The side-effects of Abramovich's reign

‘ The goal is to win. It’s not about making money. I have many much less risky ways of making money than this (buying Chelsea football club). I don’t want to throw my money away, but it’s really about having fun and that means success and trophies. ‘

These words by Abramovich explain the motive behind his Chelsea takeover, and what has transpired ever since.

Chelsea prior to Abramovich was in the same position as Everton are today. Best that they could have expected was a good cup run and an extraordinary league campaign which would see them qualify for the Champions League. All that changed when the Russian business tycoon decided to change the landscape of the Premier League.

Interestingly, the revolution might have started a bit before the takeover in June 2003. Last day of the 2002-03 season, Chelsea vs Liverpool, a match of great importance as the winner would rake in 3 points and climb to the 4th spot and a Champions League qualifying position. A certain Jesper Gronkjaer turned hero for the blues that day with an assist and then the scoring the winner in the 2-1 home win and in process, started the ball rolling for much bigger things. The qualification for the Champions league would have played a key role in Abramovich’s decision.

3 Premier League titles, a Champions League crown and a Europa League trophy, and 8 domestic major and minor cup victories means that the club has won more than half of its all time honors in the last decade under Abramovich. A trophy cabinet which not even the most ardent of the Chelsea fans would have dreamed about a decade earlier. But what is the cost of all these? Not quite in the literal sense, but what about the collateral damage.

The grass is not as green as it seems.

What about development of the youth team. Apart from Bertrand playing a minor role this season, who from the Chelsea youth academy has gone on to play significantly for the club? McEachran – well, we would never see his full potential while he still remains to warm the bench at Chelsea. A talent which almost all agree can develop into a future England national team member, wasted due to the lack of opportunities at quality top flight football. Hutchinson was tried out, but the ambitions of the owner didn’t allow much time for try-outs, so he was pushed back in the reserves.

Michael Mancienne, Miroslav Stoch, and Gökhan Töre were never of the quality to get a break into the first team. Scott Sinclair, although originally a Bristol Rovers youth product, can be considered as a sole success to come out from the Chelsea youth set-up since the take-over of the club. Unfortuantely, he seems to have thrown it away by choosing a move to Man City’s bench. A large part of Borini’s development is due to the fact that he chose to leave Chelsea in search of first team football.

Then there is the bench strength. In plain view, it should be the strength, the plus point for Chelsea. But it is also a hindrance for the youngsters at the club. Normally, in the League Cup and the first few rounds of the FA Cup, the big teams give their youngsters a run in the first team. But due to the big squad that Chelsea possesses, the fringe players who were brought in for quite substantial amounts, and who don’t get much first team action are played in these games. Also Abramovich’s greedy desires of winning every tournament they play in means that even these fringe players lose out to the regulars most of the time.

The big money transfers are a feature of his time at Chelsea. Well frankly it is his money, he can spend it the way he wants. What hurts football is the number of players he brings as back-up. For almost each position, the club has 2-3 back-ups. So many players of the same type at a single club at the same time mean that the growth of the players gets stunted. The club gets options, but we as fans get robbed of some genuinely good players or genuinely good players in the making.

The number of players brought in from other clubs in the 10 years under Abramovich – 83; And this is excluding the youth team players promoted to the first team and loan transfers. An average of about 8 per season. The result – many players came with trophy ambitions to the club, only to waste 2-3 years, stagnating, in the end transferring out to other clubs.

Jiri Jarosik, Thiago, Mateja Kezman, Slobodan Rajkovic, Lassana Diarra, Asier Del Horno, Saloman Kalou, Franco Di Santo, Ben Sahar– at varying stages of their career but have similar stories of unfulfilled potential. The reason for it is that at Chelsea they didn’t get enough opportunities to grow.

Who knows, perhaps the England squad could have been better had the likes of Scott Parker, Steve Sidwell, Wayne Bridge, Shaun Wright-Phillips got more first team football when they were at Chelsea. All of them suffered by being at Chelsea when they most needed regular football for their development. One would be tempted to even include Glen Johnson and Joe Cole in the list. Thankfully Daniel Sturridge, realizing the future prospects at Chelsea, decided to leave for greener pastures at the right time.

Same fate holds true for the returning Jeffrey Bruma, Patrick Van Aanholt, Tomas Kalas, Kevin De Bruyne, Gael Kakuta, Lucas Piazon if they don’t leave Chelsea shores again next season at least on loan. Thibaut Courtois already realizing the situation has made statements that his place in the Belgium squad will be in danger if he doesn’t gets enough first team action next season, which he won’t at Chelsea till Cech remains at the club.

There is no doubt that Abramovich’s arrival at Chelsea has changed the dynamics of the Premier League, it has been a major factor in the commercial growth of the EPL in the last decade. It has made things much more interesting and yes, it has made Chelsea fans happier. But the football purists will always place the achievements of the likes of Swansea and Wigan Athletic, the rise of Borussia Dortmund, the business acumen of FC Porto above the accolades of Abramovich’s Chelsea.