Because thats when you really started re-devoloping your squad, just like Utd have only just started redevoloping ours about 2 - 3 seasons later
If only every club could be £1BN in debt to their owner huh? I think Chelsea are benefitting enough as it stands
Why are gross figures more valid than net figures, out of interest? Net essentially takes into account sensible buying (buy low --> develop --> sell high), and isn't artificial as it doesn't magically ignore big fails like £50m for Torres.
It really wouldn't surprise me if you loved net spending, back when Manyoo sold Ronaldo for lots of money. Dat consistency.
Utd took a very long time spending the Ronaldo money (on players rather than debt) so no it didnt work out for the fans who already knew the team needed to be developed.
You still have to spend the money to be able to do that though, its rare that a high profile club sell someone they developed inhouse (or bought for say sub- £1m) and sell for £40m +
I clearly stated they SPENT £500m , which they have done - never denied sales like the fortuitous Luis sale to PSG etc
Just trying to compare squads like for like in the developement process - Chelsea are clearly further ahead in this cycle than anyone else (Its pretty well recorded how little Fergie spent in his last two or three seasons, and Moyes either wasnt allowed to spend big or just hesitated too long). Utd are still playing catch up
edit - not as though Di Maria has been an unqualified success either and for more money than Torres cost
Last edited:
