Chelsea Women’s rivals face a stark choice: spend – or be left behind
During the January transfer window Chelsea Women made headlines with their spending, although that is nothing new for the club.
Their male counterparts hold the record for the most spent in one winter window, having splashed out £275m in 2023.
Chelsea Women broke the $1m transfer fee glass ceiling in the women’s game when they bought Naomi Girma from San Diego Wave for £900,000 last week.
That was not the end of their shopping spree. They then snapped up Lioness Keira Walsh from Barcelona in another big deal reported to be worth up to £800,000.
Not everyone is behind Chelsea spending, however. Rival Women’s Super League manager Marc Skinner, of Manchester United, said the spree “skews the market”.
He added: “It’s fantastic for the women’s game, the growth and development in such a short period. But we may see fallouts and how they affect everybody else.”
Frustration has been felt across the WSL by teams who lack Chelsea’s level of budget.
Brian Sorensen, Everton’s boss, said: “They spend [on one player] what we spend on our squad an entire year. They are No1 in this country, and they are that for a reason.
“If they have an injury to a good centre-back, they just buy the best one. That shows commitment to the women’s team, so fair play. But it will probably be tricky if you’re talking about the longer term, making it sustainable, and all that.”
Chelsea spending ‘a lesson for all other clubs’
Chelsea already dominated the league and other domestic competitions. In the last decade they have won seven WSL titles and five FA Cup trophies.
They have been progressive off the pitch with their manager selection, insisting on replacing Emma Hayes with another woman, Sonia Bompastor.
Trailblazer Hayes, meanwhile, was invested in research on the impact on players of a woman’s menstrual cycle.
Last January, they broke the British transfer record with the signing of Mayra Ramirez in a deal worth over £400,000. So why is it only becoming an issue for other teams now?
Ex-England striker Ellen White said: “Every team in the WSL needs to think, ‘Do we want to be on this train or not?’. Otherwise, Chelsea will be running away with this for years.”
Former England captain Steph Houghton called the signing of Girma for a women’s world record fee “a lesson for all the other clubs” to start investing more.
Other WSL teams have the potential to compete with Chelsea off the pitch, notably Arsenal, who have cashed in by repeatedly selling out of women’s games at Emirates Stadium.
How WSL rivals have kept their powder dry
Their spending has been far more modest, however. Arsenal’s most expensive transfer so far is the 2023 signing of Kyra Cooney-Cross from Hammarby for £208,000.
Arsenal were the trailblazers in the early 2000s and remain the only English side to win the Champions League but have not won the WSL since 2018-19.
Manchester United only formed their women’s team in 2018 but have since won the second tier and FA Cup, and were only two points behind Chelsea in 2022-23.
But minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe has shown little interest in the women’s side, who have lost captain Katie Zelem and England stars Mary Earps and Alessia Russo in 18 months.
Manchester City previously held the British transfer record for the July 2023 signing of Jill Roord for £300,000 but – in contrast to their men’s side – have not spent big since.
City have the financial resources to rival Chelsea for the top talent but have seen Lionesses Georgia Stanway, Lucy Bronze, and Walsh leave since 2022.
Bronze and Walsh won successive Champions Leagues with Barcelona but, in the hope of repeating the feat with an English club, signed for Chelsea.
Their domestic dominance, meanwhile, shows no signs of slowing: seven points clear in the WSL, they seem very likely to win a sixth title in a row.
That success is a direct result of the money Chelsea have invested in talent. If their rivals keep choosing not to follow suit, the on-field trend will surely also continue.