Why De Bruyne Needed Love to Thrive

Kevin De Bruyne has become Man City's most important player, his experience at Chelsea was a catalyst for where he is today

In a week where Man City qualified for the Champions League, knocking out PSG in the quarter finals, there has been a lot of talk about Kevin De Bruyne. Not just the Belgian's key contribution over the two legs, but criticism aimed at Chelsea and then coach Jose Mourinho, for letting such a talented player depart. The problem with any kind of comparison like this however is that people try to simplify a situation which has more complexity and context. In this article we will look at why De Bruyne's time with Chelsea gave him the mindset to achieve greatness, and why he needed to be loved to get there.

When City were heavily linked with De Bruyne last summer I admit I thought the numbers suggested were extortionate. It felt excessive for a player who had one very good season. I was dubious as to the impact he could make at a 'big' club. He had excelled at Wolfsburg because of his role in the side. Would he be able to make the same impact in a team of superstars like City had? Well, this season De Bruyne has shown that he has fantastic talent and has become City's most important player, offering the dynamism, speed, energy and goal contribution with assists and goals which City have been lacking for a few years. Yet his journey to this level hasn't been easy. Perhaps that's why he's so good now?

The early move to Chelsea - a blessing or a curse?
“I am patient. It will be very hard to play in the beginning but if you can train with these guys you will get to a better level than in the Belgian league for sure."

These were Kevin De Bruyne’s words when he signed for Chelsea in January 2012. 

De Bruyne was sought as part of Chelsea’s strategy to buy the best young talent across Europe, with the hope of; saving money in the future by buying young, or of selling these players on as assets. De Bruyne’s other Belgian compatriots; Romelu Lukaku and Thibault Courtois were also bought as youngsters, both for considerable money, yet whose value rose after joining (and after going out on loan) Chelsea. 

Courtois is arguably one of the best keepers in the world and Chelsea have benefitted from him (more so last season than this one). Yet in the case of Lukaku and De Bruyne Chelsea cashed in, made their profit on them and let them carry on their careers elsewhere. One can argue cynically that this allowed them to get past FFP rules at that time and used these youngsters simply as part of a business strategy. 

The difficulty for youth at Chelsea

It’s fair to say that these two players never got the chance at Chelsea to really prove their worth. But this is the issue with Chelsea, and has been for a decade. And while these players were bought in for considerable money, they were still viewed as young, inexperienced and ultimately suffered from the constant changes of coaches at the club. 

Chelsea have struggled to develop and give youngsters a considerable opportunity due to the volatility in the management seat. And while Chelsea are a big club and thus expect to win trophies, they approach this with a clear trepidation of trusting youth. It's not like they don't possess talented youngsters  The youth is there, evidenced in recent Youth Cup successes. 

Unfortunately for players like De Bruyne and Lukaku one could argue that their ‘dream’ move to Chelsea simply came too soon. Now there is a clear difficulty for young players at Chelsea to do what young players need to be doing, playing senior football. Look at players like Lewis Baker (a player who has a lot of talent), and Loftus-Cheek (who it seems is now pushing his opportunities in the first team). Compare their time as 16-20 year olds to those of young players in the Belgian league. Belgium is producing a lot of talent, one because they have very good youth programmes and two, its ability to give young players a chance to play senior level football. It’s not rocket science really. One only has to look at Dele Alli to see what can happen when you trust a young player and give him dozens of first team games. Credit to his coaches. It can happen in England.

But compared to Baker and Loftus-Cheek, De Bruyne and Lukaku were given a get out. Yes it cost their respective suitors £18m and £28m, but it gave these players an opportunity to play regularly again. And both have excelled since leaving Chelsea.

A mistake in letting these players leave?

Now, there is a lot of criticism aimed towards Chelsea and Mourinho particularly in respects to these two players and there is a trend of Mourinho perhaps not necessarily valuing or believing in young players, but clearly having an issue with trusting young players. In October 2015 Mourinho criticised the defensive work rate, willingness and tactical intelligence of Loftus-Cheek after bringing him off at half time in a game versus Aston Villa. 

