mendy to Stamford Bridge. FFP has traditionally only allowed clubs to lose up to €30million (£26.3million) over a three-year monitoring period, though a number of accommodations were made in recognition of the impact of COVID-19 on club revenues.

Back in September, UEFA listed Chelsea as one of 18 clubs who “were able to technically fulfil the break-even requirement thanks to the application of the COVID-19 emergency measures and/or because they benefited from historical positive break-even results”, adding that further financial information had been requested and the relevant clubs “will be monitored closely in the upcoming period”.

UEFA also reminded Chelsea that those particular COVID-19 accommodations no longer apply, but FFP is changing in ways that make Boehly and Clearlake’s current spending more viable. From 2023-24, the allowable loss limit is being doubled from €30million (£26.5m; $32.6m) to €60m, which would include the 2022-23 season as the third year of the monitoring period.

Clubs judged to be in good financial health will also be granted a further €30million in allowable losses over a three-year monitoring period, meaning that Chelsea could be permitted to lose as much as €90m over three years — triple the old limit.

Before the Fernandez signing and sale of Jorginho on deadline day, Swiss Ramble estimated a €96million loss for Chelsea over the three years up to 2022-23. He also estimated the club’s squad cost at 92 per cent of revenue and profit from player sales; UEFA has ruled that all clubs must bring this ratio down to 90 per cent for 2023-24, then 80 per cent in 2024-25 and 70 per cent in 2025-26.

Recent history suggests that Chelsea have relatively little to fear, even from being found in breach of FFP. UEFA’s latest round of punishments, announced in September, amounted to a list of fines — of which, only a small percentage was to be paid immediately, with the rest conditional on future compliance. You could argue that is the equivalent of a speeding ticket for an ambitious club determined to spend big.

Boehly has publicly insisted on numerous occasions that Chelsea have FFP in mind, but it’s clear that he and Clearlake are pushing as close to the limits as possible in order to try to build a squad capable of consistently competing for the biggest domestic and European trophies, perhaps mindful that financial and regulatory conditions in the coming years may not be so favourable for this scale of investment.

UEFA have already moved to close the amortisation loophole for future transfer windows: even if a player is signed on a seven- or eight-year contract from the summer onwards, their transfer fee will be spread over no more than five years in any FFP calculation. The steadily tightening squad-cost-control rule will also put pressure on Chelsea and their rivals to be more disciplined when handing out lucrative salaries to players and coaches.

Then there is also the £60million in annual commercial income that Chelsea, at present stand, to lose from next season, as a result of the end of a £40million-a-year deal with main shirt sponsor Three and the early termination of a £20million-a-year deal with sleeve sponsor WhaleFin. Neither has been replaced yet, even though the club is confident they will be.

Most significantly of all, Chelsea are currently facing the real prospect of playing the 2023-24 season without Champions League football, and perhaps without European participation of any kind. They are 10 points off the top four. Life in mid-table was absolutely not in the initial Boehly-Clearlake business plan and would have a significant impact on the club’s transfer ambitions over the next two windows.

This is where it is important to note the very defined profile of player that Chelsea have targeted in this January window: players aged 23 or under who have, to varying degrees, shown a flash of elite ability and can either blossom into key components of the next great team at Stamford Bridge or grow their resale value in the coming years. If enough of them prove to be positive assets on or off the pitch, nine-figure transfer splurges will not be required in the future.

Even if those winter signings fail to impress at Stamford Bridge, the majority of them are on considerably lower salaries than many of their team-mates acquired under Abramovich. Mudryk, for example, earns a basic wage of £97,000 a week. Their contracts also contain provisions that reduce wages if the club does not qualify for the Champions League — a safeguard that Manchester City and Liverpool have incorporated for several years, but the previous regime at Stamford Bridge did not.

The thinking is that these two shifts in policy will make under-performers far easier to sell.

In any case, no one should expect this level of transfer spending to continue indefinitely. Boehly is not an oligarch and Clearlake Capital are not a sovereign wealth fund. The money being invested is drawn from private equity, and with it comes an expectation of an eventual positive return — either in the form of yearly profits or, more likely, a significant increase in Chelsea’s value that can be realised if the club is sold on.

