ToToMarshall
Full Member
Only way this all gets worse (and funnier) is if he either directly or indirectly ends up at Liverpool or City and ends up being good
Regardless of the merits of Sancho being frozen out, the owners could be looking at Sancho (an 80mil asset in their eyes) being brought back in as a benefit of sacking ETH.
Absolutely agree. The problem is his mates in the dressing room will stay and play up. Contracts are too big at the club to move people on.Sir Alex Ferguson: "The minute a Manchester United player thinks he's bigger than the manager, he has to go
Simple. Authority needs to be that. Not a negotiable position when someone acts petulant.
Then again refer to previous statement.Absolutely agree. The problem is his mates in the dressing room will stay and play up. Contracts are too big at the club to move people on.
There is another option that you didn't mention - extend his contract, preserve his book value (by dividing the 48m by more years it will go down slower than under the current contract). If you manage to negotiate a wage reduction with him, your yearly loss on him looks even better! #glazernomicsiirc Sancho cost £80m and has been at Utd 2 years now? Player values are subject to annual depreciation whereby the purchase cost is divided by the length of contract. So, if Sancho’s contract is 5 years then his book value will have reduced by (80/5=16x2=) £32m so the owners will have him at £48m. Any less than that = loss and any more than that = profit.
The key factor is his salary, something like £350k a week? That would be £18.2m costs each year for no positive return whatsoever because all he’s produced is embarrassment for your club and bad publicity has a negative value.
If they keep him it costs them (£16m depreciation + £18.2m wages =) £34.2m every year . . the owners love money and the prospect of another 3 years of that must be killing them. Will they hang on to a none performing player for 3 years at a cost of £102.6m or cut their losses by selling him for next to nowt?
I’m guessing that letting him walk on a free must be looking attractive because that would only cost them his book value of £48m which is sooo much better than 3 more years of bad publicity and a total loss of £102.6m.
The middle ground would be a loan with Utd paying a large part of his salary . . but paying even any part of his salary, while he brings no value to your club and his book value diminishes, is worse than paying no part of his salary and getting the bad smell out of the place that waving goodbye would.
The trouble is that Sancho won’t want to go even on a free unless he can find a club that’ll pay him what Utd are paying right now.
I can see that happening because a free transfer means a signing on fee and that combined with a lower salary might meet what he’d have received in salary at Utd.
I must say that, as an innocent bystander, I find the Sancho saga quite fascinating.
I remember all the buzz about him being an amazing prospect, I saw clips on YouTube and he certainly looked the part.
I was looking forward to him playing in the PL because exciting players always add to the occasion.
Then Utd paid a whacking great price for him, put him on a massive salary, and he seemed to just stop running like he’d decided he was above all that getting sweaty lark.
I was shocked by it all, it was something that I just didn’t expect.
Very clear and well written !!iirc Sancho cost £80m and has been at Utd 2 years now? Player values are subject to annual depreciation whereby the purchase cost is divided by the length of contract. So, if Sancho’s contract is 5 years then his book value will have reduced by (80/5=16x2=) £32m so the owners will have him at £48m. Any less than that = loss and any more than that = profit.
The key factor is his salary, something like £350k a week? That would be £18.2m costs each year for no positive return whatsoever because all he’s produced is embarrassment for your club and bad publicity has a negative value.
If they keep him it costs them (£16m depreciation + £18.2m wages =) £34.2m every year . . the owners love money and the prospect of another 3 years of that must be killing them. Will they hang on to a none performing player for 3 years at a cost of £102.6m or cut their losses by selling him for next to nowt?
I’m guessing that letting him walk on a free must be looking attractive because that would only cost them his book value of £48m which is sooo much better than 3 more years of bad publicity and a total loss of £102.6m.
The middle ground would be a loan with Utd paying a large part of his salary . . but paying even any part of his salary, while he brings no value to your club and his book value diminishes, is worse than paying no part of his salary and getting the bad smell out of the place that waving goodbye would.
The trouble is that Sancho won’t want to go even on a free unless he can find a club that’ll pay him what Utd are paying right now.
I can see that happening because a free transfer means a signing on fee and that combined with a lower salary might meet what he’d have received in salary at Utd.
I must say that, as an innocent bystander, I find the Sancho saga quite fascinating.
I remember all the buzz about him being an amazing prospect, I saw clips on YouTube and he certainly looked the part.
I was looking forward to him playing in the PL because exciting players always add to the occasion.
Then Utd paid a whacking great price for him, put him on a massive salary, and he seemed to just stop running like he’d decided he was above all that getting sweaty lark.
