http://macchelsea.com/index.php?id=334019898567470486
是日车闻摘要：2014-08-10
＊传媒报导指却尔西近年重新厘订财政策略，至今已达致收支平衡。《卫报》评论指
除了以高价出售多名球员而录得丰厚营利外，更大的转变是由以往阿内森经营青训以
培养一队球员的方针，改变为把在伦敦受训的年轻球员主要用作出售图利，有潜质打
入一队的更外借以汲取经验。由此球队成功获得资金以填补以往攻守球员不平衡的弊
病，但同时达致俱乐部一直宣称的财政平衡目标，一举两得《Guardian》
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/aug/09/chelsea-jose-mourinho-
transfer-market-premier-league-
Chelsea balance their books and fill the holes in Jose Mourinho's squad
Paul Doyle - Saturday 9 August 2014 13.43 BST
For years the concept of Chelsea as a model of sustainable transfer
dealing seemed more preposterous than beach parties on Pluto. Yet here we
are on the verge of a new Premier League season for which the Londoners
have spent less on new players than they have raised from flogging
unwanted ones. How did this happen? Has anyone told Roman Abramovich?
When the Russian sanctioned the purchase of Glen Johnson from West Ham
just after buying Chelsea in the summer of 2003, it was the start of a
season-long splurge that resulted in a net transfer loss of about ￡150m.
The following season, buys exceeded sales by ￡139m. Balancing the books
did not seem like something that Abramovich could be bothered with.
Sure enough, for most of the past decade Chelsea have been among the first
accused whenever opponents such as Arsene Wenger rail against "financial
doping". Yet Chelsea always claimed, usually to much scoffing, that they
would one day become self-sufficient and this summer's transactions
suggest that, at least when it comes to transfer fees, the club may be
devising a method of operating that does not depend on permanent
indulgence by their owner. The fees for Diego Costa, Cesc Fabregas, Filipe
Luis and Mario Pasalic were more than offset by those received for David
Luiz, Romelu Lukaku, Demba Ba and Patrick van Aanholt, generating a profit
of about ￡2m. So far this summer, Arsenal, Liverpool and the Manchester
clubs are all deep in the red as far as transfers are concerned.
Caution is required here and not only because there are plenty of other
aspects of a club's accounts. This is not the first time that Chelsea have
been in the black in terms of transfer fees: they also made a profit in
the 2008-09 season when the newly flush Manchester City lurched in to take
Wayne Bridge, Shaun Wright-Phillips and Tal Ben Haim off their hands. That
seemed more like serendipity than good strategy and the following season
Chelsea made a net loss on transfers of ￡22m. In January 2011, Abramovich
ordered the purchase of Fernando Torres for ￡50m, which, on top of
captures including David Luiz and Ramires, contributed to a seasonal loss
of nearly ￡90m. Goodnight, prudence.
Now, however, even though they are unlikely to find anyone to hand over
￡50m for another David Luiz every year, Chelsea appear to be reaping the
fruit of a well-laid plan. It is a different plan to the one that they
originally tried. Back in 2005 the club lured a reputed top talent
spotter, Frank Arnesen, from Tottenham Hotspur and appointed him director
of football as part of a bid to cultivate their own talent and feed a
constant supply of youngsters into the first team while supplementing the
side with the occasional big signings.
Arnesen was a major influence in the acquisitions of Mikel John Obi,
Salomon Kalou and Florent Malouda but few of the younger players that
arrived during his five years at Stamford Bridge made an impact on the
first team. The latest strategy does not require youngsters to make it
into Chelsea's first team at all. It does not even depend on Chelsea
developing them because they can get others to do that for them.
Last season Chelsea had 18 players out on loan at other clubs and the
season before they had even more. Only Thibaut Courtois and possibly Kurt
Zouma (bought from St-Etienne in January before being loaned straight
back) have done well enough to convince Jose Mourinho they are ready to
feature in his team. Plenty of others did well enough to persuade other
clubs to buy them.
Everton forked out a record ￡28m for Lukaku. Back in January, Wolfsburg
paid about ￡18m for Kevin De Bruyne. The two Belgians made three Premier
League starts for Chelsea, who nonetheless made a combined profit of more
than ￡21m on them in three years. They could make even bigger gains from
Courtois and Eden Hazard if they wished, or even from Eden's brother
Thorgan, who has just gone to Borussia Monchengladbach for his second loan
spell away from Chelsea since joining in 2012.
Seven other youngsters have already gone back out on loan after stints
away last term, as has Pasalic, who joined Elche soon after arriving at
Stamford Bridge from Hajduk Split. One of the teenage recruits from the
Arnesen era, Gael Kakuta, has just been farmed out for the sixth time,
while another, Van Aanholt, has been sold to Sunderland for about ￡2m.
There is always the risk of repeating the Nemanja Matic mistake. After
buying the Serbian for ￡1.5m in 2009, Chelsea sent him on loan to Vitesse
Arnhem before selling him to Benfica in 2011 – but that move did not look
so clever when, last January, Matic was bought back for ￡21m to banish
some of the midfield vulnerability.
Chelsea, though, are presumably confident that their judgment will be
right far more often than not. As for the broader question of whether all
this is right is debatable, even if it helps Chelsea comply with the rules
of financial fair play. If all big clubs expand their efforts to stockpile
young players to lease out and sell like landlords using a property empire
to extend their privileges, it gives them an even greater degree of
control over the market. Smaller clubs paying more to keep the
aristocracy's accounts in rude health might be considered an affront to
decency.
That is patently not Chelsea's concern. They want to perpetuate their
power and win more titles. This summer's activity looks to have left them
well placed to do that. The new acquisitions have not made holes in their
pocket, just filled gaps in the team.
Luis is a dynamic left-back whose arrival could allow the excellent Cesar
Azpilicueta to shift across to his preferred role on the right. Fabregas
should provide more goals and drive from midfield on a platform manned by
Matic or the fit-again Marco van Ginkel. Oscar could also join a central
midfield trio if Mourinho chooses to switch formation to the 4-3-3 that he
has tended to prefer in the past.
Either way, Fabregas looks an ideal heir to Frank Lampard, whose
departure, like that of Ashley Cole following Luis's arrival, no doubt
helped lighten the payroll. Chelsea's midfield was fragile at times last
season but now looks fearsome and Fabregas, if he resumes where he left
off in the Premier League with Arsenal, should become a regular starter
and produce more consistency than Hazard and Oscar, who were outstanding
at times last season but who also shrivelled up at crucial moments. Being
older and stronger, Hazard and the Brazilian should improve this term, as
should Andre Schurrle, Ramires and Mohamed Salah.
The chief reason Chelsea finished behind Manchester City and Liverpool
last season was that they scored 30 goals fewer than those teams and that
was largely because of the shortcomings of their strikers. Costa looks
like a big part of the solution to that problem.
The ￡32m recruit from Atletico Madrid seems the ideal Mourinho
centre-forward, a warrior who has the power, mobility, cunning and
sharpness to serve as a one-man front line. Last season Costa made
Atletico fans forget about their departed hero, Radamel Falcao, by
plundering 35 goals in 44 matches as Real Madrid's little neighbours won
La Liga and reached the Champions League final. He has the capacity to
banish Chelsea fans' bad memories of last season's strikeforce but to do
so, he will need to avoid injury and adapt to the Premier League
instantly. Otherwise, Chelsea will find themselves banking on the
returning 36-year-old Didier Drogba and dear old Torres.
That, perhaps, would be an interesting time to reassess the price of
Chelsea's summer frugality.