A major transfer risk has been raised for Chelsea following the £144m Liverpool drama as the Premier League approves new regulations

An important aspect of this approach is the length of the contract offered to players, a common tactic in North American sports. Contrary to the traditional practice of offering short-term contracts, Chelsea offered seven, eight and nine-year deals to most new players.
This includes Liverpool’s $140m bid to sign Chelsea on an eight-year deal, including Moises Caicedo, who has refused to do so.

Chelsea also have the option to extend Caicedo’s contract by another year, which could make it a nine-year deal. This approach has led to debates on the concept of devaluing football. Depreciation refers to how the value of assets, such as football players, is recorded on the balance sheet.
The transfer fee is usually paid in advance or in installments, but for accounting purposes the cost is spread over the duration of the player’s contract.
By offering longer contracts, Chelsea can spread the transfer fee over a longer period, saving annual costs on the balance sheet. Or at least it was possible until now.

UEFA took action against these business practices following Chelsea’s massive spending spree this summer. Clubs can offer players contracts of five years or more, but the transfer fee can only be repaid in five years.However, this agreement only applies to clubs participating in European competitions. Chelsea finished 12th last season and did not qualify for European football, so they were bound only by the Premier League’s profit and stability rules, which previously had no limits on contract lengths or repayment periods.

However, according to The Athletic, Premier League clubs have now decided to bring their rules in line with UEFA’s. As a result, Chelsea can no longer use this particular strategy. You can offer longer contracts if you want, but you lose the accounting benefits.
Interestingly, Chelsea were one of the clubs that voted in favor of the rule change. The bill was adopted with 15 votes. You need 14 to change it.

Chelsea’s approach to long-term contracts is outside the norm in European football. In the long run, if the transfer strategy succeeds and gives the team the edge, Boehly and Clearlake will be lauded not just for what they did before the gap closed, but as visionary geniuses.

However, should the team underperform, Chelsea may find it difficult to offload under performing players due to long-term contracts that cover the peak of their careers. There are already rumors of disgruntled players asking their agents if they can find a way out, a task made even more difficult by long-term contracts (Mail).Analysis carried out this summer by sports information company Twenty First Group found that Liverpool have the third-longest average remaining contract length among Premier League clubs for their players (2.92 years on average).

These figures include contract extensions for key players such as Alisson Becker, as well as new signings such as Alexis McAllister and Dominik Soboslay. Manchester City came second with an average contract period of 3.12 years and Chelsea came first with an average contract period of 4.59 years. That’s a 76% increase from the league average of 2.61 years.The average contract length is likely to increase further as Chelsea continue to target new signings and try to balance the balance sheet by offloading the squad.