Article by Daniel Tiluk

In Western literature, dragons are often viewed as symbols for greed. They can be found stealing, hoarding and/or guarding large depots of wealth, usually gold, until a hero or oligarch does something to stop them.

While their badge is clearly a lion, Chelsea Football Club could be considered world football's modern-day dragon. Possessing seemingly unlimited funds—only stymied by UEFA Financial Fair Play regulations—the Blues have acquired ungodly amounts of world-class players since Roman Abramovich bought the club 12 years ago.

Didier Drogba, Arjen Robben and Eden Hazard are easy to highlight as outstanding players—and worthy of being purchased by the fire-breathing west Londoners—but this random trio and others were/are given every opportunity to play first-team football. Each investment was a calculated move to improve the squad with quality, not made for future monetary compensation.

O

Over the past half decade, however, there has been a sea change. Not only are Chelsea stashing players they wish to star at Stamford Bridge, they have used their clout—garnered over the past decade—to purchase numerous lesser-known commodities, creating an impressive and extensive loan system.
The strategy, to date, has worked flawlessly. Using an adroit scouting network, Chelsea find hopeful gems and play risk vs. reward.

Should an up-and-coming player be available for the right price, buying them can turn out three ways. First, they become members of the Chelsea first team; second they become great, but surplus, and are sold for profit or lastly they remain on loan until finishing their development.

Three examples: Kevin De Bruyne (23), Thibaut Courtois (22) and Patrick Bamford (21) were purchased within eight months of each other for under £13 million collectively.

Before the ink on his Chelsea contract had dried, Courtois was loaned to Atletico Madrid, where he spent three seasons. The goalkeeper played over 150 matches for Atleti and transformed into the world's best young goalkeeper. Too good to risk losing, the Belgium "No. 1" is now Jose Mourinho's preferred goalkeeping option at Stamford Bridge.

Bamford was bought from Nottingham Forest for £1 million, played in the Chelsea youth team for almost one year and has been on loan for the past two seasons. Moving from League One to the Championship with positive results, when the England U21 striker finishes his development, his stock will surely have elevated.

De Bruyne is the ominous example.

Bought for £6.7 million from KRC Genk, the Belgian winger's talent was blatant. A year-long loan spell with Werder Bremen in 2012/13 (scoring 10 goals and assisting nine in 33 Bundesliga matches) both inflated his price tag and warranted a first-team spot at Chelsea.

Starting the first game of the 2013/14 Premier League campaign, De Bruyne looked on course to solidify his place in London, but he was unable to hold it down. Frustrated by a lack of matches, he left the club in the 2014 January transfer window to join VfL Wolfsburg for £18 million. Romelu Lukaku (21), also bought then loaned, was not willing to suffer the same fate on the Chelsea bench as his Belgian compatriot De Bruyne, and he was sold to Everton for £28 million last summer.

The Blues will view the over £21 million profit from both players as successful but repercussions could be more damning.

Players like Courtois, or even Kurt Zouma (20), could give potential stars hope that west London is an environment where they can thrive, however, Chelsea are seemingly running the risk of having talents turn them down—knowing full well their fate in advance.

Abramovich's trump card would appear wages.

Clive Mason/Getty ImagesIf Andre Schurrle cannot crack Chelsea's starting XI, prospects wanting first-team action may look elsewhere.Not many clubs have the capacity to spend on a weekly basis like Chelsea. Though perhaps renowned for their avarice, footballers ultimately want to play football. Andre Schurrle (24), is likely being paid a handsome amount, but he is probable to leave this transfer window—via Germany's SID agency (h/t ESPN FC)—as his playing time can be improved upon at Wolfsburg.

Taking into account academy players, the Blues currently have 26 players on loan in eight different countries; while choice loanees have broken through, there are many who have been wasted.

Chelsea's dragon-like policy is simply not sustainable. Unless unwitting heroes are willing to sacrifice themselves to collect cheques, the act will wear thin and prospects will turn elsewhere.