You see the problem with Mourinho in this sense is that he expects all his players to perform to the levels he requires and expects, which is fine, but he seems to want his young players being the finished products before he can truly trust them and thus play them. That is the viscous cycle. Some are 'ready', yet many are not. Many need time, patience and support to help their development, and need to play a lot to develop their understanding. 

Other clubs and coaches handle their young players better, understand their needs and shortcomings and give them time to develop and improve. One could argue these aren’t as successful as Chelsea and Mourinho which points to that feeling of the football food chain, where ‘lower’ clubs develop the youngsters into more finished articles, who then are ready and capable of performing for a Mourinho type side. This makes sense. And it makes perfect sense in the cases of De Bruyne and Lukaku. 

I am sure both were happy to be ‘patient’ when they arrived, happy to learn from such esteemed and successful pro’s like Chelsea had. Training would have been an education I’m sure. However, talented young players need to play. And I’m not always sure the loan strategy works for these players. It’s as it says a 'temporary' thing and I think certain players sometimes need to cut ties between a club, mentally detach themselves and leave that club, and often the negative experiences behind them. It’s clearly worked for De Bruyne and Lukaku. 

The problem I have with these players is that fans and media make out that Mourinho made a huge error in letting them go. That he was a fool and Chelsea are suffering from letting these players leave. The truth is that Mourinho was not going to revolve his side around De Bruyne or Lukaku. And this is what they required. Everton and Wolfsberg embraced the talents of their expensive acquisitions, made them key parts of their team, revolved the team around them. And the players have become top players because of it. There is no way in mind that they would be the players they are today had they stayed at Chelsea. 

Mourinho wasn’t a fool for letting him go, he actually helped the players careers. Perhaps he didn’t treat them with love and care while at Chelsea, perhaps he let them leave because he didn’t find them of value for Chelsea and his plans. Rumours were that De Bruyne could not cope with the pressure of fighting for his place. But ultimately these players left to progress in their career and that’s what’s happened. 

Growing up and maturing

Sometimes you need to move to mature and grow up. As De Bruyne says in an interview after joining Man City. “You can’t compare with me two years ago at Chelsea,” De Bruyne said. “It’s a different situation and I am a completely different person than I was then.

“I was nineteen when I signed and then worked with three managers and just didn’t play that much. I was probably a bit eager to play all the time at Chelsea and maybe should have taken it a little bit more slowly. I just needed to go so that things could be better for me personally.” 

And we bring up that word again, mindset. We often judge a players performance and make a snap judgement making a comment like “He’s useless”. It’s easy to judge a good performance or bad performance but a good and bad player? Good performances are most often built on confidence, a players mentality, happiness, self-belief, sense of value/importance to the team, how the coach views him. 

De Bryune didn’t feel valued, important or particularly wanted at Chelsea. A move to Wolfsberg brought a starring role in the team, a style of football playing towards his strengths, performances which made him one of the best in Europe. If Mourinho hadn’t let him leave would it have happened? No. And what if De Bruyne had moved to a different club or played under a different coach? Would he have made the impact we saw in Germany? Perhaps not. 

Those words “opportunity” and “luck” once again determine the development of the player. Remember when Kagawa moved to United? The team didn’t suit him, didn’t use him like he had been at Dortmund. Football is not like FIFA, players have feelings, emotions and can be very vulnerable. Self-belief can be a fragile thing. 

De Bruyne’s career pathway has seen up’s and down’s, times of disappointment and frustrations which can affect short term performance and progression but which could instil a greater mindset and mental toughness for long term development. De Bruyne is proof of this. 

We now see a player at 24 years old who looks one of football’s best talents, he has become Man City’s most important player this season, look at how poor City were when he was out injured. His return coincides with an upturn in performance and results for City, notably getting into the semi-finals of the Champions League. Mourinho has been lambasted for letting De Bruyne go, but he’s not a fool, he let a young player move on in his career and we now see a top quality player. De Bruyne went to Chelsea at the wrong time for him to become a key player there, however the experience may well be what he needed to be one of Europe’s finest.

The Whitehouse Address @The_W_Address