I want to explain the point as succinctly as possible. We have been building a project that isn’t about winning the next PL title, but is about dominating domestically and with that becoming a force in European football and the strongest global brand possible. It is one story if we don’t get Haaland because he stays at Dortmund another year or even if he goes to Real Madrid or Barcelona. It is entirely different if he goes to a domestic rival that literally has just beaten us in a Champions League final. What this does is threaten the project, not the next title. With Tuchel, they have an extremely talented yet ruthless manager that is a perfect match to Roman’s own ruthlessness, as well as money to back any goals. Haaland already is a “face of the Champions League” and will be possibly the superstar in football in the next decade alongside Mbappe (who will probably always have the upper hand for being in a national team that is so talented it will challenge for any World Cup and Euro titles for many cycles to come). Him going to Chelsea is bound to make Chelsea the face of English football, and this goes beyond, I repeat, whether they win the next PL title or retain the next UCL. And whenever Pep decides to leave us, having a rival so well positioned will be even worse for us. That is why I can’t imagine that the people of our club would be so lazy to think “oh, he’s entertaining the possibility of going to another club” and give up on years of work. Unless we were pursuing Mbappe on the side, the news that Haaland could seriously be going to Chelsea HAS to mean we have to fight for this. Spare me the “this isn’t how we work” line: we work for the dominance and there hasn’t been in the last decade one single situation in which one specific signing could downgrade our status and the landscape in English football. That is why I don’t believe we would allow ourselves to miss on him for a domestic rival by being outspent, because of 1) the true cost of having that dominance threatened 2) would allow for a domino effect in the medium and long term. It is one thing to “settle for Kane” in a scenario in which Haaland isn’t available, it’s entirely different if he is. And were Haaland to go to Chelsea, we may well be left with signing Kane as a desperate move and attempt at some relevance, but it would be realistically as significant as signing André Silva instead. It makes me cringe with second hand embarrassment to read people keep referring to Kane as the “English captain” as if that carries any weight globally (it’s even more irrelevant than the English national team itself, with all due respect, my British friends!). Of course, if people want to tell themselves that Kane would score more league goals overall for us than Haaland would for Chelsea in his first year (which would be a similar scenario that happened in the Bundesliga and didn’t stop him from being the star there), or stuff like “Tuchel will be fired three months into next season” or insisting that he plays a “defensive style” or whatever, frankly, hilarious bullshit that Pep better than anyone knows all too well isn’t going to be the case, they can tell themselves that if it’s comforting at all, go ahead by all means. Even add in the “but Raiola” cliches, if needed. And as fans, maybe all we should care about is next year’s titles. But I can’t pretend the horizon wouldn’t look bright with Haaland at Chelsea.
This definitely wasn’t succinct, hehe.
