Chelsea players gather to celebrate at Turf Moor, (c) Chelsea Twitter.

Chelsea must sell two players in order to land Declan Rice in January

Chelsea already have an inflated roster and must sell to be able to lodge their primary target, and also to be safe of FFP ramifications.

Chelsea had a productive summer as they managed to sign no less than seven players for their first team. Edouard Mendy, Ben Chilwell, Thiago Silva, Kai Havertz, Timo Werner and Hakim Ziyech have already gotten off to a flying start for Frank Lampard’s side, whereas Malang Sarr is also now on loan at Porto.

Despite spending significantly on a massive revamp, the Blues were unable to land one of their most prioritized targets in Declan Rice. The former academy product has a contract at West Ham until June 2024, but despite a long commitment, the Blues have not cooled down interest and will have a bout at his signing in January.

The Athletic has now claimed that the west Londoners are planning on getting rid of two players in order to make room for the England international. While the names of the players which may be shipped out remain unknown, it is clear that N’Golo Kante isn’t one of them and will continue to have an integral role at the Stamford Bridge.

Rice is more likely than not going to employed as a central defender, so Antonio Rudiger could well be among those who the Blues are looking to sell. The central defender does not have Lampard’s trust and is yet to feature this season in the Premier League. Tottenham have shown interest in him, but the club may not sell him to a direct rival.

While it is understandable that the club would want to make room in the team to accommodate a player who is likely to be a regular, it is imperative that they sell players for a significant price rather than selling them just to reduce the size of the roster. With perhaps the highest spending in Europe, Chelsea may once again come under the Financial Fair Play scanner.

Which two players would you sell from the Chelsea squad in order to be free from financial sanctions from another potentially expensive signing?