Chelsea: Transfer ban has stranded all but two youth in career no-man’s land

Chelsea’s transfer ban was considered a blessing in disguise, creating the platform for the beloved youth revolution. The time for blissful ignorance is almost over.

Once upon a time, there lived a chain-smoking villain. He ruled the blue kingdom with an iron-first, methodologically terrorising the citizens with his cruel, mechanical ideologies. The land grew barren with time, bearing transfers no more, as the people were starved of happiness or elation. Then one day, came a young knight, the prodigal prince, with a band of his jolly young soldiers. They invaded the kingdom, much to the delight of the commoners, slaying the cruel old villain and putting an end to his reign of terror. Everyone lived happily ever after.

This is the fairytale Chelsea fans have telling been themselves and the world.

Now, for the reality of the matter.

Maurizio Sarri’s mundane (but effective) season followed by his premature departure left a sour taste in the mouths of Chelsea fans, which, coupled with Hazard’s departure and as summer transfer ban, created a cloud of negativity hovering above the club.

The board then took a leap of faith to bring a club legend in Frank Lampard to steer the club back to happy times, despite his obvious inexperience in coaching. With the club unable to participate in the transfer window, Lampard gave chances to young players from the academy, which satisfied a long-standing desire of the fans.

The positivity derived from it has ensured that the real problems of the club can be ignored.

This squad should not be fourth in the Premier League. Eden Hazard’s departure made this squad, on paper, arguably the worst in the top six, as inconsistencies in both attack and defence have proven. The club’s high standing in the table is due more to all of their top four rivals underperforming than the team’s own performances. A mere look at Chelsea’s Champions League showing and group table provides enough tangible evidence to back this.

The much-hyped “youth revolution” at Chelsea this season has revolved around Fikayo Tomori, Reece James, Mason Mount, Callum Hudson-Odoi and Tammy Abraham. These players were deemed “ready” for the first team by ChelsTwit, who looked for them to make spectacular impacts. The world was not “ready,” apparently. Lampard was picking them completely based on their ability with no consideration given to their tags as academy graduates, so it went

How many of these players would have really made the team, had it not been for the transfer ban?

The answer is fairly simple (and infuriating?): Only Reece James and Tammy Abraham.

Breathe. Stop overeating. Read on.

Young players require a lot of game time to work on their flaws and find consistency in their game. If it were so simple for them to break into starting lineups up at top clubs, why isn’t that seen at top clubs like Barcelona and Real Madrid or even at well-run clubs like Bayern Munich and Juventus on a regular basis?

Inconsistent performances by young players are vital for their development, but these inconsistencies can harm a top club’s short-term prospects, which in turn hurt the club’s reputation and stature.

Would Cristiano Ronaldo have joined a Juventus side developing their youth products but playing in the Europa League? Probably not, as it makes the club an undesirable destination for top players hoping to challenge for trophies immediately.

Mason Mount is no doubt a talented player but is being restricted and over-exposed in the position Frank Lampard is playing him. This season, he needed to play under a different manager who would have used him in different roles at a smaller club in the Premier League. It would have helped him grow as a midfielder away from the dangerous spotlight of a top club.

The same applies to Fikayo Tomori, who, as a centre back, needs to play every game to improve his communication, positioning and marking. A Premier League loan would have done him a world of good.

For all his talent, Hudson-Odoi has barely gained necessary first-team experience and is coming back from a long-injury. A short-term loan would’ve helped him progressively regain his form and confidence rather than have come under instant pressure to win Chelsea games.

Tammy Abraham, despite being one of the best academy players, went through three loan spells to finally deserve a place in the squad. The only player who could have been brought right into the team from the academy, like Kylian Mbappe or Trent Alexander-Arnold, was Reece James, and even he chose to build his case on loan first.

The transfer ban forced the accelerated progression of some of these youth products, which could easily do more harm than good for their development. Their inconsistencies have hurt Chelsea to this point, and in a race decided by the finest of margins, could very well contribute to the club’s failure to finish in the top four.

While these players can definitely improve next season, it is far from a guarantee, and another season of inconsistency could very well put them under unbearable pressure.

Should Lampard and his colleagues realize this and send some of them on loan next season, they would be accused of going back on their word: the youth revolution would be nothing more than a false dawn.

Chelsea needs signings in January to finish in the top four, but the targets like Jadon Sancho, Timo Werner and Ben Chilwell would never want or be allowed to leave mid-season.

This means Chelsea would have settle for stop-gap signings, like it has in the past, and block the path to sign top targets in the summer. If the club chooses to avoid the winter window, there is a good chance that Champions League football will elude the club next season, without which Chelsea will not be a preferred destination for these top players. It is a transfer paradox.

The transfer ban has put Chelsea in a precarious position with its youth and transfer, a No Man’s Land between youth and progress. One wrong move could set the club well back in its struggle to return to the top of the football world through long-term planning.

Blessing in disguise, indeed.