Is Jadon Sancho really worth the 100 plus million fee?

Status
Not open for further replies.
MikeUpNorth said:
The worth of an asset is determined by what someone is willing to pay.

My house is only worth what someone is willing to pay to for it. I can put my house on the market for £500k, but if I'm only getting offers of £300k, it's stupid for me to continue to claim it's worth half a million. Whether I sell or not is up to me, but that's irrelevant to the value of my house.

If no club is willing to offer 120m for Sancho, then quite simply he isn't worth that much money. Dortmund can refuse to sell, but that doesn't make him worth any more.
Click to expand...
This is the other notion being bandied about as a valid reason why he's not worth what Dortmund asked, completely suspending the fact that, currently, the teams that can afford him - outside of us - are already stacked in the position or have their eyes on other players who are longstanding targets.

Madrid - everyone knows that they have had eyes on Mbappe, a longstanding target since 2018. It's also rumoured/suggested they want Camavinga; collectively, that's a £250m window.
Barcelona - whatever you want to say about their finances, Sancho is not viable for them as they have Messi, Fati and Dembele for the wings.
Chelsea - have just spent a fortune across a number of positions
Liverpool - have Salah and Mane
City - He's not going there because of Pep
Bayern - they don't spend that kind of money.

So this echo chamber that has somehow built up to a crescendo makes no sense - there was a reason why this was seen as the perfect storm for us.

What we're prepared to pay is irrelevant if it's not what the seller wants and has shown that they will gladly walk away from.
 
Fortitude said:
This is the other notion being bandied about as a valid reason why he's not worth what Dortmund asked, completely suspending the fact that, currently, the teams that can afford him - outside of us - are already stacked in the position or have their eyes on other players who are longstanding targets.

Madrid - everyone knows that they have had eyes on Mbappe, a longstanding target since 2018. It's also rumoured/suggested they want Camavinga; collectively, that's a £250m window.
Barcelona - whatever you want to say about their finances, Sancho is not viable for them as they have Messi, Fati and Dembele for the wings.
Chelsea - have just spent a fortune across a number of positions
Liverpool - have Salah and Mane
City - He's not going there because of Pep
Bayern - they don't spend that kind of money.

So this echo chamber that has somehow built up to a crescendo makes no sense - there was a reason why this was seen as the perfect storm for us.

What we're prepared to pay is irrelevant if it's not what the seller wants and has shown that they will gladly walk away from.
Click to expand...
So, in summary, no club was willing to pay 120m for him. His value this window was about 80-90m, which Dortmund turned down. Fair enough, we can all move on with our lives.
 
Fortitude said:
You're being obtuse, but the point still stands.

And it was us who enquired, not the other way round.
Click to expand...
You've said it was 'the perfect storm' for United to sign Sancho this summer. But it could also have been the perfect storm for Dortmund. He might be worth less next summer, depending on covid and form. There is plenty of risk on both sides with such a high stakes transfer. He's not going to stay at Dortmund his whole career - so the question is when is the optimum time to cash in. We'll see.
 
MikeUpNorth said:
You've said it was 'the perfect storm' for United to sign Sancho this summer. But it could also have been the perfect storm for Dortmund. He might be worth less next summer, depending on covid and form. There is plenty of risk on both sides with such a high stakes transfer. He's not going to stay at Dortmund his whole career - so the question is when is the optimum time to cash in. We'll see.
Click to expand...
I think it depends on what optimum means to them. It depends on what they perceive themselves as or what they want to be known as as a club. Standing up to us and making the song and dance they did was important to them. Not dissimilar to what Levy did and resulted in Spurs being left alone since, pretty much. Madrid had to pay them superstar rates in part because they had established themselves as a club that will no longer be bent over for their assets.

In the mid to long-term, even if they take a loss on Sancho (which is far from assured), they've set themselves in good stead to have a strong position at the negotiating stage when the time comes for other top players of theirs to move on. They set a price, buying clubs will take heed or walk away. We've essentially built them up with our stupid actions over the summer. I doubt there's regret on their side because Sancho wasn't sold. Overall, it should result in a net gain even if he now goes for less than he would have.
 
