Chelsea’s Sale of Christian Pulisic: A Costly Todd Boehly Mistake?

Christian Pulisic’s departure from Chelsea, now proving to be a monumental loss, casts a spotlight on a significant misstep by the club’s ownership under Todd Boehly. His sale to AC Milan, for a fee substantially lower than his original purchase price, continues to raise eyebrows as the American star flourishes in Italy. But how did Chelsea arrive at this decision, and could the club have avoided this costly blunder?

Pulisic’s Value to Chelsea

Signed for £58 million from Borussia Dortmund in 2018, Pulisic was expected to light up Stamford Bridge with his flair and goal-scoring ability. His first season was promising, with the winger netting 11 goals across all competitions. However, despite his undeniable talent, the American never replicated that tally in subsequent seasons. Injuries, managerial changes, and inconsistent performances saw him fall down the pecking order at Chelsea.

By the time Boehly and Clearlake Capital took over in 2022, the decision was seemingly made to part ways with Pulisic, who had just one year left on his contract. He was sold to AC Milan for £20 million, a fee that left many fans questioning the club’s judgment.

Pulisic’s Rebirth in Milan

Since his move to Milan, Pulisic has rejuvenated his career. His debut season saw him rack up 12 goals and 8 assists, quickly establishing himself as a key player for the Rossoneri. This form has carried into his second campaign, where he’s contributed 6 goals in as many games, helping Milan to a strong start in Serie A. As Chelsea continues to struggle for consistent output from their wide players, Pulisic’s form in Italy only underscores the club’s error in letting him go for such a low fee.

In an interview after his move, Pulisic reflected on his decision: “With a year left on my contract, it felt like the right time to move for my career. At the end of the day, this move felt like a no-brainer.”

The winger’s words reflect a player ready for a fresh start, but also raise questions about whether Chelsea truly valued his potential. At a time when his market value was arguably still high, should they have done more to extend his contract or at least secure a higher transfer fee?

Comparisons to Chelsea’s Current Wingers

Pulisic’s post-Chelsea performances also highlight the struggles of his replacements at Stamford Bridge. Despite significant investment in wide players like Mykhaylo Mudryk and Pedro Neto, none have come close to matching Pulisic’s productivity in 2024/25. Even Cole Palmer, who has impressed, lacks the output Pulisic has delivered in Serie A.

While Pulisic’s time at Chelsea may not have been consistently outstanding, his performance in Milan demonstrates that Chelsea may have missed a trick. With a more stable role and consistent playing time, Pulisic has shown that he’s capable of delivering at the highest level.

Did Chelsea Rush the Decision?

From a financial standpoint, the decision to sell Pulisic for a £38 million loss is hard to justify, especially given the fact that players of his calibre don’t often come cheap. However, with just one year left on his contract and little movement on an extension, Chelsea’s hands may have been tied.

Still, Pulisic’s comments suggest that he wasn’t difficult to convince about a move. He explained, “I spoke with the directors, I was also on a call with the coach. You want to get a good feel and feel like you’re wanted. Everyone at the club made me feel like that.”

With Chelsea ready to move on and Pulisic eager for a fresh start, perhaps the sale was inevitable. But with his current success in Italy, it’s hard to shake the feeling that Chelsea acted prematurely and failed to maximise the value of a talented player.

Our View – EPL Index Analysis

From a Chelsea fan’s perspective, the sale of Christian Pulisic has proven to be a glaring misstep by the club’s management. While his performances at Stamford Bridge were inconsistent, selling him for a £38 million loss and seeing him thrive at AC Milan has left many supporters questioning the strategy behind the decision. It’s not just the financial aspect of the deal that stings but also the potential wasted in not getting the best out of a player who clearly had more to offer.

Fans might feel particularly frustrated given the substantial investments made in players like Mykhaylo Mudryk and Pedro Neto, both of whom have struggled to make a similar impact. With Pulisic now shining in Italy, there’s a growing sense that Chelsea rushed into the sale without giving him the right environment to succeed. Injuries and managerial changes played a part, but there’s no denying that Chelsea’s recent history is littered with examples of letting talented players leave too soon, only to see them flourish elsewhere.

Supporters may also question whether Boehly and the current board are too quick to cut their losses. In a team where other wingers are struggling, keeping a player of Pulisic’s calibre, even on reduced wages or a shorter contract extension, could have offered Chelsea greater stability and depth.

Ultimately, Pulisic’s success at Milan serves as a reminder that football is often about timing, and Chelsea’s decision to part ways with him may go down as one of the club’s bigger recent regrets.