---

Five months on from Boehly and Clearlake’s initial transfer outlay of more than £250million, it is fair to say that none of last summer’s five major permanent first-team arrivals — Wesley Fofana, Cucurella, Raheem Sterling, Kalidou Koulibaly or Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang — have so far improved Chelsea on the pitch. Loan signing Denis Zakaria has arguably made the best impression on supporters with several positive displays before suffering a thigh injury.

There are already signs that Chelsea’s winter spending will be a different story.

Badiashile has made a quietly solid start to life alongside Thiago Silva, while Joao Felix and Mudryk both thrilled in limited debut appearances against Fulham and Liverpool respectively. All of the permanent January arrivals are young enough to become foundational pillars of Potter’s squad over the next few years.

And what a squad it is — if not the deepest nor the most rounded in the Premier League, then certainly one of the most interesting:

The question of whether Chelsea addressed all of their most urgent needs during this January will linger, however.

Healthy central striking options are particularly underwhelming, limited to false No 9s like Havertz and Joao Felix or natural wide forwards like Aubameyang or Datro Fofana, who are either not trusted or simply not ready to make consistent contributions.

On the flanks, inverted wingers Mudryk and Madueke give Chelsea a badly-needed infusion of line-breaking speed and one vs one dribbling, as well as complementary skill sets for overlapping full-backs Chilwell and James. Less ideal is the fact Ziyech and Christian Pulisic have ended another transfer window at Stamford Bridge despite both plainly seeing their futures elsewhere — particularly Ziyech, given the circumstances in which his loan move to PSG fell through. How he refocuses between now and May remains to be seen.

At the other end of the pitch, Gusto’s delayed arrival from Lyon means James remains the only credible two-way option on the right of defence for the remainder of 2022-23, though Chelsea will hope his body proves equal to the task of a sparser match schedule. Potter does at least have plenty of youthful alternatives to the so-far disappointing Koulibaly, all ready to partner with the evergreen Silva in a back two or three.

In the middle of the pitch, there is finally a clear vision for a new era. Jorginho, the man who defined Chelsea’s midfield for better and worse from the day he arrived in the summer of 2018, is gone.

Jorginho departed Chelsea after four and a half years, a stint that yielded a Champions League and a Europa League (Photo: Robin Jones / Getty Images)

In his place arrives a 22-year-old World Cup winner riding the momentum of a rapid rise to international renown and, now, the most expensive Premier League import ever. Fernandez is the biggest symbol of Boehly and Clearlake’s vast investment project, and whether or not he lives up to the billing will go a significant way towards determining its success or failure.

But he is not alone. Kante and Kovacic remain to offer some level of continuity, as do Mason Mount and Ruben Loftus-Cheek — though it is important to note that none are contracted beyond June 2024.

Conor Gallagher is in a bracket of his own, simultaneously a valued part of Boehly and Clearlake’s youth movement and the most obviously saleable asset in the squad. Filling out the midfield rotation are Carney Chukwuemeka and Santos, two high-upside development projects who could be ready to help in a meaningful way sooner than many might think.

Boehly and Clearlake have achieved one of their key goals in significantly reducing the average age of the squad. Overall, this group of players has the look of a massive transition carried out at dizzying speed, and that process will not end with this window; asking those on Abramovich-era wages to renew within a new salary structure could lead to more turnover in the next year or so.

The summer will also bring new personnel problems — chief among them what to do with Lukaku if Inter decide not to renew his loan for another season. Even with Christopher Nkunku incoming from RB Leipzig, a new striker is likely to remain a significant need. A goalkeeper, too, considering neither Kepa nor Mendy has entirely convinced over the past two years. Despite the such vast investment, Chelsea’s squad is not yet particularly close to being complete.

What cannot be denied after this remarkable January transfer window, however, is the scale of Boehly and Clearlake’s ambition for Chelsea — or the money they are willing to put behind it.

(Additional contributors: David Ornstein, Adam Crafton, Elias Burke, Steve Madeley)

 

 

 

[Vesper 28,418]

Does Jorginho's arrival affect Arsenal's Declan Rice interest?

 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Vesper

[ZAPHOD2319 4,417]

Perhaps @Vesper can post the entire article. It is a really good read on what Clearlake is trying to achieve. It is not as random as some people think.

 

[TheHulk 1,825]

Is this guy any good?