To assume players will stop wanting to play at Stamford Bridge is nonsensical. However, not too far off you might witness youngsters telling reporters: "I want to play for Chelsea eventually. They are a great club, and I am delighted they are interested in me, but if I sign for them now, I'll just end up at Vitesse."

Article by Daniel Tiluk

In Western literature, dragons are often viewed as symbols for greed. They can be found stealing, hoarding and/or guarding large depots of wealth, usually gold, until a hero or oligarch does something to stop them.

While their badge is clearly a lion, Chelsea Football Club could be considered world football's modern-day dragon. Possessing seemingly unlimited funds—only stymied by UEFA Financial Fair Play regulations—the Blues have acquired ungodly amounts of world-class players since Roman Abramovich bought the club 12 years ago.

Didier Drogba, Arjen Robben and Eden Hazard are easy to highlight as outstanding players—and worthy of being purchased by the fire-breathing west Londoners—but this random trio and others were/are given every opportunity to play first-team football. Each investment was a calculated move to improve the squad with quality, not made for future monetary compensation.

O

Over the past half decade, however, there has been a sea change. Not only are Chelsea stashing players they wish to star at Stamford Bridge, they have used their clout—garnered over the past decade—to purchase numerous lesser-known commodities, creating an impressive and extensive loan system.

The strategy, to date, has worked flawlessly. Using an adroit scouting network, Chelsea find hopeful gems and play risk vs. reward.

Should an up-and-coming player be available for the right price, buying them can turn out three ways. First, they become members of the Chelsea first team; second they become great, but surplus, and are sold for profit or lastly they remain on loan until finishing their development.

Three examples: Kevin De Bruyne (23), Thibaut Courtois (22) and Patrick Bamford (21) were purchased within eight months of each other for under £13 million collectively.

Before the ink on his Chelsea contract had dried, Courtois was loaned to Atletico Madrid, where he spent three seasons. The goalkeeper played over 150 matches for Atleti and transformed into the world's best young goalkeeper. Too good to risk losing, the Belgium "No. 1" is now Jose Mourinho's preferred goalkeeping option at Stamford Bridge.

Bamford was bought from Nottingham Forest for £1 million, played in the Chelsea youth team for almost one year and has been on loan for the past two seasons. Moving from League One to the Championship with positive results, when the England U21 striker finishes his development, his stock will surely have elevated.

De Bruyne is the ominous example.

Bought for £6.7 million from KRC Genk, the Belgian winger's talent was blatant. A year-long loan spell with Werder Bremen in 2012/13 (scoring 10 goals and assisting nine in 33 Bundesliga matches) both inflated his price tag and warranted a first-team spot at Chelsea.

Starting the first game of the 2013/14 Premier League campaign, De Bruyne looked on course to solidify his place in London, but he was unable to hold it down. Frustrated by a lack of matches, he left the club in the 2014 January transfer window to join VfL Wolfsburg for £18 million. Romelu Lukaku (21), also bought then loaned, was not willing to suffer the same fate on the Chelsea bench as his Belgian compatriot De Bruyne, and he was sold to Everton for £28 million last summer.

The Blues will view the over £21 million profit from both players as successful but repercussions could be more damning.Players like Courtois, or even Kurt Zouma (20), could give potential stars hope that west London is an environment where they can thrive, however, Chelsea are seemingly running the risk of having talents turn them down—knowing full well their fate in advance.

Abramovich's trump card would appear wages. If Andre Schurrle cannot crack Chelsea's starting XI, prospects wanting first-team action may look elsewhere.

Not many clubs have the capacity to spend on a weekly basis like Chelsea. Though perhaps renowned for their avarice, footballers ultimately want to play football. Andre Schurrle (24), is likely being paid a handsome amount, but he is probable to leave this transfer window—via Germany's SID agency (h/t ESPN FC)—as his playing time can be improved upon at Wolfsburg.

Taking into account academy players, the Blues currently have 26 players on loan in eight different countries; while choice loanees have broken through, there are many who have been wasted.Chelsea's dragon-like policy is simply not sustainable. Unless unwitting heroes are willing to sacrifice themselves to collect cheques, the act will wear thin and prospects will turn elsewhere.