I was shocked by it all, it was something that I just didn’t expect.
There is another option that you didn't mention - extend his contract, preserve his book value (by dividing the 48m by more years it will go down slower than under the current contract). If you manage to negotiate a wage reduction with him, your yearly loss on him looks even better! #glazernomics
Sound like solutions we used to do in the 90's & 00's and ended up in memoires....
The great shame is that there’s an absolutely brilliant prospect hiding inside that surly child but as time goes on there’s an ever diminishing prospect of it ever emerging again. Can’t someone call his mother and get her to slap him round the head until his balls drop and he finally starts behaving like a man?
Chances are he was consulted on the issue and agrees on current course of action.Sir Alex Ferguson: "The minute a Manchester United player thinks he's bigger than the manager, he has to go
Simple. Authority needs to be that. Not a negotiable position when someone acts petulant.
Sound like solutions we used to do in the 90's & 00's and ended up in memoires.
Might have thrown something at himVery true, SAF wouldn’ve slapped him purple eh?
iirc Sancho cost £80m and has been at Utd 2 years now? Player values are subject to annual depreciation whereby the purchase cost is divided by the length of contract. So, if Sancho’s contract is 5 years then his book value will have reduced by (80/5=16x2=) £32m so the owners will have him at £48m. Any less than that = loss and any more than that = profit.
The key factor is his salary, something like £350k a week? That would be £18.2m costs each year for no positive return whatsoever because all he’s produced is embarrassment for your club and bad publicity has a negative value.
If they keep him it costs them (£16m depreciation + £18.2m wages =) £34.2m every year . . the owners love money and the prospect of another 3 years of that must be killing them. Will they hang on to a none performing player for 3 years at a cost of £102.6m or cut their losses by selling him for next to nowt?
I’m guessing that letting him walk on a free must be looking attractive because that would only cost them his book value of £48m which is sooo much better than 3 more years of bad publicity and a total loss of £102.6m.
The middle ground would be a loan with Utd paying a large part of his salary . . but paying even any part of his salary, while he brings no value to your club and his book value diminishes, is worse than paying no part of his salary and getting the bad smell out of the place that waving goodbye would.
The trouble is that Sancho won’t want to go even on a free unless he can find a club that’ll pay him what Utd are paying right now.
I can see that happening because a free transfer means a signing on fee and that combined with a lower salary might meet what he’d have received in salary at Utd.
I must say that, as an innocent bystander, I find the Sancho saga quite fascinating.
I remember all the buzz about him being an amazing prospect, I saw clips on YouTube and he certainly looked the part.
I was looking forward to him playing in the PL because exciting players always add to the occasion.
Then Utd paid a whacking great price for him, put him on a massive salary, and he seemed to just stop running like he’d decided he was above all that getting sweaty lark.
I was shocked by it all, it was something that I just didn’t expect.
Agree with your maths, but depreciation and book value is all FFP related. In the real world, The Glazers will see that we spend 80mil on player, that the club is paying 350k for that the manager has frozen out.
It would seem that ETHs decision to force him out has backfired. If reports are true, other players in the squad disagree with it and from a financial perspective, it is a disaster.
I could understand that perspective if he’d been any good when played, but even when he’s been in the squad he’s rarely played, and he’s been outstandingly meh when he has. So having him training with the kiddies is no loss whatsoever to TH and it gets his bad example away from the senior players.
PS. And while the Glazers don’t understand football they certainly do understand money and the value of cutting losses / not throwing good money after bad. Just look at the way they’re selling off underperforming shopping malls at a massive loss and investing in sports businesses (Indian professional cricket etc.).
I agree, he has been average, at best. But average is still better than some of the dross that are playing for United right now. Sancho came on v Wolves, played well and set up the goal, iirc.
My opinion, even though Sancho has been given a lot of opportunities, it was counter productive to call him out post the Arsenal loss. I know people will say ETH was only answering a question, but he wasnt attached to a polygraph. You dodge the question and move on. Deal with your sh1t behind closed doors.
We dont know what other players think about this, but from what we are hearing in the media, others thought Sancho was treated unfairly, which adds another seed of doubt into the players heads. Another reason to dislike or doubt this manager.
Then, as you say, there is the money aspect. Yes, it was no secret that Sancho was an underperforming, overpaid lazy so and so, but this situation has made him even more difficult to shift. If Ten Hag wanted him out, you manage him out. Find a suiter who may be willing to take his wages on for a low transfer fee, giving ETH some money to play with in January. Instead, the best we can hope for now is a loan where MUFC pay most, if not all of the salary.