If we have £120 to spend why spend it on one player when we are in great need of players in other areas as well? CB and CDM first and foremost. Especially when we do not have all the money in the world to spend on players right now.

I think we could find three great players (CB, CDM and RW) for like £40 each. Just think that we could have bought Ferran Torres (£23 addons not included) and Thomas Partey (£45) and have £52 for a CB. Instead of buying Sancho for £120.

My point is that we really need to add squad depths instead of putting all the eggs in one basket.

With that said, I think Sancho would be a great long term investment and a great addition for the team. But we do not have the luxury right now.

That is my take on the Sancho situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VeevaVee
Fortitude said:
This is the other notion being bandied about as a valid reason why he's not worth what Dortmund asked, completely suspending the fact that, currently, the teams that can afford him - outside of us - are already stacked in the position or have their eyes on other players who are longstanding targets.

Madrid - everyone knows that they have had eyes on Mbappe, a longstanding target since 2018. It's also rumoured/suggested they want Camavinga; collectively, that's a £250m window.
Barcelona - whatever you want to say about their finances, Sancho is not viable for them as they have Messi, Fati and Dembele for the wings.
Chelsea - have just spent a fortune across a number of positions
Liverpool - have Salah and Mane
City - He's not going there because of Pep
Bayern - they don't spend that kind of money.

So this echo chamber that has somehow built up to a crescendo makes no sense - there was a reason why this was seen as the perfect storm for us.

What we're prepared to pay is irrelevant if it's not what the seller wants and has shown that they will gladly walk away from.
Click to expand...
Pep would have brought him back if he thought he was worth it. Same as the Pogba deal city turned down.
 
Mr PG said:
Pep would have brought him back if he thought he was worth it. Same as the Pogba deal city turned down.
Click to expand...
As far as the press state, there's ill blood between them. Sancho mightn't entertain them even if they came in for him.
 
No player sold for £100m or over has actually been worth the money, so no, I don't think Sancho is worth that amount. Not even Mbappe or Ronaldo have been worth the money their clubs have spent.

What has PSG won with Mbappe that they wouldn't have won without him? Nothing.

What has Juventus won with Ronaldo that they wouldn't have won without him? Nothing.

Both clubs would have won the same things without them, so the investment has not had a tangible impact which you expect from a player of that amount.

I hope clubs are wising up to the fact that spending £100m on a single player is a bad idea. For some reason, clubs have got the idea that the next Messi/Ronaldo will be found so soon. Players of that standard come around rarely, so it is stupid to throw around ridiculous amounts of cash just for the very small chance of unearthing the 'next greatest player ever'. So, Sancho is not worth it.

Dortmund probably don't think he is worth that much either, but buying clubs have been so stupid recently that I am not surprised they asked for so much. Especially when they didn't even want to sell him.
 
I can see more people are starting to question if he's really worth 100m + when stats can be deceiving particular in this Dortmund team and the league he plays well in.
 
Untd55 said:
No player sold for £100m or over has actually been worth the money, so no, I don't think Sancho is worth that amount. Not even Mbappe or Ronaldo have been worth the money their clubs have spent.

What has PSG won with Mbappe that they wouldn't have won without him? Nothing.

What has Juventus won with Ronaldo that they wouldn't have won without him? Nothing.

Both clubs would have won the same things without them, so the investment has not had a tangible impact which you expect from a player of that amount.

I hope clubs are wising up to the fact that spending £100m on a single player is a bad idea. For some reason, clubs have got the idea that the next Messi/Ronaldo will be found so soon. Players of that standard come around rarely, so it is stupid to throw around ridiculous amounts of cash just for the very small chance of unearthing the 'next greatest player ever'. So, Sancho is not worth it.

Dortmund probably don't think he is worth that much either, but buying clubs have been so stupid recently that I am not surprised they asked for so much. Especially when they didn't even want to sell him.
Click to expand...

Agreed they haven't won anything but Mbappe and Ronaldo have been worth their money no doubt.

They bring Mbappe and Ronaldo fans to support the team they are playing for, they bring in enormous commercial income too.
 