To assume players will stop wanting to play at Stamford Bridge is nonsensical. However, not too far off you might witness youngsters telling reporters: "I want to play for Chelsea eventually. They are a great club, and I am delighted they are interested in me, but if I sign for them now, I'll just end up at Vitesse."

What a load of rubbish . It is a trend this days in the media , lets take a dig at Chelsea when other clubs doing fishy transfers " cough" real ly coughing, you know who . Shall we remember how many talents other big club of Europe have " wasted " ? In fact they don't call it as "wasted" talent , but simply labeled them as not good enough . Well folks Chelsea is no longer small club from London and if talent wants to play in first 11 of one of the best football clubs in the World , he will have to show something extraordinary .

Thibaut Courtois came young and made it to first team ( benched one of the best goalkeepers in the world ) , Kurt Zouma made it to a first team , Oscar came young made it , Ivanovic used to be bench warmer , Azpilicueta used to be bench warmer , Willian was rotation player and Matic left the club improved and now plays . Chelsea gives chance for those youngsters to impress , so if they fail they don't make it , simple . We not going take all the young talents into starting, just so they can grow . How long will his development take ? Can we risk having young players playing against likes of City or Madrid and Bayern , just so they can get the firs team action ? Hell no . Standards are high and if player does not meet them , there is always another club where he can be sold and be happy with new low standards .

What a load of rubbish . It is a trend these days in the media , lets take a dig at Chelsea when other clubs doing fishy transfers " cough" real ly coughing, you know who . Shall we remember how many talents other big club of Europe have " wasted " ? In fact they don't call it as "wasted" talent , but simply labeled them as not good enough . Well folks Chelsea is no longer small club from London and if talent wants to play in first 11 of one of the best football clubs in the World , he will have to show something extraordinary .

Thibaut Courtois came young and made it to first team ( benched one of the best goalkeepers in the world ) , Kurt Zouma made it to a first team , Oscar came young made it , Ivanovic used to be bench warmer , Azpilicueta used to be bench warmer , Willian was rotation player and Matic left the club improved and now plays . Chelsea gives chance for those youngsters to impress , so if they fail they don't make it , simple . We not going take all the young talents into starting, just so they can grow . How long will his development take ? Can we risk having young players playing against likes of City or Madrid and Bayern , just so they can get the firs team action ? Hell no . Standards are high and if player does not meet them , there is always another club where he can be sold and be happy with new low standards .

The article is right though. Chelsea probably have the most players shipped out on loan right now. More than most other major clubs in the BPL.

First off, major clubs in the BPL don't trust the U21PL for development Secondly Footbal League would resist Spanish-style B teams. Thirdly as the situation is today it's a profitable opportunity for the club and a way for the youngsters to develop their skills in order to get into the starting XI of Chelsea. Because, let's face it, the likelihood of an academy player stepping into the starting XI of a team like Chelsea is very slim. I mean, who would he bench?

Like it or not, that's the only current possibility for Chelsea and many other teams.

@Marcus

"Chelsea gives chance for those youngsters to impress , so if they fail they don't make it , simple . We not going take all the young talents into starting, just so they can grow ."
Well considering the massive amount of young players Chelsea buys every season, no one expects half of them to make the starting lineup anyways. So why don't Chelsea buy only the players they want to make the 1st team, rather than buying every young player in sight? Why don't Chelsea end up being like Madrid and Bayern, where young players are bought with the intention of making them all 1st team players (Thiago, James, Isco, Benzema, Higuain, Ramos, Neuer, Gotze, Martinez)? Because Chelsea wants profit.