[ulvhedin 506]

It's funny, that after all these spendings our midfield is still need to be hugely sorted out in the summer. Currently we have ONE sure option:

Enzo Fernandez

And then:

Mateo Kovacic - injury prone, contract status unclear, may leave in the summer

Ngolo Kante - could be finished, contract expires in the summer, not sure whether it will be extended

RLC - not Chelsea quality, would be gone if not for his massive wages,

Denis Zakaria - on loan, still would need to be bought, had good moments but still it's uncertain whether he is Chelsea level

Connor Gallagher - it's uncertain whether he is Chelsea level, and potentially could be sold for good profit

Mason Mount - contract status unclear, still not certain whether can play in miedfield constantly,

Lewis Hall, Carney Chukwuemeka - young and not experienced, both need a lot of playing time to further develop,

Cesare Casadei, Andrey Santos, Charlie Webster - too young to be sure what is their real level in senior football

[milka 3,336]

If everyone hates Chelsea again, then we're on the right track .

💙🏆✔️

[Vesper 28,418]

1 hour ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

Perhaps @Vesper can post the entire article. It is a really good read on what Clearlake is trying to achieve. It is not as random as some people think.

What do other Premier League clubs think of Chelsea and their transfer spending?

https://theathletic.com/4138292/2023/02/03/Chelsea-premier-league-clubs-think/

It is far too early to judge whether Chelsea ‘won’ this January transfer window, but they unquestionably dominated it to a degree that might make even Barcelona — whose economic-lever-fuelled recruitment drive was by far the biggest story in football throughout the summer of 2022 — a little envious.

From hijacking Arsenal’s carefully planned pursuit of Mykhailo Mudryk to making Enzo Fernandez the most expensive Premier League player ever with minutes to spare on deadline day, Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital’s spectacularly aggressive approach to strengthening Graham Potter’s squad has left no one in the football world indifferent to Chelsea.

After signing seven senior players for more than £280million ($340m) in the winter window, everybody is talking about them, and everyone has an opinion. To some they are the sport’s equivalent of the proverbial bull in the china shop, moving fast and breaking the transfer market for everyone else, fuelled by a huge appetite for risk-taking and seemingly without a coherent underlying plan. To others they are smart, calculated operators unafraid to go against conventional football thinking in their quest to grow Chelsea on and off the pitch.

Among their rivals, Chelsea’s spending has provoked a wide range of reactions: jealousy, bitterness, admiration, confusion and even fear about where this all could lead.

Chelsea’s spending spree certainly hasn’t gone unnoticed by the managers of some of their biggest rivals. Both Pep Guardiola and Jurgen Klopp were asked questions about Chelsea’s January business at their press conferences on Friday — and both made their feelings known.

Guardiola was asked whether City would receive more criticism for spending what Chelsea have, and said: “Definitely, I know what would happen because we have in the last five or six years.

“What counts is winning titles. What Chelsea and the other clubs have done is not my business. You need good players like they (big spending teams) all believe but the market is just wow now. You have to spend to achieve. This is the reality.”

Klopp echoed his comments. “I say nothing without my lawyer,” he joked. I don’t understand this part of the business but it’s a big number. They are all really good players so congratulations. 

“I don’t understand how it’s possible, but it’s not for me to explain how it works.”

The Athletic has canvassed the views of officials across a variety of levels at other Premier League and European clubs — as well as a private equity specialist. They have been granted anonymity to enable them to speak freely without fear of impacting any future dealings with Chelsea or their owners.

One word that came up time and again during the course of the conversations was “disruptors”. There is a widely-held belief that Chelsea have deliberately set out to disrupt and distort the transfer market, particularly by spending so heavily in January — a market in which major deals are typically rarer as most clubs are very reluctant to countenance losing their most valued players in the middle of the season.

A senior official at another of the Premier League’s ‘Big Six’ blames Boehly and Clearlake for what they anticipate will be the “£100million midfielder merry-go-round” this summer — most likely to be headlined by Borussia Dortmund sensation Jude Bellingham — in light of the massive price that Chelsea were willing to pay to secure Fernandez from Benfica.

Chelsea, for their part, believe the market that develops for Bellingham and other coveted midfielders this summer will vindicate their strategy to go all out to secure Fernandez now, before a more active transfer window in which they — unlike the majority of rival suitors — may well not have Champions League football to offer the highest profile targets.

