Why Chelsea’s transfer business is bad for football

Jose Mourinho

Should Juan Mata and Mohamed Salah complete their respective moves to Manchester United and Chelsea respectively, it would mean that the Blues would have made four moves in the current transfer window: (1) Selling Kevin De Bruyne to Wolfsburg; (2) signing Nemanja Matic from Benfica; (3) selling Mata to Manchester United; (4) signing Salah from FC Basel.

Questions can be asked about each of these moves. For instance, did the club waste De Bruyne? Did they need to buy him in the first place? Should they have utilised Matic when he was at the club the first time around so they could have avoided having to spend a large sum of cash to bring him back to the club?

Should Jose Mourinho have done more to utilise Mata? Is he selling him to United to, as Arsene Wenger suggested, get an edge in the title race, given the Red Devils no longer have to play Chelsea and are still to play Arsenal and Manchester City? And finally, given the amount of attacking midfielders owned by the club, did they need to pursue a transfer for Salah?

Nemanja Matic

These are all pertinent questions, which raises another question, one that concerns Chelsea’s overall transfer policy: Is it a prudent one?

It’s great that a wealthy owner is willing to back his manager in the market and it has done the club huge favours, looking at the strength of Mourinho’s squad. However, there are drawbacks.

For starters, there’s the issue of Financial Fair Play now being in the picture and the fact that the club recently reported a loss of around £49.4 million in the year up to June 30 2013. Admittedly, the sales of De Bruyne and Mata will have generated needed revenue, but the sustainability of their approach is questionable.

Generally speaking, Chelsea’s transfer policy actually works against them, seeing that the volumes of talent they buy go under-utilised. De Bruyne is one example. A part of Belgium’s “golden generation,” he was developing quite nicely at Genk before Chelsea signed him, and he did very well on loan at Werder Bremen last season.

But he rarely got a chance under Mourinho, often remaining rooted to the bench or at times not even making the matchday squad. In the end, he made just three league appearances before heading back to Germany for around £20 million. The big-money signings of Willian and Andre Schurrle last summer certainly didn’t help matters.

Kevin De Bruyne

What about Matic? He made just two league appearances over two years at the club before he was shipped off to Benfica as part of a deal for David Luiz. Had the club given him more of a chance, they likely would’ve saved themselves £20m or so million.

Then there’s Mata, who has gone from being club Player of the Year to being a reject. This one is down to the new manager, however, who decided that the Spaniard doesn’t suit his tactical plans. Still, one would think that a player of Mata’s credentials warrants the manager trying to find a meaningful solution to working with him.

And what about his replacement Salah? If Mata couldn’t get into the team, who’s to say the Egyptian would? With Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Willian very much in favour at the moment behind Samuel Eto’o, it’s quite likely the youngster will spend a lot of time riding the pine. That said, Mourinho could have just used one of the talented young players already owned by the club.

Beyond these players there’s Thibaut Courtois who, though developing nicely atAtletico Madrid on loan, is hardly likely to feature for his parent club in a hurry-if ever-given the fact that Petr Cech, still only 31, which is young for a ‘keeper, can go on playing at a top level for years to come.

These are just a few basic examples. There are others like Romelu Lukaku as well as the group of players currently on loan at Vitesse Arnhem, the Dutch club Chelsea have a good relationship with. With so many attacking midfielders at the club already, it’s unlikely that the likes of Lucas Piazon, who has shone brightly this season,Christian Atsu, etc. would get a chance in the Blues’ first team, regardless of how well they do on loan.

What about Chelsea’s own youth products? Well, their youth academy is practically redundant, given that youths aren’t being given a chance to shine. Chelsea’s transfer policy is one that reflects urgency and a spur-of-the-moment, make-it-up-as-you-go-along mindset rather than careful planning and patience.

Owner Roman Abramovich hasn’t shown himself to be a very patient man down the years, showing an insatiable desire for instant success-no matter the cost or the consequence.

Josh McEachran

No matter how talented Josh McEachran, Nathaniel Chalobah, or Ruben Loftus-Cheek are, for example, it’s very unlikely that they would make the breakthrough into the first-team at Stamford Bridge, and may have to eventually go elsewhere to fulfill their potential.

Ultimately, Chelsea are getting where they want to go, as they are very much in the league title race and are challenging for the Champions League trophy, but they are going about it the wrong way. Abramovich may have more money than he knows what to do with, but better planning and consideration would see his and the club’s resources more efficiently utilised.

Saying that, his club’s current transfer policy, though proving effective to an extent, is far from prudent upon looking at the whole picture, and needs revising–for the benefit of the club and, by extension, of football.