Since I'm sure you've read the article already, you've already went through the three things Chelsea mostly do with their young buys. Either,

1. They introduce immediately to starting lineup (E. Hazard)
2. They become excellent players, but surplus (key word here) to Chelsea's requirements (Lukaku, De Bruyne)
3. They become loaned repeatedly until reaching a +200% profit potential for Chelsea

Although this is excellent business from Chelsea, it does not bode well for the players. On the long run, it does not bode well for Chelsea either. After a while, youngsters will realize that going to Chelsea will make their fate almost certainly set in stone, and they will begin to slowly turn down Chelsea in favor of clubs where they may have more opportunities.

@Marcus

"Chelsea gives chance for those youngsters to impress , so if they fail they don't make it , simple . We not going take all the young talents into starting, just so they can grow ."

Well considering the massive amount of young players Chelsea buys every season, no one expects half of them to make the starting lineup anyways. So why don't Chelsea buy only the players they want to make the 1st team, rather than buying every young player in sight? Why don't Chelsea end up being like Madrid and Bayern, where young players are bought with the intention of making them all 1st team players (Thiago, James, Isco, Benzema, Higuain, Ramos, Neuer, Gotze, Martinez)? Because Chelsea wants profit.

Since I'm sure you've read the article already, you've already went through the three things Chelsea mostly do with their young buys. Either,

1. They introduce immediately to starting lineup (E. Hazard)
2. They become excellent players, but surplus (key word here) to Chelsea's requirements (Lukaku, De Bruyne)
3. They become loaned repeatedly until reaching a +200% profit potential for Chelsea

Although this is excellent business from Chelsea, it does not bode well for the players. On the long run, it does not bode well for Chelsea either. After a while, youngsters will realize that going to Chelsea will make their fate almost certainly set in stone, and they will begin to slowly turn down Chelsea in favor of clubs where they may have more opportunities.

I personally think that this is some excellent piece of business by Chelsea board. A lot a promising youngsters are scouted and welcomed aboard.
Since not everyone can make the squad, players that have already proved they can pretend to a regular spot in the squad are kept (Hazard, Schurrle, Oscar, ...), while those who haven't are sent on loan or with the youth to prove themselves at a higher level. After one or two seasons, those who had fought and developed well (Courtois, Lukaku, De Bruyne...) can make it to the squad, others are sold. Fair enough.
But, once you're in the squad, nobody has his first 11 spot secured for the season. You still have to fight, work hard and prove yourself. Chelsea is not the only club in Europe to have bench warmers. Lukaku and de Bruyne, as much as I love them, wanted a regular spot in the 11 without fighting, so they were dropped, and eventually sold so they can have more gametime.
I think Hazard had his first team spot secured because of his price tag, which is unfair to other players, but quite makes sense. Oscar, on the other hand, was warming the bench at first when he came aboard, he fought hard, and look now how he is involved in at least 90% of Chelsea games. Schurrle's case is something else, he had a virus for 4 months when he came back from Brazil and couldnt regain form, while Willian was beasting. Being too inconsistent on the pitch when given the chance, he decided to go.
So my opinion is that Chelsea is a huge machine, that filters players, and keep the ones that fit the first squad the most. Chelsea is obviously not the kind of team a young player would think he will be promised a starting seat in no time, young players go there because they know they will be watched by Jose all along, and having a Chelsea FC tag on your dossier certainly boost your carrier and open doors.

@Ashwin

Juan Mata didn't crack the Chelsea team or did not fit into the system? He was Chelsea Player of the Year for two seasons in a row, if my memory serves me correctly. Jose preferred Oscar due to his work rate. He had already worked with a AM who does not contribute to defense at all (Ozil), so I don't see how Mata didn't 'fit in' with his system. Jose chose to not pick Mata, and this is a matter entirely different.

"This is in no way different from what Real does season in and season out. Remember when you had Sneijder, Robben, van der Vaart..etc and you went after Ronaldo, Kaka, and Benzema?"

