This summers Premier League transfer window was the most expensive in league history – four of the five record signings have taken place over the past few months. It would come as no surprise to anybody to learn that all four of these huge transactions were conducted by members of the traditional “Big Six”, exercising their financial dominance to pursue different visions of progress and success.
For Manchester City, re-establishing themselves as the most dominant force in English football is the undoubted priority. Deadline-day signing Enzo Fernández matched the British transfer record and became the first player to command two separate nine-figure fees. Alongside Elliot Anderson and others, he is expected to strengthen a squad entering unfamiliar territory after Pep Guardiola ended his triumphant ten-year reign.
They will also be mindful that failing to win silverware will be costly. City’s €526.20 million spend was the most in the league this summer. While it clearly shows ambition to stay firmly in contention despite significant systematic change, expectations of instant quality and results come alongside huge investment.
Liverpool and Chelsea’s costly acquisitions this summer reflect different ambitions. Both teams are coming off underwhelming, empty-handed seasons, finishing 5th and 10th in the Premier League, respectively. While contending the league title may not be the immediate target for either team, both have spent big to bolster their ranks this summer.
But for these two sides in particular, last season proved that success isn’t as straightforward as simply spending big.
Clubs such as Brentford, Brighton and Aston Villa were amongst the lowest spenders, yet were all able to achieve top half finishes, and in Villa’s case, a spectacular 4th place finish.
The traditional ‘Big Six’ clubs undoubtedly have the most strength in resources to attract big names and proven-elite talent.
However, looking further into recent seasons, cementing a Champions League position, which their fans will unquestionably view as a necessity, has been an object of great inconsistency for three teams in particular: Chelsea, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur.
It begs the question: what factors have influenced these disparities in consistency between the financially dominant ‘Big Six ’?
Managerial turnover
This seems like an obvious place to start. Clubs buy to maximise specific managerial styles and tactical approaches, aiming to build a settled, long-term core. However, this ideal becomes complicated when managers are deemed ineffective in an increasingly low-patience environment that is the Premier League.
Frequent changes in philosophy create a misaligned squad and waste expenditure. Players often struggle to settle and prove their value, falling out of favour with the next manager, who may have a different vision from what the player was originally bought for.
At Manchester United, for example, high spending alongside frequent managerial turnover has created a vicious cycle in which managers struggle to inspire, working with a squad that doesn’t often fit their footballing philosophy. In the winter of the 2024/25 season, the club brought in Ruben Amorim, who enjoyed great success in Portugal by utilising wingbacks with crucial attacking responsibilities.
Not only did the squad Amorim inherited lack natural fits for this integral feature, but he quickly burned bridges with several expensive misfires purchased before his tenure, forming a group infamously known as the ‘bomb squad’. He lasted just over a year before getting the sack, with the lowest win percentage (38%) of any permanent Manchester United manager since Sir Alex Ferguson.
With another €173.20m spent this summer and a poor start to Michael Carrick’s first full season in charge, it feels like Groundhog Day for the Red Devils. The same can be said for Tottenham Hotspur, who sit bottom of the table after investing hugely in a team that has finished 17th in the past two consecutive seasons.
By contrast, a team like Arsenal shows how patience with a manager lets a consistent identity take hold, softening the impact of expensive signings that don’t quite go to plan.
Viktor Gyökeres, for example, was bought for a significant €66.90m fee in the hope that he’d be the poaching, physical focal point Arsenal wanted as a striker. The Swede has fallen short of what many expected, given the heights of his tenure at Sporting CP. Yet, thanks to years of recruiting overwhelmingly versatile talent for Mikel Arteta, Arsenal spread attacking responsibilities and finished the season with the second-most different goalscorers in the Premier League (18).
Spending sustainability
Underperformance substantially decreases a player’s resale value. Combine this with huge wages, and players become increasingly difficult to shift, gradually limiting available expenditure to compete for best-in-class players who demand immense fees.
A closer look at Net Spend shows how much each side has lost in recent years.
Manchester United is perhaps the club feeling the strain on available expenditure the most at present. This stems from over a decade of blockbuster acquisitions leaving on free transfers or for significantly reduced fees, often due to underperformance and wages other teams cannot match.
This summer, for example, Casemiro, initially signed for €70.00m at 30 years old, with little prospective resale value, and he subsequently left on a free transfer to join MLS side Inter Miami. They also failed to offload Marcus Rashford, whose high wages likely complicated a return to Barcelona, who opted to buy the younger, lower-earning Anthony Gordon to fill the left-wing position.
Because of years of unsustainability, United now struggle to compete for talent at the very top of the market. When looking to replace Casemiro this summer, they were completely helpless in their pursuit of Elliot Anderson, unable to match the €135.00m fee that crosstown rivals Manchester City ultimately agreed with Nottingham Forest.
City have displayed a far more effective sales strategy, often selling youth talent at peak value and largely offsetting huge spending on marquee additions.
They have also smartly offloaded fringe players who couldn’t quite make a name for themselves, showing how players’ values can be preserved when the rest of the team is performing. This summer, they sanctioned a huge €87.70m sale of Sávio to Tottenham Hotspur, who had managed only 7 goals and 16 assists in 84 appearances in all competitions for City.
Age and proven experience
In contrast to what the above graphic suggests, Chelsea have improved their ability to sell players recently, and we have begun to see a long-term strategy in motion. Since the BlueCo consortium’s takeover in 2022, they have predominantly spent big on large numbers of young players, either to develop them into first-team regulars or sell them on for a profit. This summer, they made a €41m profit, selling talent they bought in previous seasons, such as Nicolas Jackson, Andrey Santos and Liam Delap, amongst others.
However, despite a system that hedges its bets on exciting young talent, Chelsea have not yet looked like a team capable of challenging for a Premier League title. Alongside the obvious huge turnover of managers, it could be that too many signings for the future have neglected the need to win now.
Of course, world-class talent has undoubtedly come through the door. But for every successful arrival, there have been too many failures, especially at a club expected to challenge for the biggest trophies. Morgan Rogers is a step in the right direction in adding the proven quality they need, but Chelsea must tone down their seemingly unrequited faith in inexperience if they want to be a mainstay in the top four once again.
So what now?
Each club is different, and you have to look at how factors combine to create varying levels of success or failure through the lens of unique circumstances. But what is clear is that success often comes alongside patience and stability, and that years of inconsistency without return on investment come back to bite and limit market capabilities in the present.
It will be interesting to see how Liverpool’s post-Klopp rebuild fares under Andoni Iraola, with underachieving Galáctico signings brought in during the 2024 summer window ultimately contributing to his predecessor Arne Slot’s dismissal at the end of last season. But for United, Spurs, and Chelsea in particular, the quest to build a strong core and identity will remain unattainable unless they place their full trust and patience in their appointments.