For me, this is a massive self-own from ETH. All on the back of him making a comment in a presser because he was frustrated with the result.
You're comparing Sancho's best with the rest's worst. Let's not forget Sancho lost his place in the squad (and then in the bench) to those very same guys.
The rest of the comments have been discussed ad infinitum/ad nauseam so we're not getting back on that. Basing arguments about "what we're hearing from the media" is weak though.
I agree, he has been average, at best. But average is still better than some of the dross that are playing for United right now. Sancho came on v Wolves, played well and set up the goal, iirc.
My opinion, even though Sancho has been given a lot of opportunities, it was counter productive to call him out post the Arsenal loss. I know people will say ETH was only answering a question, but he wasnt attached to a polygraph. You dodge the question and move on. Deal with your sh1t behind closed doors.
We dont know what other players think about this, but from what we are hearing in the media, others thought Sancho was treated unfairly, which adds another seed of doubt into the players heads. Another reason to dislike or doubt this manager.
Then, as you say, there is the money aspect. Yes, it was no secret that Sancho was an underperforming, overpaid lazy so and so, but this situation has made him even more difficult to shift. If Ten Hag wanted him out, you manage him out. Find a suiter who may be willing to take his wages on for a low transfer fee, giving ETH some money to play with in January. Instead, the best we can hope for now is a loan where MUFC pay most, if not all of the salary.
For me, this is a massive self-own from ETH. All on the back of him making a comment in a presser because he was frustrated with the result.
That's your view but IMO this isn't on TH mate.
He answered a question honestly, he didn't embelish his response by slagging sancho off, he just said that he wasn't training well enough to make the first team squad.
Who judges whether a player is training well enough? The first team coach does that and, as TH is the first team coach when he says that a player isn't training well enough for selection for the match day squad then that's how it is and there's no argument.
Sancho could've responded by getting his head down and working his socks off, like an adult would, but he threw a childish hissy fit and picked a fight with TH by, in effect, calling him a liar on social media.
Do you really think that sancho was training well and that TH is some kind of evil a vindictive monster who just decided to pick on poor little sancho and drop him from the match day squad for shits and giggles then lie about his reasoning afterwards?
No, of course not.
Sancho has form for being an entitled lazy arse. I was hoping that he'd grow out of it and bring a bit of excitement to the PL but he's gone backwards.
I recon that he's just not got sufficient mental capacity to be in employment anywhere.
As Tom Jones famously said "it's not unusual". There are plenty of exanmples of brilliantly skilled players who had short careers because they had shit for brains.
Look at that Balotelli fella they had at city and then iirc at the dippers, he was a superb footballer, he could do things with a ball that truly great footballers couldn't even do in their dreams but he wasn't worth employing because he had the brains of a child in nursery . Look at Paul Gasgoine, Gazza was another superbly talented footballer but wasn't playing with a full deck of cards.
It's a shame to see talent wasted but a player like sancho who doesn't have a functioning brain is no different to a player with a brilliant footballing mind but legs that don't work . . they need fitness, talent and intelligence to be successful for any length of time and sancho has the kind of mental fortitude that would've got him sacked from macdonalds by now if his talent hadn't taken him on a path to undeserved riches.
Ten Hags fault? Well only if he stole sancho's brains and stuffed a wet sock in the hole they used to occupy.
Doesn't have the mentality. Doesn't have the physicality. Doesn't have the punctuality.
Sancho is a man child. Very thin skinned. The response tweet was immature and ill thought out. We know that, so Ten Hag should too.
Not every player is going to respond well to what could be perceived as public criticism. A manager should know this.
We all know the story of the United players being told by Fergie to attend a gala in club suit and tie. Cantona turn up in a Nike trackie. The players thought he was in for a bollocking but Fergies says "let Eric be Eric". Now, Sancho is no Cantona, clearly, but good managers know how to manage individuals.
It had been reported in the Athletic that Sancho felt he was being singled out by Ten Hag. Also, that it was felt ETH was playing favorites. Ten Hag leaves the disagreement open post the Friday training ground argument, then airs it publicly post a defeat Sunday.
Fergie would always say that you deal with these things behind closed doors. Ten Hag took the dispute into the public arena. If stories are true, it has pissed off other players.
Plus, what gets me, Sancho gets grilled for not putting it in in training. How about the countless number of players that are not putting it in on the field? Where is the consistency there?
