Transfer Window Frustration Shows Youth Must Be the Way Forward for Chelsea

So, the summer transfer window was a sobering experience for Chelsea.

From being imperious Premier League champions heading into the post-season break, Jose Mourinho's side have come out of the other end looking alarmingly fragile.

Their slow start to the season has shocked many, with a lack of movement in the transfer market compounding their predicament.

It's still early days in 2015/16, yet looking at Manchester City and the changes they have made to revitalise their squad this summer, Chelsea pale into insignificance.

Indeed, if we're thinking about performance in the transfer market as a whole, the league table is probably a correct indicator for where Chelsea find themselves.

They're way off the pace and have failed in almost every aspect. They tried all summer long and couldn't get John Stones or other high-profile targets, leaving them to suffer as a result.

OLLY GREENWOOD/Getty Images

Meanwhile, Manuel Pellegrini has ticked all the boxes when it comes to to his requirements, spending big to seal each of his targets including Raheem Sterling and Kevin De Bruyne.

Pellegrini's moved players on and been clever with how he's transformed a team that disappointed so much last season.

With everything in place, City have the look of heavyweights. By comparison, Chelsea have dropped a few divisions and look incapable of throwing the big, knockout punches for this season at least.

It needn't have been that way.

Indeed, rather than spending a summer playing transfer cat and mouse, Chelsea's struggles beg the question of why they haven't looked internally before identifying their transfer needs.

Victor Moses became the 31st Chelsea player to leave the club on loan when he joined West Ham United on transfer deadline day. He was followed soon after by new signing Michael Hector, loaned back to Reading where Chelsea had signed him from just hours earlier.

Of those on loan, only a handful have realistic ambitions of making it into the first team at Stamford Bridge.

If Chelsea continue to send them packing across Europe, the big concern is that even those will never make it.

What's disappointing is that Chelsea's inability to sign Stones has meant the club has seemingly panicked with the signing of Papy Djilobodji, a transfer confirmed on the club's website.

Is the 26-year-old the solution to the defensive problems Chelsea have suffered? Does Mourinho really think he can plug the holes that have seen his team concede at least two goals every game this term?

If he was, he wouldn't have arrived on deadline day, that's certain.

It's not about profile or being a star name, it's about ability and having confidence a player can do what is required of him.

Being a relative unknown to the Premier League, what's clear is that Djilobodji isn't going to be competing with John Terry and Gary Cahill for a starting place any time soon.

He's there to make up the numbers, to cover at times when a relatively small squad is stretched over the course of the season.

And if that's the case, if that's what Chelsea really needed this summer, why send Andreas Christensen on loan to Borussia Monchengladbach? Why allow Tomas Kalas to spend another year at Middlesbrough?

Both of those deals were agreed early in pre-season and left Chelsea without any notable cover beyond their first-choice centre-back pairing and Kurt Zouma.

With time running out to bring in a genuine contender such as Stones, Chelsea have been forced into a consolation signing. They had no other alternative given how hasty they had been weeks before.

Djilobodji is taking a squad place that should belong to a youth-team player who can develop his game by training regularly with the first team, featuring at different stages of the season.

We're not talking about an elite talent here, a player who is worthy of blocking the pathway.

Being a squad player like Djilobodji, either Christensen or Kalas would build up the trust of their manager to show they are capable of being a Chelsea player.

Instead they need to hope the manager takes their loan move seriously enough to consider them when they return.

Looking elsewhere in this Chelsea squad, what must Nathan Ake be thinking? And, for that matter, Marco Van Ginkel and Patrick Bamford?

That trio have shown themselves to be capable deputies in this Chelsea team, able to develop their game enough to potentially save the club millions.

Chelsea's midfield has been catastrophic at best in these opening four league matches. It's been open season for their opponents who have carved their way through like a knife in butter.

Can out-of-form players be replaced? No, because Chelsea haven't signed any players capable enough, and those who could fill in are busy playing for other clubs.

Catherine Ivill - AMA/Getty Images

If we rewind back to January when Chelsea needed another attacking midfielder after Mohamed Salah had left on loan and Andre Schurrle was sold to Wolfsburg, Mourinho could have saved himself £26.1 million by not signing Juan Cuadrado.

There was any number of youth-team players, including Lewis Baker, Izzy Brown or Jeremie Boga who would have benefited from the few minutes of playing time Cuadrado endured.

We say endured as the Colombian proved a dreadful investment. Such was his impact before joining Juventus on loan this summer, there's every chance those youth-team players would actually have contributed more, too.

And had they not, what would Chelsea have lost? If Christensen or Kalas failed to make an impression this season, what would be the repercussions? If Bamford couldn't outscore Radamel Falcao as a back-up striker, where would it leave Chelsea?

Well, to start with, the club would have a clear answer as to whether or not their youth policy is working or not.

That shouldn't be the question, though. The perspective is all wrong.

We should be asking what happens if these players actually make it? What if they take on the responsibility and transform the whole dynamic at Chelsea?

It was only 20 minutes, but we got a brief glimpse of that against Crystal Palace on Saturday.

Chelsea were woeful in defeat, but the most encouraging moments from that game came from Kenedy—albeit a summer recruit but a youngster nonetheless—and Ruben Loftus-Cheek.

Where too many senior players had let Mourinho down, it was two youngsters who were looking like Chelsea's best option to get back in the game.

OLLY GREENWOOD/Getty Images

They played with desire; they weren't afraid to impose themselves and their sense of adventure boosted an otherwise lacklustre display.

It would be folly to expect a similar cameo every week, yet it was proof enough that Chelsea need not look elsewhere when attempting to develop this team.

Rather than being rejected all across the continent, Chelsea's best investment would have been to coach these promising youngsters in an effort to nurture their talents.

For too long there has been a tendency to spend their way to success, but look where it has got Chelsea this summer.

They're arguably a weaker team than this time last year, with just Pedro standing out as a smart investment for the present.

After a summer of rejection and disappointment, the time has come for a change of tack, to finally look to the youth-team players as the club's future.

Given how 2015/16 has started, can things really get any worse?

Garry Hayes is Bleacher Report's lead Chelsea correspondent. All quotes were obtained firsthand unless otherwise noted. Follow him on Twitter @garryhayes