Elsewhere there has been consternation at Chelsea’s seemingly erratic approach to identifying targets and apparent fondness for gazumping the offers of others. Beyond the predictable lingering bitterness felt at Arsenal regarding the way the Mudryk situation played out, some clubs have been unable to divine much logic behind Boehly and Clearlake’s movements in the market. “They’re all over the shop, trying to do deals left, right and centre,” says another senior official at a Premier League rival.

Chelsea insist there has been a coherent plan underpinning their January recruitment drive and, in particular, a defined profile of player they targeted. All seven of their permanent signings in the winter market are under the age of 23, have flashed elite ability to varying degrees at their previous clubs and were prepared to commit to longer-than-standard contracts on sustainable, incentivised salaries reflective of playing time and Champions League participation.

A senior executive at another Premier League club says: “It has all been a bit bonkers since Todd came in and the project became owner-led, which is fine if there is a structure — but there doesn’t seem to be one. When Marina (Granovskaia) and Bruce (Buck) were at Chelsea, they were professional and the chain of command was obvious.”

Chelsea this week moved to clarify their footballing structure, with Paul Winstanley and Laurence Stewart appointed co-sporting directors empowered to lead the conversations on key decisions regarding transfers, talent identification and recruitment strategy.

Boehly and Clearlake co-founder Behdad Eghbali are now prepared to take a step back and while internally there is acknowledgement that last summer’s transfer dealings were conducted in less than ideal fashion, there is also a feeling that the process of finding the right executives to fill the void created by the swift departures of Granovskaia and technical and performance advisor Petr Cech could not be rushed.

Not everyone outside of Stamford Bridge is negative about Chelsea’s transfer tactics. Another senior executive at a Premier League rival says: “In terms of how they are spending, from the outside, it looks probably more scattergun than it actually is, because we know the people involved and they’re not silly.”

Shakhtar Donetsk CEO Sergei Palkin is more familiar with Boehly and Clearlake’s big ideas for Chelsea than most, having spent “nine or 10 hours” with Eghbali in Antalya, Turkey negotiating the eventual €100m (£88m) deal that took Mudryk to Chelsea rather than Arsenal.

“When they explain to you the whole story and you look for the next two, three, four, five years, then you see they have a serious project,” he said during an exclusive interview with The Athletic last month. “I believe they will build one of the best clubs in the world because I am telling you, they are very serious in all directions: sports science, the stadium side, the commercial side, on all things. For us, they looked very ambitious.”

There is also a broad understanding within the game of why Boehly and Clearlake have made a policy of handing out seven and even eight-year contracts to their younger signings — both of the potential rewards and the possible downsides.

One individual working in a senior recruitment role at another Premier League club says: “We all have different ideas. We are in an industry where nothing can stay the same, the instability is the stability!

“It’s different, but I just think they’re trying to be ahead of the game. You safeguard yourself to a degree because of the longevity of the contract but if it doesn’t work out, it could be a noose around their necks. If the player performs and stays throughout then it’s great for them.

“Chelsea have spent an awful lot of money in previous seasons but they seem to be a lot more strategic about what they’re doing. In previous years (under Abramovich’s ownership) I wasn’t sure there was much of a strategy behind it all.”

Boehly and Clearlake regard these ultra-long contracts as beneficial even without the benefit of the financial fair play amortisation loophole that UEFA will close from this summer onwards; as well as protecting the asset from the club’s perspective, the player gets greater security of income in case of serious injury. If some of Chelsea’s recent long-term acquisitions do not work out at Stamford Bridge, the hope is that lower base salaries will make them easier to sell on.

But what about the business case for Chelsea’s spending? One private equity specialist contacted by The Athletic recognises what he has seen in Boehly and Clearlake’s vast transfer outlay over the first two windows of their ownership — though he is sceptical of its suitability for the football industry.

“Private equity is largely about front-loading the cost in order to get a bit of rocket fuel in the asset, and believing — or hoping — that the asset succeeds,” he says. “Can you do that for a sporting franchise? I’m not sure.

“The purpose is to buy companies, invest in them and then sell them. This is a grow-and-sell model. Chelsea, sooner or later — three to five years is typical — will be sold. They’re investing heavily now to grow the asset so they can eventually sell it.