• Yes, because Kaka, Ronaldo, and Benzema are improvements over Sneijder, Robben, and Van Der Vaart. They were also, as a matter of fact, mostly players about to enter their prime (Benzema excepted). Unlike De Bruyne, Lukaku, or Salah, who are merely young talents who show some signs of great promise. Ronaldo has performed excellently, Kaka couldn't due to unfortunate injuries, and Benzema has had a mixed but successful time at the Bernabeu. On the other hand, the players the author of the article was talking about, were De Bruyne (failed to muster up many matches at all for Chelsea), Lukaku (a player discarded for his attitude, but didn't have much faith put into him either), and Hazard (a successful purchase that looks extremely promising).

The difference is that Madrid, under Perez, try to buy players they want to break into their 1st team lineup, at least for the forseeable future. Players like Lukaku, De Bruyne, Salah, Schurrle? I mean, you've already got Hazard, Oscar, Torres, Ba, Eto'o, Lampard, etc. in those positions already, so really what are the chances of them breaking in? Realistically, a player like Mohamed Salah was never going to break into Chelsea's lineup. So what is the point in buying him? Playing him for a few Capitol Cup matches? I highly doubt that's what Abramovic or Mourinho had in mind. They intend to make it a good piece of business by loaning him out, and then selling him for a higher price that what they paid for. I mean, look at Schurrle. The moment his price index goes up a bit, he is sold to a Wolfsburg team that is hungry for talented players. Lukaku was sold for a massive sum of money, and so was De Bruyne. Courtois was loaned out and then performed so f**king well that Chelsea just couldn't afford to lose a talent that good, and Hazard was in the starting lineup from Day 1. See what I mean?

@dynastian So why don't Chelsea buy only the players they want to make the 1st team, rather than buying every young player in sight? - What kind of utopia society do you think Mourinho lives in, in where he buys a player cheap who turns out to immediately become a success? Chelsea buy many players for an eventual future. They show talent, but will this talent develop in other clubs to cut it for the Chelsea XI? You're right, most don't. But, that is not expected either. Most of the players still develop their talent elsewhere and can then be sold to clubs with other ambitions than Chelseas' with a profit. You seem to think that Chelsea is alone in loaning out players? Well, they certainly aren't, even though they lead that battle with a good margin. Chelsea simply has a good network of scouts throughout the world. More so, than most other clubs in PL. But, believe me, if other clubs had the same network, they would do exactly the same thing.

While not many people call Chelsea a plastic club who only buys their players no-more, it's funny how the arguments change when the club change tactics. Instead of buying expensive players, Chelsea tries to buy cheap talents that later develop into fine players. But, that's wrong as well I see.

As I mentioned earlier you can't compare Real to Chelsea in this regard. Major clubs in the BPL don't trust the U21PL for development and the Football League would resist Spanish-style B teams, which is the reason Pl teams can't develop academy talent (and others) further in their own league-system. Instead the players have to be loaned out in order to stay competitive. Chelsea for example has a close connection with Vitesse in the Netherlands where many of our players have contributed to that league, as they simultaneously develop their talent in order to prepare for their Chelsea entrance.

As to Mata, yes he was one of our absolutely best players but during a time we finished 6th in the league. Don't forget that. The reason he was sold, and yes your reasons are wrong.. were because of his defensive in-capabilities in combination with that Chelsea got almost £40m for him and thus made a profit of £16m. The same reason to why Cuadrado replaces Schurrle now.

And When you say that Schurrle didn't get enough play time, I'm not sure what you mean. Schurrle played plenty of games before he got sick after the world cup. Don't misunderstand me, I love the guy but Cuadrado seems to be a step up, with his defensive capabilities, which Mou likes. Also, Schurrle with add-ons was sold for £28m and not £22 as you seem to believe. Thus, we made a proper profit on him as well.

Lastly, "Players like Lukaku, De Bruyne, Salah, Schurrle? I mean, you've already
got Hazard, Oscar, Torres, Ba, Eto'o, Lampard, etc. in those positions
already, so really what are the chances of them breaking in?" - What makes you think that players try to break in to the REAL XI but players DON'T try to break into the Chelsea XI? This was a really poor example. Lukaku had a great chance on breaking in to the starting XI in the close future. Neither Torres, Drogba or BA were successes on that spot, but he got greedy which paved the way for his exit of the club. And once again Schurrle played plenty of games depending on the game scenario that Mou wanted to have. Different players, different qualities. Salah just didn't cut it. The ONLY player I agree with her is De Bruyne, because he really never got the chance in Chelsea for reasons unknown. But once again, I trust the Chelsea manager more than my own judgment on that one.

