An alternate way for Chelsea to buy Erling Haaland this summer

Chelsea has been pursuing dynamic Dortmund striker Erling Haaland for quite a while now. There may just be a way to get it over the line after numerous reports it’d take an insane amount of money to get the Germans to sit down for negotiations. Signing a world class player for an astronomical fee is always a difficult chore as the selling club wants to maximize the sale of its prized asset. Meanwhile, the buying club wants to minimize the damage in acquiring him. It often leads to a stalemate in the negotiations and ultimately, the deal seldom gets done.

Yet, in the past, the Blues have used a technique that worked brilliantly for them. It also benefitted the sellers, who in that case was the same club in question now, Dortmund. That sale was the transfer of Christian Pulisic a few seasons ago. The technique used saw Chelsea sign the American and loan him back to Dortmund immediately, where he spent the remainder of the campaign. Now, this symbiotic approach may be a way to break the deadlock on Haaland if Chelsea is resigned to acquiring the striker, but determined not to pay the full €150 million-or-so fee that Dortmund is reportedly seeking.

More from Chelsea FC News

• Bournemouth vs Chelsea: 1 Blue Mauricio Pochettino should drop
• Bournemouth vs Chelsea: 3 Blues who must start
• Predicted Chelsea lineup vs Bournemouth: Palmer starts in 4-2-3-1
• Chelsea sporting directors finally reveal why they sign so many young players
• These 3 new signings may never get a game at Chelsea

Pros and cons of Chelsea buying Erling Haaland just to loan him back to Dortmund right away in order to lower the cost of the transfer.

Let’s first explore the positives. For the Bundesliga giants, these most notable include the fact they would get to keep Haaland for an additional season. The young striker is an unbelievable striker and he will keep Dortmund competing in 2021/22. In addition, the structure of the deal could include a forward-funding component by Chelsea of a percentage of the fee and perhaps a player to use as a makeweight in the transaction to reduce the overall cost. The Blues have money, and cash up front can be a huge enticement to the Black and Yellow, who can use those funds to bolster its side for the upcoming season.

The early sale also allows Dortmund to make more money on a Haaland sale than it would after next season, when a release clause can be triggered. It is reported that the release clause in his contract is for €75 million. All those reasons make the early deal a very good one for Dortmund, but what about Chelsea?

For Chelsea, there are also a lot or pros. First, the Blues would secure one of the most promising young strikers in all of world football. It’s an early investment in the future of a phenomenal goal-scorer. Another plus is that forward-funding a portion of the fee and/or player could help keep the cost down for the Blues to a more manageable number.

The cons for Chelsea are obvious as well though. The most obvious drawback is the club does not get the player for a complete season when it has a dearth of top striker options available. Yet, Thomas Tuchel seems to have come to the conclusion that Tammy Abraham and Olivier Giroud are likely to depart. Therefore, Tuchel would not get his No. 1 striker for a whole season. There is risk involved for the Blues therein. Managers can come and go in less than a season, especially in SW6, so Tuchel not having the player he desires right away is not a good thing.

Also on the negative side is the possibility of injury. Haaland’s continued presence in the Dortmund XI will have Chelsea and its fans holding their collective breaths every time the forward is hacked down in a game next season. A debilitating injury (unless a clause is inserted into the deal to cover such an eventuality) could be a complete disaster for Chelsea. Another potential con for the Blues is that should Haaland’s play fall off for whatever reason, they are stuck with the remainder of the bill that notwithstanding. That’s another real risk that has to be factored into the decision for the Blues.

That’s just one brief exploration as to how Chelsea could get its man, albeit later on, and save some investment capital in the process. It is fraught with risk, yet so was the Pulisic deal, and that worked out well for the club. Regardless, it’s an option that the two clubs have used in the past to break an impasse on the fee for a top player. Both won in the process.

What do you think of a deal of this type for Haaland? Let us know in the comments or on Twitter!