Liverpool and Chelsea both spent heavily in the summer transfer window, but a former Everton player reckons one club’s approach will end up trumping the other’s in the long term
Liverpool and Chelsea have both spent lavishly this summer(Image: Getty Images)
Former Chelsea star Pat Nevin reckons his former side had a better transfer window than Liverpool, despite the Reds’ record-shattering summer spending spree. Liverpool grabbed all the headlines by breaking the British transfer record on two separate occasions, ultimately splashing £446million on new talent – the biggest outlay in Premier League history.
High-profile additions including Alexander Isak, Florian Wirtz, and Hugo Ekitike showcased the club’s extravagant strategy. Chelsea’s dealings, in contrast, were more modest, though hardly conservative, with the Blues still splurging £284m on new players.
Whilst it will probably take time to assess the real impact of each club’s summer movements, Liverpool were undoubtedly the ones who captured the spotlight. Nevertheless, Nevin, who also played for Everton, contends that Chelsea’s more calculated recruitment approach – focusing on emerging prospects with strong resale potential – represents a smarter long-term strategy, and one that might produce better returns than Liverpool’s high-stakes expenditure.
He also cautioned that should expensive acquisitions like Isak fail to perform, Liverpool will not only be lumbered with an underachieving, highly-paid player, they’ll also find it tough to offload him, especially at a profit.
“Isak is someone I can see Chelsea potentially going for, but if you’re spending £125m, you’re not making a profit if you sell in four years,” Nevin said told the Mirror, via Betway. “Isak would do the job for you, but Chelsea don’t look at it that way.
“This is Chelsea’s method. They won’t buy players without a potential resale value. It’s happened with plenty of clubs in the past where they’ve spent big on a player, and when it doesn’t work out, there’s no resale. Chelsea don’t like that. That’s not the model.”
Pat Nevin thinks signing Alexander Isak for such a big fee represents a huge risk for Liverpool(Image: Nikki Dyer – LFC/Liverpool FC via Getty Images)
Nevin went on to suggest that Liverpool might have overpaid for their marquee summer signings – particularly when compared to the players Chelsea secured in the same positions.
“The club have brought Joao Pedro in for half the price of Isak. Is Isak really twice the player that Joao Pedro is? I don’t think so,” the former Scotland international said. “He’s a fabulous player, he’s probably better than Joao Pedro at the moment, but if you’re looking at smart money, then Chelsea have got the better deal.
“Chelsea would have made back that Joao Pedro money from the sales they’ve made this summer and from the Club World Cup as well. The model looks alright to me. Don’t get me wrong, Chelsea have spent a lot of money, but they’ve recouped that money as well.
Joao Pedro has started brightly at Chelsea(Image: Getty Images)
“Chelsea are right amongst the top when it comes to spending over the past few years, but they would say they’ve been sensible. They’re back in the Champions League, they’ve won the Club World Cup, so actually, you can see the model is working.
“Some of the players they’ve brought in are great value. Estevao might be the best value of the lot. He’s only a kid, but he looks like a brilliant footballer. If he’s this good now, you can only imagine how good he’ll be if he keeps on improving.
“So, the way Chelsea look at it is, do we go for this talented 18-year-old or go out and sign Florian Wirtz for £100m+? You’ll only know in three or four years who was right, but I think it’s a close call from what I’ve seen.”
Chelsea have mastered the art of players sales, raking in big fees for players who didn’t exactly set the world alight, like Noni Madueke(Image: Arsenal FC via Getty Images)
Chelsea have shown themselves to be experts at selling in recent windows. In the past few weeks, stars such as Noni Madueke, Nicolas Jackson, Joao Felix and Renato Veiga have all been sold – or in Jackson’s case, loaned out – for significant fees, despite not delivering standout performances in west London.
Their readiness to cash in for profit, coupled with a keen eye for bargains, has put them in a strong financial position, even as one of the world’s biggest spenders. This summer alone, Chelsea generated a record £287m from player sales, leaving them with a net spend of -£3m.
Liverpool, on the other hand, maintain a similarly robust position, albeit through a different strategy. Their patience in the transfer market – splashing the cash only when necessary – has reaped rich rewards.
Players like Virgil van Dijk have proven great value for money, despite the hefty transfer fee(Image: George Wood, Getty Images)
Players like Mo Salah, Virgil van Dijk, Alisson, and Fabinho have justified their hefty price tags, becoming key members of the squad. The reigning champions are banking on the success of new signings such as Isak, Wirtz, and Ekitike following suit. However, if these players fail to perform, the club will be stuck with £300m worth of talent they can’t utilise properly or shift.
Liverpool already know how this feels, having had their share of expensive missteps. Darwin Nunez and Naby Keita, who were signed for a combined £130m, proved difficult to offload and temporarily strained the club’s finances.
In contrast, Chelsea are trying to avoid such high-risk ventures. They’re focusing on less established, lower-profile talent to close the gap on the teams above them in the league – a stark departure from their previous extravagant spending under ex-owner Roman Abramovich.
Liverpool have had great success with buying big in recent years, and will hope the likes of Wirtz and Isak will follow suit(Image: PA)
They have, of course, spent big on certain players, investing over £200m in Enzo Fernandez and Moises Caicedo, for instance. But for the fourth window in a row, no single signing has cost more than £55m – a figure Liverpool surpassed three times this summer alone.
Chelsea’s approach may not make headlines like it once did, but it signifies a long-term plan centred on sustainability and wise investment. If Nevin’s evaluation is accurate, the upcoming seasons could see the Blues reaping the benefits of patience and frugality.
Liverpool, on the other hand, have an impressive history of success when making substantial investments, and it’s this measured boldness that could ultimately keep them one or two steps ahead of Chelsea.