“It could go very well for Chelsea. They’re scaling up massively to invest in a lot of players and if they’re successful on the pitch, it’ll be vindicated. They’ll continue to grow and try to make Chelsea into a mega club. If it doesn’t work, it’s Leeds. At some stage, if the current growth strategy doesn’t work, there will be an enormous fire sale.”

Boehly and Clearlake have repeatedly insisted their plans for Chelsea are far longer term in nature than that, backed by wealth from funds that have a considerably extended life cycle relative to those of many other private equity firms. The bullishness in their business strategy has been unwavering, with no discussion up to this point of what happens if things do not go to plan for the club on the pitch in the coming years.

Nevertheless, what they are doing at Chelsea is vastly different — at least in scope, if not quite in principle — to the other private equity firms who have ventured into European football club ownership in recent years. That ensures the eyeballs trained on their medium and long-term fortunes will extend far beyond their own sport.

“We’ve never seen a private equity firm in football with this scale of investment,” the private equity specialist adds. “As a business strategy in English football, it’s never been done before. I think it will either go really well or really badly. I can’t see a middle ground.”

[Pizy 18,344]

1 hour ago, ulvhedin said:

It's funny, that after all these spendings our midfield is still need to be hugely sorted out in the summer. Currently we have ONE sure option:

Enzo Fernandez

And then:

Mateo Kovacic - injury prone, contract status unclear, may leave in the summer

Ngolo Kante - could be finished, contract expires in the summer, not sure whether it will be extended

RLC - not Chelsea quality, would be gone if not for his massive wages,

Denis Zakaria - on loan, still would need to be bought, had good moments but still it's uncertain whether he is Chelsea level

Connor Gallagher - it's uncertain whether he is Chelsea level, and potentially could be sold for good profit

Mason Mount - contract status unclear, still not certain whether can play in miedfield constantly,

Lewis Hall, Carney Chukwuemeka - young and not experienced, both need a lot of playing time to further develop,

Cesare Casadei, Andrey Santos, Charlie Webster - too young to be sure what is their real level in senior football

Think we definitely will be in the market for a long term partner for Enzo in the summer. We’ve got lots of young midfielders for the future but none of them are ready to be everyday starters.

The rumors a couple of days ago about Amrabat sound pretty good to me. We don’t have to completely break the bank again for another midfielder to significantly upgrade. We don’t have to go for Rice or Caicedo even though they’d be ideal.

[Vesper 28,418]

On 01/02/2023 at 19:28, ZAPHOD2319 said:

 

LOVE THIS MAN!!💖

[Vesper 28,418]

it is so fucking weird to look at our roster and see it littered with players I have SO wanted

long may this keep up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edited February 3, 2023 by Vesper

[ZAPHOD2319 4,417]

7 minutes ago, Vesper said:

LOVE THIS MAN!!💖

I really hope he stays past his playing days.

[Vesper 28,418]

Winter Window 2023.............................

 

The Good

The Bad

The Ugly

[Vesper 28,418]

2 hours ago, ulvhedin said:

It's funny, that after all these spendings our midfield is still need to be hugely sorted out in the summer. Currently we have ONE sure option:

Enzo Fernandez

And then:

Mateo Kovacic - injury prone, contract status unclear, may leave in the summer

Ngolo Kante - could be finished, contract expires in the summer, not sure whether it will be extended

RLC - not Chelsea quality, would be gone if not for his massive wages,

Denis Zakaria - on loan, still would need to be bought, had good moments but still it's uncertain whether he is Chelsea level

Connor Gallagher - it's uncertain whether he is Chelsea level, and potentially could be sold for good profit

Mason Mount - contract status unclear, still not certain whether can play in miedfield constantly,

Lewis Hall, Carney Chukwuemeka - young and not experienced, both need a lot of playing time to further develop,

Cesare Casadei, Andrey Santos, Charlie Webster - too young to be sure what is their real level in senior football

good summary

hopefully it soon becomes more......................

The Darling Buds - Crystal Clear

 

[ZAPHOD2319 4,417]

CL squad complete 

 

[TheHulk 1,825]

2 minutes ago, ZAPHOD2319 said:

CL squad complete 

 

Was obvious, no way was Felix gonna miss the squad after paying so much for a loan and a handful of games. Good decision, I believe in Fofana to stay fit.

[ZAPHOD2319 4,417]

Auba was removed from CL,