Chelsea's ownership crisis deepens with rifts between Clearlake Capital and Todd Boehly over transfers, Pochettino's firing, and stadium delays.
 |
| The relationship between Todd Boehly and the Clearlake Consortium has broken down with both parties seeking full ownership options, how will this end? (Photo credit: The Athletic) |
The crisis at Chelsea is finally out in the open: a little more than two years after their £2.3 billion ($3.02 billion) takeover of the club from sanctioned Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, majority shareholder Clearlake Capital’s relationship to co-owner Todd Boehly is in tatters.
Although there have been rumblings of discontent behind the scenes for some time, Boehly and Clearlake co-founder Behdad Eghbali, who has been the most visible and actively involved member of Chelsea's ownership consortium over the past 18 months, have consistently denied specific accusations of a breakdown in their relationship until now.
There are three key factors believed to be behind the rift between the two parties: a cultural difference in how the club should operate and negotiate transfers, the decision to fire Mauricio Pochettino at the end of last season, and a lack of progress in the stadium project.
Since their massive takeover of the club, the consortium has committed more than £1.2 billion in transfer fees and generated more than £500 million in sales. The consortium has bought and sold players at a pace and scale that has been both divisive and concerning.
Bobby has been the focus of transfers and negotiations, leading to social media mockery and amusing memes. However, he hasn't participated in any transfers since January of last year; he resigned from this role without informing the public.
Considering their league position and investment, the recruitment strategy has largely failed, indicating a significant rift in their relationship. The new players haven't proven their worth, and the club's supporters are in need of clarification.
But while Boehly stepped back, Eghbali remained very active on the sporting side in that January window, flying to Turkey with Winstanley to pitch Ukrainian club Shakhtar Donetsk on a deal to sign their winger Mykhailo Mudryk for an initial €70 million with a further €30 million potentially due in performance-related add-ons.
On the deadline day of that same window, the two men led the negotiations that resulted in Chelsea paying a British-record fee of €120 million to Benfica of Portugal for midfielder Enzo Fernandez, a negotiation that tested their resolve until they secured their man.
Boehly was largely accused of overseeing failed transfers, with many of his signings now out of the club or frozen out—Khalidou Koulibaly, Pierre Emerick Aubameyang, and Raheem Sterling, who have joined Arsenal on loan, are some of these players.
Boehly missed out on Sterling's loan move to Arsenal, and given the quality of the Gunners' squad and their direct competition for Champions League qualification, the American has publicly criticized Chelsea's decision to heavily subsidize Sterling's salary there.
That first window is remembered with regret rather than recrimination by Clearlake, conducted as it was in the chaotic first weeks after an accelerated takeover and driven partly at the direction of Thomas Tuchel, a head coach with whom all of the owners quickly agreed they simply could not work.
Pochettino was a very different case. Boehly privately invited the Argentine for dinner before their season's final league game against Bournemouth. Despite rumors of discontent, Boehly publicly endorsed Pochettino after the dinner, stating that "good things take time."
Pochettino and Chelsea announced their mutual decision to part ways the following Tuesday after six hours of talks over two days at Cobham with Winstanley, Stewart, and Eghbali, with Boehly dialing in from the United States.
People familiar with Boehly's thinking say he wanted Chelsea to keep Pochettino, but he didn't formally veto when they reached a mutual decision. According to these sources, he views Eghbali as impulsive and the driving force behind the decision to move on, a charge that Clearlake vehemently refutes.
Clearlake responded by saying that Boehly lacked transparency. They accused the Americans of verbally agreeing to the termination of Pochettino’s contract before going public to endorse the Argentine; this deepened the trust issues between the two parties.
On their arrival at Chelsea in 2022, Boehly and Clearlake signaled that they expected to communicate a stadium plan by the end of that calendar year. Boehly and Clearlake extended their self-imposed deadline to the summer of 2023, and then again to some time in 2024.
More than two years into their ownership, the crucial question of what to do with Stamford Bridge—and potentially the tantalizing former Earls Court Exhibition Centre site less than a mile away—remains unanswered. Both parties blamed each other for delays, entrenching the conflict.
The two parties have refused to address the general public about the current situation. However, after publicly exploring full ownership options, everyone now understands the irreparable damage, and the loyal fans are hopeful about the impact of the ongoing madness on the squad.
Where does Enzo Maresca stand among all of these? On whose side is he? How will the team approach their upcoming games, knowing that the club hierarchy is at each other's throats? Chelsea fans will miss Abramovich in times like this, but they must also understand that beneficial things come to an end too.
Reports from The Athletic and Bloomberg were incorporated in this article.