Haven't paid too much attention to Sancho/Dortmund's performances so far this season. I know Haaland continues to be class but how has Sancho been?
 
I'm very happy that we didnt spend 120 million for Sancho. He's a very good player and happy to have him, but not for that price. I'm glad United finally had the stones to not cave into unrealistic demands.
 
Untd55 said:
No player sold for £100m or over has actually been worth the money, so no, I don't think Sancho is worth that amount. Not even Mbappe or Ronaldo have been worth the money their clubs have spent.

What has PSG won with Mbappe that they wouldn't have won without him? Nothing.

What has Juventus won with Ronaldo that they wouldn't have won without him? Nothing.

Both clubs would have won the same things without them, so the investment has not had a tangible impact which you expect from a player of that amount.

I hope clubs are wising up to the fact that spending £100m on a single player is a bad idea. For some reason, clubs have got the idea that the next Messi/Ronaldo will be found so soon. Players of that standard come around rarely, so it is stupid to throw around ridiculous amounts of cash just for the very small chance of unearthing the 'next greatest player ever'. So, Sancho is not worth it.

Dortmund probably don't think he is worth that much either, but buying clubs have been so stupid recently that I am not surprised they asked for so much. Especially when they didn't even want to sell him.
Click to expand...

I think this is a great point as spending large amounts for a transfer is a recent trend and one clubs master poorly. MUFC's recent track record of Pogba and Maguire might have played a part in Sancho not being transferred.

Disagree on Mbappe as PSG reached a CL final for the first time with him making a big contribution. Also bear in mind resale value. What if they recoup most of the money, or even earn a profit if/when they sell him?

Clearly the calculations at play are wider than mere on-pitch impact, as there are merchandising and sponsorship factors at play besides potential future transfer fees. Mbappe won a World Cup as a PSG player, thus bringing a lot of exposure to their brand.

All in all though, very few megatransfers seem to have generated great value for money. Not that their respective funders necessarily care. Players' reactions to costing that much are also difficult to predict.

Price tags for transfers are highly irrational.
 
Last edited:
While I still rate him highly, I said it several times during his transfer thread that not signing him isn't going to be a disaster for our attack, but people were just going into it with mentality "Either we sign Sancho or it's a complete crap market". We had a decent window, all things considered.
 
romufc said:
Agreed they haven't won anything but Mbappe and Ronaldo have been worth their money no doubt.

They bring Mbappe and Ronaldo fans to support the team they are playing for, they bring in enormous commercial income too.
Click to expand...
Not for 180m. He rarely affects the big games in Europe and has 1 goal in knockout games in his entire PSG career.
180m!!!!
 
el3mel said:
While I still rate him highly, I said it several times during his transfer thread that not signing him isn't going to be a disaster for our attack, but people were just going into it with mentality "Either we sign Sancho or it's a complete crap market". We had a decent window, all things considered.
Click to expand...
Cavani and Telles made a huge difference there! Going forward with just Martial, Rashford and Greenwood was a huge risk purely because of numbers. Telles gives us flexibility to change systems and keep quality width, or give us more attacking threat from fullback, while Cavani gives a quality striker depth option, and a group of 4 who can rotate between a front 2.

Things got dramatic in the window because we left it all to the last minute, not because of who we brought in IMO. If we did it before the season, it would've been far better. Leave it to the last day where it takes a few weeks to get match fit, up to speed, settled and take into account quarantine time... just poor planning. Sancho was the guy we were linked with all summer so it was logical that his thread blew up. If we signed everyone earlier, Sancho rumors wouldn't have been that crazy (as it wouldn't be needed).
 
Theres a part of me that thinks players like Sancho and Haaland shouldn't be targeted until we make that next step up - so they come in to a near perfect team and scare the opposition due to how dangerous we can be as a whole squad. When the players value being for this new generation of Manchester United.

I think we are slowly getting there and can see us targeting these players finally in a year or twos time.
 
el3mel said:
While I still rate him highly, I said it several times during his transfer thread that not signing him isn't going to be a disaster for our attack, but people were just going into it with mentality "Either we sign Sancho or it's a complete crap market". We had a decent window, all things considered.
Click to expand...

