Welcome to issue #036 of Contemporary Football, your inside look at how the game really works behind the scenes.
Monday to Friday, you’ll uncover a new perspective on football business, and sometimes a deeper story that sharpens your thinking and gives you an edge in the beautiful game.
If you need support on your football journey, just write me.
Hey everyone, and happy New Year!
Roma fans are dreaming again.
Not because of results alone, but because with Gian Piero Gasperini on the bench, the club finally looks coherent.
And belief always leads to the same question in Rome:
Can we make a big move in January?
Short answer: yes, but only one way.
Long answer below.
The numbers
Roma already spent heavily in the summer.
Transfer spending on permanent deals, buy options and redemptions: ~€63.5m
Transfer income: just under €55m
Net transfer balance: –€8.75m
This matters, because January flexibility often depends on what you already burned in June.
The real problem: squad cost is up
The bigger issue is not transfers.
It’s the cost of the squad.
2024/25 squad cost: €140.1m
2025/26 squad cost: €163.5m
Increase: +16%
And this is before incentives and bonuses.
Some examples:
Leon Bailey, despite arriving on loan, impacts the season by ~€9m
Mile Svilar’s renewal pushed costs further up
Roma did not slim down.
They doubled down.
Ranieri said it clearly
In September, Claudio Ranieri, now senior advisor to the Friedkins (owners), said the quiet part out loud:
“We must stay within the rules.
If we don’t, we risk a red card.
And with a red card, you don’t play the Champions League.”
Translation:
Sporting ambition is allowed.
Financial disobedience is not.
UEFA Fair Play: the real constraint
Roma are still under UEFA monitoring.
The current settlement agreement evaluates:
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
Maximum allowed deviation: –€60m on the Football Earnings Rule.
After minor fines in 2024 and 2025, the message for June 2026 is simple:
break even, or better.
The €90m question
Internally, Roma targeted ~€90m of margin by June 30, 2026.
How?
Champions League qualification
Stronger Serie A finish
Better Europa League run
New, more lucrative shirt sponsor
Player trading
Last summer, capital gains were below €10m.
Next cycle, they need €40m+.
Which means: January is not about buying.
It’s about positioning.
Even if Gasperini doesn’t agree and pushes for Zirkzee and Raspadori.
The key twist: the UEFA clause
Here comes the interesting part.
According to La Repubblica, Roma can:
Pay an additional UEFA penalty
Shift FFP evaluation from a 3-year window to a 4-year window
Push the deadline to 2027
This clause changes everything.
Not because it creates money.
But because it buys time.
So… can Roma move in January?
Yes.
But only under strict conditions:
No permanent transfers
No mandatory buy options before June 30
Limited impact on 2025/26 squad cost
Ownership may tolerate a slight cost increase if it clearly improves Champions League odds.
Anything else would be irresponsible.
Why Zirkzee becomes possible
This is where Joshua Zirkzee fits.
The structure would be:
Loan
Option to buy
Obligation triggered only if Roma qualify for the Champions League
From Manchester United’s perspective, this secures upside.
From Roma’s perspective, it’s a bet on themselves.
Same structure for Raspadori and Atletico Madrid.
And the wages?
Here is the hidden lever.
By summer:
Paulo Dybala’s contract ends
Pellegrini’s situation may change
Bailey and Ferguson could leave if not redeemed
Even bigger assets may be rebalanced
January is about bridging to a reset.
Final thought
Roma are not poor.
They are constrained.
The difference matters.
Zirkzee and Raspadori are not a fantasy.
It’s a financially conditional move, perfectly aligned with UEFA logic.
The transfer market is no longer about buying and selling players.
It has become financial engineering under sporting pressure.
Clubs are now required to strengthen squads while respecting multiple constraints: cash flow, amortisation, wage caps, and regulatory limits.
In this context, giving full control to an “old-style” sporting director, without a strong financial and strategic counterweight, is not bold leadership.
It’s a structural risk.
And structural risks, sooner or later, show up as fines, restrictions, or forced corrections.
See you tomorrow,
Happy to be back!
Federico