Underlines for me (once again) the sometimes bizarre transfer policy at Chelsea. Caught for 26 million, 8 years at the club and 7 times on loan. Why did you even extend your contract? It must have been clear for a long time that he would no longer play a role.
Admittedly, that looks a bit strange with the contract extension(s).
They come about because somehow you still have the hope that the player will explode the next time they are loaned and that there will be some kind of return on investment.
Unfortunately, that didn’t work out for Baba – his loans to the Championship weren’t too bad (he got good playing time), but in the end nobody made an offer for him.
Another prominent Chelsea example would be Marco van Ginkel, who also had three contracts in his eight years at Chelsea, including “countless” loans and injuries. Always hoping that the player will still be something.
Interestingly, the bet can also work… and who would have thought it, another Chelsea player.
Tomas Kalas was also nine years at Chelsea to play just a whopping 180 PL minutes.
After a few loans and extensions, the player was eventually sold to Bristol at a profit. It remains to be seen whether the €3.2 million transfer profit will cushion the salary costs over the years.
Man City currently has such a candidate in Yangel Herrera, where I always wonder when the permanent change will finally come and bam: extension and loan.