- 9 hours ago
Bats*** Boehly STRIKES AGAIN with Nicolas Jackson decision
Robin Bairner
- 15 Aug 2024 06:45 CDT
- 4 min read
Chelsea’s transfer policy has long been beyond fathomable, and now with the majority of the big-money deals for the summer apparently dried up, Todd Boehly’s circus has rolled into the contract extension department.
The Blues took the world by surprise when Boehly took it upon himself to hand new signings ultra-long deals.
A quick look through Chelsea’s extensive squad and it becomes apparent that most of the club’s key figures are tied down for the next four years as a minimum, while others, like Enzo Fernandez, Mykhailo Mudryk and Nicolas Jackson are locked in until at least 2031.
READ MORE: Chelsea name CHEAP Madueke price tag amid exit links
Compared
Cole Palmer
M (CR)
Chelsea
Cole Palmer
M (CR)
Chelsea
VS
Nicolas Jackson
F (C)
Chelsea
Nicolas Jackson
F (C)
Chelsea
|
|
ETV |
|
| €37.8M - €63.1M | ETV Range | €33.7M - €56.1M |
| 22 years old (06 May, 2002) | Age | 23 years old (20 Jun, 2001) |
|
England
|
Nationality |
Senegal
|
The rationale for this is clear: sign young players on long-term deals on (comparatively) low wages and you have them locked to the club for the majority of their careers. Chelsea spent big on these players, but these large transfer fees could effectively be recouped by spending less on wages over the course of seven or eight years. Meanwhile, the players have lost all control of their futures, having effectively signed it over to the club.
The argument behind giving Cole Palmer a new nine-year contract was clear. He excelled last season to such an extent that there is a solid case to be made that he was the best Premier League signing of the season.
In turn, this sends out a positive message to the rest of the squad.
FABRIZIO ROMANO TRANSFER NEWS: Felix to Chelsea ON, Arsenal PUSH for Merino, Man Utd's Ugarte DREAM
Nico Jackson new contract: What are Chelsea doing?
The logic starts to collapse, however, with the reports from The Telegraph that Nicolas Jackson is set to be offered a new deal.
The Senegal striker wasn’t as bad as some critics portrayed. The 23-year-old’s return of 14 goals in 35 Premier League games matched or perhaps even exceeded expectations. It was not, however, the type of stellar campaign that justifies Chelsea lengthening his deal and, presumably, increasing his wage. He’s under contract until 2031 – there’s simply no need.
What’s more curious about this saga is that Chelsea are still interested in signing Victor Osimhen, a player who would act as a direct replacement for Jackson.
This is not the joined-up thinking of a logical club.
Boehly, of course, has taken a step back from having direct control of transfer matters, with Behdad Eghbali having a more pronounced role, but the American will retain a veto on these decisions.
In the short term, Chelsea and Enzo Maresca come into the new campaign firefighting after poor pre-season performances. There is a very real danger, though, that the club’s ongoing transfer and contract policy leaves them in trouble for years to come.
