Chelsea’s decision makers have got themselves into quite the pickle in terms of their managers in the last two years.
After sacking Thomas Tuchel and his staff, they brought Graham Potter and all his cronies to the club. When they all got the boot just months later, it cost an eye watering amount to pay them all off. One can understand why, then, they were more cautious with Mauricio Pochettino. He was given only a two year deal – and quite rightly so, it seems, as he was sacked just a year in.
But that short deal created it’s own problems towards the end. With less than a season under his belt, the Argentine was constantly getting questions about his future as the clock ticked down. There’s no sense of stability and security when a boss is just a year from free agency, and a two year deal gives you less than a year before the questions start coming.
Taking that on board, it seems like those in charge are set to swing wildly the other way again. Reports about incoming coach Enzo Maresca’s deal claim it’s going to be a mind boggling 5 years. That seems crazy – that’s more than enough to create stability, and it’s not even like Maresca has a huge amount of leverage to demand that.
When is a long contract not a long contract?
But Nick Purewal’s report for the Evening Standard today reveals there’s a fugazi element to it all anyway – he notes there will be “prudent break clauses” built in.
A five year contract that can be broken before five years are up is not really a five year contract. It seems this is just a way of giving him the authority of a longer deal, without giving him the payout when they inevitably panic and get rid of him in 12 months.