It was a decent window but we'd be a lot stronger with Sancho. I mean in our last league match we lined up with Mata and James as our wide players..

I don't think Sancho is worth £120m atm as he's not a Neymar level player, but he would improve us a lot. But then tbh any good right winger would improve us, due to us having no options there.

Overall though probably the right choice by the club. £100m+ during a pandemic is a huge risk, and a gamble on a player so young who may or may not adapt to the league (Mikhi and Kagawa both failed to do so for United).
 
MikeUpNorth said:
The worth of an asset is determined by what someone is willing to pay.

I can put my house on the market for £500k, but if I'm only getting offers of £300k, it's stupid for me to continue to claim it's worth half a million. Whether I sell or not is up to me, but that's irrelevant to the value of my house.

If no club is willing to offer 120m for Sancho, then quite simply he isn't worth that much money. Dortmund can refuse to sell, but that doesn't make him worth any more.
Click to expand...

Comparing your house to an elite footballer is not really a good example of valuing assets.
 
I can see us knocking Dortmund and Sancho out of the CL this year. Written in the stars.
 
I really wanted him and we still have a massive void on that right hand side but in my opinion we would be a much more solid team having a proper CDM in place and even a rock solid CB.

You add sancho to our team right now it would upgrade the attack slightly, add more depth etc, however you add someone like Saul into that team and a top class CB and suddenly it is much more complete, now I am not sure who that CB is you go out and get, maybe it's Axel if he can stay fit ? But you get my point,

Sancho would be the cherry on the cake that has no filling or icing. important things that make a cake i think, i don't even eat much cake, don't know why i am using cake as an example, don't read this.
 
romufc said:
I would be very surprised if PSG let Mbappe go for a free.
Click to expand...

What can they do ? if he does not want to sign, he won't.

And i'm not sure anyone can pay more than what they paid for him (150M) when he just has one year left on his contract. Especially during this covid crisis.
 
No player should be worth that kind of money. Not even half. If we look at todays market he still isn't worth 100m. I'm glad we didn't sign him.
 
Bebestation said:
Theres a part of me that thinks players like Sancho and Haaland shouldn't be targeted until we make that next step up - so they come in to a near perfect team and scare the opposition due to how dangerous we can be as a whole squad. When the players value being for this new generation of Manchester United.

I think we are slowly getting there and can see us targeting these players finally in a year or twos time.
Click to expand...

We already targeted them both conveniently before they joined Dortmund so I don't see the point however its a more logical basis if we were after Mbappe.

I don't see why we would wait two years aside looking for a cheaper negotiation given the contract situation. The bad news regarding Haaland is that his release clause will inevitably open the door for more competitors for his signature. If Dortmund don't sell Sancho in January or next summer they will look ridiculous having not capitalised when their assets value is at its highest.
 
Honestly, it may sound strange but I'm not so sure that Sancho is the right type of player for Solkjaer. It feels like he fits into teams that walks with the ball into the net. A lot of Sanchos goals and assists are tap ins and some cut backs. Do we really score those goals? I don’t know. I think I prefer, at least in a Solkjaer team, a player who are able to dribble it and just slam it into the net. A 2010 Nani would be ideal for our team imho.
 
If Diallo ends up living up to his hype, we can all chuckle in 5 years time about how we were smart not to put down over £100m on Sancho and how it’s Ronaldinho/Ronaldo again.
 
I've wanted Sancho all summer, but I've slowly gone cold on the idea of us spending huge amounts on him. Think Scholes had it right when he said we have enough attackers in the mould of Sancho, he's similar to Martial, Rashford and Greenwood.

I also think there's a real belief in thr camp that in a couple of years Rashford and Greenwood are going to be two of the best attackers in the world in, and you can see why. At the moment, Rashford is looking so explosive and deadly, he has that element of pace and power to his game that Sancho lacks.