I rest my case. Please concentrate on Real instead of being obsessed with Chelsea now.

@dynastian

Do you honestly believe in what you say ? Or you just trying to mess with us ?

Which is more wasted time ? Young player going to top club trying what he is capable not succeeding and still has years of football ahead of him or finish product player sitting on the bench of Real Madrid and then being sold like a sick cattle ? Mmh idk this one is tough i guess .

Those youngsters can only benefit from having Chelsea on their CV .

Real got little cocky and feel morally obligated to teach others how to deal transfers after Jose turned it around and spent wisely . Club that has over 600 million debt , makes shady transfers and gets insane TAX breaks from the government but still has nerve to say they are perfect module to follow . There is a reason why nordic countries call likes of Spain "pigs of europe " . Slowly Real is going back to old ways of buying players for ridiculous prices , lets see how long it will take when it will start taking toll on performances of bunch of stars .

Agree completely with @ashwin chusksea and like @ktbffhswe says if we buy finished products , media and jealous fans will still moan and if we are building future by buying young players they still moan . So , honestly , they can go all F8ck themselves and before criticizing our policies . They should look into their own clubs because we are doing pretty good without breaking any rules and while complying with FFP making profit on top .

@dynastian

Do you honestly believe in what you say ? Or you just trying to mess with us ?

Which is more wasted time ? Young player going to top club trying himself to see of what he is capable maybe not succeeding and still has years of football ahead of him to improve and grow to world class if transffered or finished product player in his late 20s sitting on the bench of Real Madrid and then being sold like a sick cattle ? Mmh idk this one is tough i guess .

Those youngsters can only benefit from having Chelsea on their CV .

Real got little cocky and feel morally obligated to teach others how to deal transfers after Jose turned it around and spent wisely . Club that has over 600 million debt , makes shady transfers and gets insane TAX breaks from the government but still has nerve to say they are perfect module to follow . There is a reason why nordic countries call likes of Spain "pigs of europe " . Slowly Real is going back to old ways of buying players for ridiculous prices , lets see how long it will take when it will start taking toll on performances of bunch of stars .

Agree completely with @ashwin chusksea and like @ktbffhswe says if we buy finished products , media and jealous fans will still moan and if we are building future by buying young players they still moan . So , honestly , they can go all F8ck themselves and before criticizing our policies . They should look into their own clubs because we are doing pretty good without breaking any rules and while complying with FFP making profit on top .

@Ashwin

"Kaka was not better than Robben/Sneijder when you brought him."

• That's absolutely ridiculous. Kaka was the reigning Ballon d'Or winner when we bought him. He was worth every penny at the time.

"Real buys Ozil, Khedira, diMaria...etc to start. Why? Because one of your players had a bad season?"

• Bad season? What are you talking about? Real bought them to improve the team. We bought them because we didn't have any players who could play well enough in those positions for us to be a Champions League contending team. And guess what? Of those 3 players you mentioned, all three played extremely important roles in our record-Liga campaign and La Decima. Di Maria was one of our most important players in 2013-14, and Ozil and Khedira were brilliant in 2011-12. They were visible upgrades over the previous players. Just how, comparably, Matic is an upgrade over Mikel. Understand now?

@Marcus

"Club that has over 600 million debt , makes shady transfers and gets insane TAX breaks from the government but still has nerve to say they are perfect module to follow ."

• No one says we are the perfect module to follow. If anything, Chelsea FC are the perfect module to follow in terms of business. Don't make sh*t up.

And we do not have 600+ million in debt. That is predicted debt at the beginning of each season. After our wages are paid off, and all our other fixed expenses, we end up with approximately 100-170 Million debt, which is completely normal for a massive enterprise.