John Terry Feels the Allure of Riches, Again

Charlie KleinContributor IJuly 12, 2009

COBHAM, ENGLAND - MAY 27:  John Terry in training during the Chelsea Football Club Training Session held at their Cobham Training Ground on May 27, 2009 in Cobham, England.  (Photo by Christopher Lee/Getty Images)

While the Beatles decry the idea that one cannot buy love, I do not think Mr. Terry finds himself in agreement.

The English press is abuzz with the story emanating from southwest London that John Terry, referred to by many as "Mr. Chelsea", is rumoured to want out after hearing what potential riches could be his should he swap royal blue for sky.

Manchester City are speculated to be offering 250,000 sterling per week to secure the English captain's services.

Terry's concern over the fact that Chelsea have yet to make a major signing this offseason has his eyes darting for an exit, especially one that will pay him in his mind commensurate to his value on the football pitch.
For those not familiar, Terry is currently not below the poverty line bringing in 130,000 pounds per week. And yet this does not seem enough for him. After all, we could have another Latrell Spreewell on our hands here, JT needs to feed his wife and kids, after all!
The football transfer window is always a time to test any player's loyalty to his club and this window in particular has been an exhibition of that. Players like Kaka and Ronaldo leaving the clubs that made them famous for Real Madrid this summer is one example of this.
Those two, however, and to no fault of their own, were not made into standard bearers for their clubs in the way John Terry has been for Chelsea.
Unlike both of those players, Terry has spent his entire career at one club. When one says Chelsea to another football fan the first player that usually comes to mind is John Terry.
The sheer fact that Terry is even considering a move to Manchester City shows how Chelsea has been unable to create an atmosphere that breeds loyalty to the badge. I am sure that many players, including JT, have kissed the badge on their chest, but that gesture is gradually becoming more meaningless by the passing inflated transfer fees and ridiculous contracts being offered to players these days.
It is not hard to understand why Chelsea have had issues with loyalty when their managers change with the seasons and all club actions are subject to the whims of a Russian billionaire.
The fee itself for Terry is exorbitant; especially in comparison to the one paid by Manchester United to sign Rio Ferdinand. The Times of London speculate that the fee for Terry is in the region of 35 million sterling. Manchester United paid six million less for a player that was five years younger than Terry is now, at 28.
Not only that, Ferdinand is regarded as the better player. And yet because City know that they have no chance at signing Rio due to his loyalty to badge over pay packet they are pursuing Terry.
Clubs that exercise loyalty to their managers normally receive the same steadfastness from their players. Three primary examples of this are Manchester United, Arsenal, and Everton. All of those teams have had managers who have been at the employ of their respective clubs for at least five seasons.
Squad turnover, especially at United, has been minimal and has only been used in order to make the team better. Teams who change out their managers on the regular, like Chelsea and Newcastle (bet you did not think I could make a comparison between those two teams!), have experienced little loyalty shown by their own players.
Newcastle is such a mess that I just do not want to go into their own struggles. Chelsea, if they wanted to maintain any of their success, should have done everything possible to retain Guus Hiddink. Their biggest mistake was firing Jose Mourinho, who seemed to be the only manager, aside from the Golden Goose, that could command the loyalty of his players.
Teams like Chelsea come and go like the tides and weather storms. Their two season domination of the Premier League, following the influx of cash from owner Roman Abramovich, feels like a distant memory. Prior to Roman, Chelsea had not won an English league since 1955, the year in which my father was born. They had won more second division titles than first before the year 2005.
So what does no history and little stability lead to? A team that will stand to lose its talent and staying power in the face of teams that have either experienced recent foreign takeovers or by teams that have the history and the stability to outpace them.
After all, footballing fans around England refer to Chelsea as "The Rent Boys".