Sancho is a man child. Very thin skinned. The response tweet was immature and ill thought out. We know that, so Ten Hag should too.
Not every player is going to respond well to what could be perceived as public criticism. A manager should know this.
We all know the story of the United players being told by Fergie to attend a gala in club suit and tie. Cantona turn up in a Nike trackie. The players thought he was in for a bollocking but Fergies says "let Eric be Eric". Now, Sancho is no Cantona, clearly, but good managers know how to manage individuals.
It had been reported in the Athletic that Sancho felt he was being singled out by Ten Hag. Also, that it was felt ETH was playing favorites. Ten Hag leaves the disagreement open post the Friday training ground argument, then airs it publicly post a defeat Sunday.
Fergie would always say that you deal with these things behind closed doors. Ten Hag took the dispute into the public arena. If stories are true, it has pissed off other players.
Plus, what gets me, Sancho gets grilled for not putting it in in training. How about the countless number of players that are not putting it in on the field? Where is the consistency there?
He's still very young and could still be a late bloomer, even with his early Dortmund era behind him. Has happened plenty before.Only way this all gets worse (and funnier) is if he either directly or indirectly ends up at Liverpool or City and ends up being good
well then, prepare some extra antidepressants.i have..hahAnd on top of that Alonso really doesn't have any ties to United so far. It is well known that at least Real and Bayern watch him closely and might offer him the job the next time they need a new manager. And obviously Liverpool might do so as well...
Will be a quick one:Can't wait to see the outcome of ETH's one-to-one meeting with Sancho on how to fix things up.
Tend to agree with some of this. Antony is garbage and plays every week. I wonder exactly what he is doing in training. There were suggestions from eTH that some of the young players were giving 100% and couldnt be dropped from the squad, so at what point do they actually get to play?Sancho is a man child. Very thin skinned. The response tweet was immature and ill thought out. We know that, so Ten Hag should too.
Not every player is going to respond well to what could be perceived as public criticism. A manager should know this.
We all know the story of the United players being told by Fergie to attend a gala in club suit and tie. Cantona turn up in a Nike trackie. The players thought he was in for a bollocking but Fergies says "let Eric be Eric". Now, Sancho is no Cantona, clearly, but good managers know how to manage individuals.
It had been reported in the Athletic that Sancho felt he was being singled out by Ten Hag. Also, that it was felt ETH was playing favorites. Ten Hag leaves the disagreement open post the Friday training ground argument, then airs it publicly post a defeat Sunday.
Fergie would always say that you deal with these things behind closed doors. Ten Hag took the dispute into the public arena. If stories are true, it has pissed off other players.
Plus, what gets me, Sancho gets grilled for not putting it in in training. How about the countless number of players that are not putting it in on the field? Where is the consistency there?
Yeah, the biggest issue- larger one than Sancho and the merits of ETH's approach - is the larger 'lack of accountability' senior players have for performances, when young players are (supposedly)making their cases in training. Given how disjointed the midfield was, why aren't we see Mainoo playing at least 30 mins against Fulham, why did Gore get no minutes against Newcastle after relatively impressing in previous cup games.? What about a 10 to put pressure on Bruno, if Mount isn't trusted there. ETH isn't doing well with the existing side, and isn't properly promoting young talent, which should cause serious questions to be raised, and is something his defenders overlook. Hopefully our new investment/sporting directorship have a clear-eyed appreciation of these faults and guve him an ultimatum.Tend to agree with some of this. Antony is garbage and plays every week. I wonder exactly what he is doing in training. There were suggestions from eTH that some of the young players were giving 100% and couldnt be dropped from the squad, so at what point do they actually get to play?
I love your optimism, your Sancho the phoenix rising from the ashes vision but there’s a time when you’ve got to give up and now’s about that time.
Let’s face it, if players aren’t putting in a shift on match day, but Sancho not only can’t get a berth in the match day squad but also can’t get a berth in the full senior squad and is training with the little kiddies, then what do you think that says about sancho?
It says that no matter how shite some players are, Sancho can’t get to wear the jersey because he’s even more shite.
He‘s the rising star equivalent of that svelte girl we all fell in love with at 16 . . . and the next time we saw her she was 35, had a beer gut, vomit breath, a face tattoo and some of that pink hair that the real mingers go for.
He was on the way to being wonderful but he missed the turning and went into a ditch . . what ‘s the betting he ends up with a face tattoo, a beer gut, vomit breath and some mingers pink hair eh?
A compromise needs to happen, pair of stubborn idiots have taken long enough as it is...