- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,034
This post is copied from an older thread, in response to someone saying they expected us to be dominating games after our £200m “massive” spend.
I thought I’d repost it here because I just keep seeing this come back again and again.
The spend was to bring the squad back up to the current level as well as invest in the future. That was a maintenance spend, not a Chelsea style £1.2bn attempt to buy the league spend.
We had to replace Caicedo, Mac Allister, Mwepu, Undav, Groß and others going back to Trossard who hadn’t really been truly replaced (RDZ’s big peeve) as well as the next development signings.
If we look at the signings we’ve made,
Cozier-Duberry (19) - free, loaned, prospect
Yalcouyé (18) - €7m, loaned, prospect
Osman (19) - €19.5m, loaned, prospect
O’Riley (23) - €29.5m, just returned from injury
Kadioglu (24) - €30m, injured
Gruda (20) - €31.5m
Wieffer (24) - €32m
Minteh (19) - €35m
Georginio (22) - €45.7m
Average age of the players we signed is 20.89 years old. Three signings worth €26.5m went out on loan immediately.
It is extremely clear to me that the (relatively, for a club our size) big spend was about investing in the next batch of young players to develop and improve with time and first team experience with us.
We weren’t buying a European campaign or title challenge (lol), we were signing what was absolutely necessary to a) try and maintain our position in the top half of the league and try for Europe and b) give these young players a platform to shine and hopefully be the next big money sale out of the door in order for the club to be self-sufficient financially.
I think it was an excellent window of superb business, but one which many people won’t recognise until like - as in the past with Mac Allister, Bissouma, Caicedo, Baleba and the rest - the players come good due to first team exposure and hard work on the training ground.
I am very sorry that people got confused about exactly what our £200m was getting us. Chelsea spent over £200m on two central midfielders and finished mid table last season.
I thought I’d repost it here because I just keep seeing this come back again and again.
The spend was to bring the squad back up to the current level as well as invest in the future. That was a maintenance spend, not a Chelsea style £1.2bn attempt to buy the league spend.
We had to replace Caicedo, Mac Allister, Mwepu, Undav, Groß and others going back to Trossard who hadn’t really been truly replaced (RDZ’s big peeve) as well as the next development signings.
If we look at the signings we’ve made,
Cozier-Duberry (19) - free, loaned, prospect
Yalcouyé (18) - €7m, loaned, prospect
Osman (19) - €19.5m, loaned, prospect
O’Riley (23) - €29.5m, just returned from injury
Kadioglu (24) - €30m, injured
Gruda (20) - €31.5m
Wieffer (24) - €32m
Minteh (19) - €35m
Georginio (22) - €45.7m
Average age of the players we signed is 20.89 years old. Three signings worth €26.5m went out on loan immediately.
It is extremely clear to me that the (relatively, for a club our size) big spend was about investing in the next batch of young players to develop and improve with time and first team experience with us.
We weren’t buying a European campaign or title challenge (lol), we were signing what was absolutely necessary to a) try and maintain our position in the top half of the league and try for Europe and b) give these young players a platform to shine and hopefully be the next big money sale out of the door in order for the club to be self-sufficient financially.
I think it was an excellent window of superb business, but one which many people won’t recognise until like - as in the past with Mac Allister, Bissouma, Caicedo, Baleba and the rest - the players come good due to first team exposure and hard work on the training ground.
I am very sorry that people got confused about exactly what our £200m was getting us. Chelsea spent over £200m on two central midfielders and finished mid table last season.