Take that 108m and invest it in Upamecano (I know he got roasted last night but still love the look of him) and Zakaria, and all of a sudden the spine of the team looks really good. I feel like we're gearing up for a big push for Haaland in the coming seasons anyway, and he offers us something different so maybe he's the better option? Cavani a short term option before we go all out for him?
 
Chairman Steve said:
If Diallo ends up living up to his hype, we can all chuckle in 5 years time about how we were smart not to put down over £100m on Sancho and how it’s Ronaldinho/Ronaldo again.
Click to expand...

Yep. It also allows us to go all in the Haaland. Diallo is a generational talent and if we nurture him right, we could potentially have a forward line the envy of Europe again.
 
Sancho is a good to have and he will improve us a lot.

But our priority should be Haaland. He will transform us like what RVP did and more. Haaland is a generational talent after Messi and Ronaldo. I think Scandinavians prefer epl rather than la liga. So we have a good chance to get him and also don't have to deal with "my dream is to play for RM/Barca" shits.
 
Overrated British talent who would have flopped badly here. I'm glad we didn't spend 120 odd million for him. Rashford is probably twice the player and would go for 50-70 max (even lower in this market). The hype and hysteria on this forum regarding Sancho was nauseating.
 
Coutinho, Dembele, Griezmann, Hazard, Vs Gnarby, Davis, Salah, KDB is the main reason for Clubs hesitating to spend big. If value of transfer equate to value of contribution then surely spend spend spend. There have been so many unfortunate error, while there are so many germs out there on the cheap.
 
snk123 said:
Overrated British talent who would have flopped badly here. I'm glad we didn't spend 120 odd million for him. Rashford is probably twice the player and would go for 50-70 max (even lower in this market). The hype and hysteria on this forum regarding Sancho was nauseating.
Click to expand...
I'm inclined to agree. Yes Sancho is good. Yes he could get better. But is he worth us crippling our ability to sign other players over the next few years? No...

Just like lukaku or sanchez, he would come in on massive fee and wages and may upset the apple cart. To even begin justifying the fee, he would have to hit the ground running and then some. Otherwise, we have another pogba situation on our hands. Spending that much on a player rarely works for any club and has been proven to VERY rarely work for our club.

I'm glad we "missed out"...
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Sancho is a good to have and he will improve us a lot.

But our priority should be Haaland. He will transform us like what RVP did and more. Haaland is a generational talent after Messi and Ronaldo. I think Scandinavians prefer epl rather than la liga. So we have a good chance to get him and also don't have to deal with "my dream is to play for RM/Barca" shits.
Click to expand...

Haaland is ridiculous. No gamble. Sancho is a gamble. Haaland would just work. There is no doubt that wherever he goes, he may end up the best goalscorer of all time.
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Sancho is a good to have and he will improve us a lot.

But our priority should be Haaland. He will transform us like what RVP did and more. Haaland is a generational talent after Messi and Ronaldo. I think Scandinavians prefer epl rather than la liga. So we have a good chance to get him and also don't have to deal with "my dream is to play for RM/Barca" shits.
Click to expand...
Haaland has said he wants to play for Madrid one day and we wouldn't sign him because him and his team insisted in the buyout clause. That doesn't sound like a player who wanted to put down roots here
 
Mr H said:
What can they do ? if he does not want to sign, he won't.

And i'm not sure anyone can pay more than what they paid for him (150M) when he just has one year left on his contract. Especially during this covid crisis.
Click to expand...
I honestly can't see Mbappe being happy at PSG much longer if they continue winning the league and losing to the same poor English team in the CL every year...

He must wonder about playing in a better league... Spain or England? He is proving nothing there and is still young, amazing and, I think, ambitious. I
wolvored said:
Haaland has said he wants to play for Madrid one day and we wouldn't sign him because him and his team insisted in the buyout clause. That doesn't sound like a player who wanted to put down roots here
Click to expand...

That's fine. It's pretty obvious ous he doesn't want us or he would've signed last summer. Would be lovely to get him but nobody here expects it.

But he is a much more certain option than Sancho and that's why the discussion on this thread. Haaland is and will always be amazing. Sancho is a gamble.

That said, if Haaland doesn't want us, fair enough. Just try though...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.