Manchester City have paid Chelsea at least £17 million in compensation for Enzo Maresca, but it is the West London club that may end up counting the greater cost. The three statements that accompanied Maresca's move marked another victory for City over Chelsea, both on and off the pitch.
Chelsea's Short-Term Gain
Chelsea will count the £17 million as a success, and they are right to do so. The very fact that Maresca and City both posted statements reflected that Chelsea insisted on it as part of the compensation agreement. However, this looks like a small victory in the context of the war waged by City to defend their interests.
How the Deal Unfolded
Maresca made Chelsea world champions 12 months ago but has now been picked out to maintain City's edge. The Blues approached Maresca about succeeding Pep Guardiola without firm possibilities; he then told Chelsea as contractually obliged. Despite inviting them to offer a new contract, Chelsea believed he had made up his mind and wanted out. Trust was lost, and the situation exploded, leaving Maresca out of a job by January.
Costs Beyond Compensation
As Maresca rejuvenated in the Maldives while taking meetings with AC Milan and City, Chelsea's season fell apart. They hired and fired another manager and finished so low in the Premier League that they will not play any European football next season. This means they will not receive sizable UEFA competition funds. City, meanwhile, have landed one of a shortlist of coaches they thought capable of succeeding Guardiola.
Value for Money
£17 million feels a lot for a manager, but for City it is not a regular occurrence. Guardiola cost nothing, and their last manager payout was in 2013 when they sacked Roberto Mancini. Chelsea recouped less for Maresca than they paid Brighton for Graham Potter (£20 million) and not far off what they paid Potter to sack him (£13 million). Manchester United paid £11 million to hire Ruben Amorim after paying £10.4 million for sacking Erik ten Hag, with a provision of £15.9 million for Amorim's potential sacking.
City do not expect to pay Maresca out. If £17 million and a public statement land them the coach they want, it is a price worth paying. Considering Maresca's influence and that players are valued at up to £116 million, it does not feel terrible value. City have paid out for Maresca, but if he lives up to expectations, it will be Chelsea who end up counting the cost of an explosive and expensive episode.
