It was pretty mind boggling to hear that Chelsea were going to appoint a relatively unproven coach after sacking Mauricio Pochettino.
It is even more crazy to hear that they were going to give him a 5 year contract – something that even the very biggest and best managers don’t tend to get.
Now things have gone even a step further, with Kieran Gill of the Daily Mail claiming today that Enzo Maresca will sign a 5 year deal with a club option for an extra year at some point later today.
After all the issues with Mauricio Pochettino, who signed just a two year deal and so inevitably got questions about his future from about the halfway mark of his first season, Chelsea have clearly decided to go hard in the other direction this time.
Chelsea are expected to announce Enzo Maresca as their new head coach on Friday on a five-year contract with the option of a sixth in a significant show of faith from the club's owners.
~ @kierangill_DM pic.twitter.com/dgw2ojWWkA
— Vince™ (@Blue_Footy) May 30, 2024
A fugazi contract for PR reasons
Of course, as Gill revealed in his own article of last week, the whole 5 year contract idea is pretty nonsense in any case because it has break clauses in it. That means it has all the positive appearance of a long deal (faith in the manager, certainty in the project, avoiding awkward questions in press conferences in a year’s time), but without any of the financial implications.
This is a pretty unique situation where Maresca is getting a job far better than he could have hoped for, with very little leverage. While a top coach might push back against the fugazi contract with a break clause, Maresca is just happy to get the offer. Even if it’s effectively a two year deal from his end financially, it’s still a major step up. And in fact, the 5+1 appearance of if reflects well on him, if anything.
Go and look up the odds on Maresca lasting one full year, let alone 6. That tells you the reality of the situation.
Once again, SuperFrank, this is crap “journalism.” Your headline calling it a “6 year” deal is totally undermined by the details of the piece—which clearly show it’s no ordinary “6 year” deal and to call it that is to largely misunderstand the contract. Second, you’ve carelessly thrown Todd Boehly’s picture up with the headline when there is precious little evidence that he had much of anything to do with this deal (as opposed to Egbahli). It’s another in a disappointing pattern from you of pieces that deliberately try to color the news to stir sentiment (or generate clicks) with distortions. You’re doing a disservice to we, the readers, and to the club we love with this divisive (and totally unnecessary) tactic.