Why Chelsea's crazy £1.2BILLION slap-dash transfer approach will work, writes SIMON JORDAN

What is Chelsea’s financial plan given they’ve splashed out £1.2billion on players since 2022 and do not appear to be stopping anytime soon?

You can’t call it admirable to spend money like drunken sailors but I’ve tried to step back from the laughable 'purists' point of view and consider how owners Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali see things strategically.

To them, this is likely a marathon, not a sprint. They bought the business for £2.5billion thinking no doubt it could be worth £10-15billion in a decade’s time the way sport is going, alongside other benefits of owning a prized asset like a London-based Premier League club.

Clearlake Capital did not buy Chelsea for charity. They’ve done it to make money from.

Over in America, they’d noticed the growth of football and seen an opportunity where the capital asset of clubs were likely to eventually be several times higher than the purchase price.

So, if they’ve had to spend a further two billion+ of investors money to get Chelsea where it needs to be (which by the way they committed to when buying the club), they’ll say the ends justifies the means.

I would surmise unless there is zero logic to what they are thinking, and some would suggest there is, they might find themselves in that very situation where Chelsea is worth one day a number of multiples of what they paid.

With that in mind, they are prepared to take some slings and arrows from people who consider they've departed the orthodoxy of running a Premier League club, against the bigger picture of a long-term prospects.

While it looks unpalatable and opens up arguments on subjects ranging from selling academy graduates to the treatment of players, they’ve shown an element of initiative in adhering to FFP and PRS by selling hotels and other assets to get around the obligations that they encounter along the way.

I can tell you this, I bet if Manchester City's owners knew in 2008 what they know now, they would likely have put in a structure with lots of inherent assets they could have disposed of in a circular transaction (between companies who are part of the same larger group).

Chelsea have done that. They have sold hotels and others things, ultimately to other businesses they are involved in at a market price to meet their requirements.

Is it 'Football, old chap'? No. But that genie is out of the bottle. My central point is why are so many offended about the money Chelsea are spending on players on behalf of those who aren’t overly-concerned, their owners!

Besides broadcasting, football is being funded on the whole by investors buying clubs to turn them into even bigger capital assets.

It’s Chelsea’s plan which is why they’ve felt comfortable agreeing the signing of Joao Felix this week to take their summer spend beyond £200million.

Are they throwing money about because they have it? Possibly there is that American mentality to do things with a certain bravado and it’ll fly, a more sophisticated version of go hard or go home.

Nevertheless, I can see an outcome where Chelsea get it right and their owners make money in the end.

When is that end? In our world of fans and media, we want instant gratification, particularly at a club like Chelsea.

The owners might have a slightly more pragmatic view. They will expect a certain level of success on the pitch but they are clearly not fretting about adverse popular media or current negative fan engagement, as they are continuing to pay big fees and operate with their own plan.

Graeme Souness said it’s a slippery slope. I say lots of things in life have the possibility of being a slippery slope. Suggest ID photos, and some warn you about Big Brother. Not everything reaches the bottom of the snakes and ladders.

Do I admire Chelsea’s spending? No. Achievements on the pitch will be in part the litmus test and right now they are not successful despite spending inordinate amounts. But it can change.

Raheem Sterling has become the latest magnet for all the noise around the club.

I don’t know if Chelsea have tried to set him up to over react and put him in breach of his contract by leaving him out of the squad for the first league game against Manchester City or simply feel he doesn’t bring value to the team.

Gary Neville’s argument that his representative’s statement asking for clarity was done to support other marginalised Chelsea players like Trevor Chalobah and Connor Gallagher is nonsense though. This isn’t Wolfie Smith, Power to the People! (one for the kids that..)

The statement was likely to ensure his position and to indicate no intention to request a transfer thus negating any form of financial consequence like loyalty payments ... perhaps!, perhaps not?, I mean Lord know footballers are renowned altruistic characters.

On Sterling who has hardly set the world alight for his apparent £16.5million per year, Juventus are interested and I was recently in Turin with Andrea Agnelli, the former President of Juventus, in July.

The scale and size of that football club was impressive.

I don’t see much of a transfer fee so a loan might be a solution and Chelsea maybe have to take a view and cover a third of his reported £300,000-a-week wages. He’d still be their asset and maybe sell him next summer or even January if he smashes it over there.

All things considered it will be fascinating to see if the unconventional and apparent profligate approach of this version of Chelsea flies in the face of all the current criticisms and delivers on its objectives, one eventually being a successful team. My guess is it will..eventually!

Spanish managers have improved English game

There are currently more Spanish managers than English ones in the Premier League. Having faced Julen Lopetegui last week, Unai Emery will face another countryman on Saturday, Mikel Arteta.

I don’t think it’s unfair on English coaches – in fact I think it’s raised their levels. You can’t expect club owners, who come from around the world, to limit their choice of manager to one island of 55million people.

And by the way, the import of managerial talent happens in Spain, too. The big three Real Madrid, Barcelona and Atletico Madrid are led by an Italian, a German and an Argentine.

I was a major dissenting voice about the English coaching mentality from a previous generation, sitting at the desk with a Racing Post, lazily complaining about the chairman.

That’s gone now because we’ve evolved as a nation both as players and coaches. we’ve become more sophisticated because of the continental infusion.