COMMENT: Will it work? Indeed, does it work? This multi-club model that Chelsea have just entered into. Does the system actually benefit the principle club involved...?

So Chelsea, or better yet 'BlueCo', have their first official club partner. Strasbourg, much to the concern of their fans and supporter groups, are now the first member of this new club network. A network which is drawing inspiration, as Todd Boehly and Bedad Eghbali have stated, from City Football Group (CFG) - the umbrella company of Manchester City.

But for Chelsea's co-owners, the question begs: what is the actual benefit to City from CFG's multi-club scheme? For this column, it's difficult to raise any type of positives. Indeed, given the attitude of the decision-makers inside the Treble winners, do City even regard themselves as part of such a network?

A look through City's outstanding squad and there's next to no player who have come through the network. The talent has either been brought in from outside, or come through City's academy system - and without spending any time away at Troyes, Lommel or Girona. Indeed, when it comes to the very best of their academy talent, City boss Pep Guardiola prefers to send such players elsewhere. Just consider James McAtee's time at Sheffield United last season or Liam Delap's loan with Preston. If the network was built primarily for the benefit of City's best youngsters, clearly Pep and Txiki Begiristain have other ideas. Even this week, we now have news of Cole Palmer potentially being loaned out next season. But not to Girona in the LaLiga. Instead, it's to Germany and potentially RB Leipzig. Again, what is the actual purpose of this network?

Which needs to be the question for BlueCo. Or better yet for the fans of both Chelsea and Strasbourg. In the French club's case, Marc Keller, Strasbourg's charismatic president, is already on the record: the Alsatians will not be a defacto Chelsea reserve team.

And the former West Ham midfielder went further, lifting the lid on BlueCo's plans.

"We have the same shareholder, but we will be sister clubs with separate management," Keller told L'Equipe in an exhaustive ninety minute interview just hours after overseeing the deal's completion. "There are several types of timeshare, which is a growing phenomenon, with 8 L1 clubs having foreign investors. We see that Red Bull with Leipzig and Salzburg is doing a good job. Others have chosen to aggregate around ten clubs, this is not BlueCo's model."

So Keller, from his side of the table, has insisted Chelsea won't be able to park unwanted players at their new French partners. And from BlueCo's side, they've let it be known matching the CFG model of owning 12 football clubs around the world is unlikely. So how does this actually benefit Chelsea?

In terms of choice, we must say Boehly has done well - that is, if he was a stand alone investor. Strasbourg have been right through the wringer these past 12 years - and come out the other side absolutely glowing. And it's down in no small way to Keller. The former Strasbourg player - with a team of local investors - took the club out of bankruptcy in 2011 and effectively started again from the foot of France's football pyramid. With local investors and passionate, local support, they played their way up the leagues to reach Ligue 1 in 2017 - where they've been ever since. Significantly, it's been a journey that has brought the club and the local community closer together.

There's a special connection between the fans and Strasbourg. A real source of pride. The sort of relationship that only comes from two parties that have been through hell together - and come out the other side. So there shouldn't be a surprise, no matter the assurances of Keller, of a backlash from the local support.

Gregory Walter, the vice-president of Strasbourg's 'federation of supporters', warned Boehly and co last month: "if a shareholder were to enter the capital of Racing by being a shareholder of other clubs, we will clearly enter into opposition. It is not worth selling the wonderful atmosphere of La Meinau to this shareholder, because it is likely to change quite quickly."

They don't want Strasbourg 'Americanised'. They don't want to be a Chelsea satellite. After buying season tickets to support their club since it's enforced amateur days over a decade ago, it's easy to understand Walter's perspective. And if Keller is true to his word, that Strasbourg will not be a babysitter for Chelsea's youth teamers, then again the question remains: what is the point of it all?

Asked directly about taking on Chelsea players next season, Keller insisted, "that's not the plan," before detailing how they expect an increased transfer budget to sign players to Strasbourg's requirements - along with potentially handing new deals to their own most wanted.

"We will be more competitive in the transfer window, more active also because we have to renew the squad. With BlueCo, we want to keep experienced players."

That's on the pitch. Off it, Keller also sought to assure Walter and the members of the fans federation. The club's president insisting the "family model" of ownership had been exhausted, though also insisting the values built over these past 12 years would not be discarded.

"Our family model was at its maximum given this environment," stated Keller. "We had to think about an evolution to go a little higher, while allowing the club to progress on its base of values.

"BlueCo's desire is to provide new means to reinforce the ambition of a project that works. They want to help us grow, they believe in our project and we think they can bring us something."

Like with Manchester City and CFG, for this column, the benefit to Chelsea of BlueCo's multi-club plans appear negligible. But maybe it's all in the packaging? Maybe this is all being sold the wrong way?

The reality is that these multi-club networks other little benefit to the principle club. Particularly clubs of the aspirations of City and Chelsea. They work on such a higher plane to their 'partners' that a development path to lead a player from Montevideo to Melbourne to Troyes and finally to City is the stuff of fantasy calcio. It just isn't going to happen.

Call us cynical, but these networks have nothing to do with football. It's all about investment and money making. The multi-club model is there to benefit the shareholders. Not City's fans. Nor Chelsea's. They'll lean on their name, sure, to help in negotiations. But in the end the system offers no benefit to the principle club involved.