What Champions League failure means for 'broken club' Chelsea

Chelsea may have won the football lottery twice but, this time, the return on investment under owners Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital is being questioned. Chants of "we don't care about Clearlake, they don't care about us, all we care about is Chelsea FC" are increasingly becoming the anthem of a turbulent season. There have also been previous chants of "Roman Abramovich" but those recollections are rose-tinted, particularly towards the end of the Russian oligarch's reign, where Chelsea were widely regarded as a cup team and had lagged behind their rivals in terms of revenues. The £490.9m turnover last season was Chelsea 's second highest on record but still lagged well behind their rivals in the so-called 'big six'. That gap needs to be bridged as debt grows within the parent company. Inside Chelsea they say debt is part of a highly-structured investment approach, common in elite sport, and there is a long-term plan for sustainability. Still, Chelsea spent the most on agents' fees and the third most on both transfers and wages last season, despite a reduction in overall spending following the unprecedented outlay in the early BlueCo years. The cost remains evident through a league-high 'amortisation' bill - where they have spread transfer fees across the length of a contract up to five years - of more than £200m. What has been squandered by this ownership is the strong Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) position they inherited. …