Chelsea’s player trading model continues to cost the team on the pitch

This is a syndication of the article originally published for the BBC, here.

It was another busy summer at Chelsea, whose sporting structure have built the club’s transfer philosophy around very defined principles, some of which go against much of the conventional wisdom fans have become used to.

For example, teams in the past would try to minimise turnover in any given window, in order to allow chemistry to develop on the pitch, and to help the group bond off it. Chelsea have overturned that rule. If there’s a chance to buy a player for less than they’re worth, they take it. If there’s a chance to sell a player for more than they’re worth, they take it.

Chelsea abandon traditional approach in hunt for profit

Noni Madueke completes Arsenal move.

We saw that in the summer – did Chelsea need to sell Noni Madueke? No. But Arsenal made an offer that allowed the Blues to bank a big profit. Is Alejandro Garnacho a better player? Maybe not, but the chance to buy him for below his market value was equally irresistible.

Buy low and sell high and you’ll make money. But the cost comes on the pitch, and that was clear this weekend as Chelsea continued to show a lack of fluency in attack, or indeed any real chemistry in the team.

A combination of injuries and international break fatigue forced Enzo Maresca to rotate his side. But the players brought in are not yet settled, and it showed. The manager had to draw for the big guns at half time.

A more conservative approach in the summer would have meant players like Madueke or Nicolas Jackson coming into the team; adapted, familiar with the system and ready to deliver. Instead there was the likes of Jorrel Hato, Facundo Buonanotte and Garnacho all making their debuts, trying to learn on the fly.

The advantages of this player trading model are obvious – but so are the downsides.

Will Faulks @willfaulks

View publisher imprint