I think that's just because of how poor our players do. Most of the players we sell are awful and it'd be impossible to get anything for them.
What's maddening is how much we spend for average players. The Antony saga is the prime example.
Jadon Sancho - Chelsea (loan) watch | £5M opt-out fee
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) talk about the proposed new stadium, season ticket prices, Sir Jim Ratcliffe and all things INEOS after the first year of their co-ownership.
They also discuss back-to-back victories vs. Real Sociedad and Leicester City - was this the best week for Amorim so far?
What's maddening is how much we spend for average players. The Antony saga is the prime example.
Would it have been better if it was 3 professional and 1 unprofessional forward instead?
His attitude is likely harmful towards the squad — we'll never know for sure from the outside but generally one of the top earners who can't even motivate himself to try and perform, be it on the pitch or in training, is actively detrimental to the overall moral and motivation. In any collective, not just in sport.
The management team really are clueless, how do you agree a loan with obligation to buy if there’s no obligation to buy 
. They probably thought they were being smart too, but they’ve been played like a damn fiddle.
. They probably thought they were being smart too, but they’ve been played like a damn fiddle.Fair enough, he wouldn't have decisively improved the teams performance even in that conditions. Which is a statement in itself.
The remaining points hold though.
I’m failing to see how a £5m loan with no option to buy would be worse than a loan with an option to buy or to pay a £5m fee otherwise.
The deal it sounds like we did put all the power into Chelsea’s hands. Suddenly re-discover his Bundesliga form at Premier league level - a £30m bargain who we have to sell. Play relatively poorly - £5m and back to you United for another season and good luck.
Loans usually don’t happen with players on £350,000 a week.
Sancho’s incredibly high wages and poor performances and attitude put us in a really shitty situation. There were no pain free escape routes available to us.
Sancho’s value wouldn’t have improved by us letting him rot on the bench or in the reserves whilst we pay his full wages. His value as an asset had already deteriorated massively, which is what prevented us from being able to make a better deal to get him out of here in the first place.
And Sancho rotting in the reserves wouldn’t have given us extra attacking players to use in the latter part of the season either - it’s abundantly clear the relationship had broken beyond repair, to the point where he wouldn’t be playing for us again. And I can’t see how him stinking up the place would have helped with the attitude and professionalism reset Amorim has clearly been trying to instil.
We don’t look any bigger fools than Chelsea do, who are paying five million to not get him, or than we already did by spunking £80 million on the waste case in the first place.
This has just been a damage limitation exercise with a gamble that didn’t pay off as we hoped. But given the absolute paucity of available options, what else were we supposed to do? At least this gave us a chance to mitigate some of our financial losses along with a roll of the dice for getting rid of him permanently.
In reality this was a £5m loan fee with £20m option. Makes a bit more sense why the 'obligation' was said to be between £20-£25m and not a fixed amount. Clearly when this deal was done the clubs where saying different things and now the truth of the matter has come out. Really is kind of worst of both worlds deal for Utd.
From his perspective, he's had two loans now that have been disappointing to say the least. Yes he played well in a game against PSG for Dortmund but didn't do much else there, and now he's almost certainly being sent back from Chelsea. Also, he's nowhere near the England set up.
Burning his bridges with that 'freedom' comment was an incredibly stupid move.
Burning his bridges with that 'freedom' comment was an incredibly stupid move.
Maybe it doesn’t make any difference. It’s basically just a different way of structuring what was always still a loan deal. It's impossible to know for sure either way without having insight on all the other various permutations that would have been discussed (eg how much of his wage is being covered etc).
But the issue here isn't the deal we made with Chelsea. That being the best available deal to us at the time is simply a reflection of the shitty situation our tragically poor previous transfer dealings have put us in.
Of course Chelsea were in a stronger position than us - they didn’t need him as badly as we needed to try and get rid of him and the financial burden he has put on us. All this comes down to is them taking a punt on him on the off chance he comes good, and us taking a punt on being able to get rid of him permanently.
Last edited:
Ah well. We saved a major portion of his wages and received 5m. Now, to find a loan or exit for him in summer 2025.
I knew the obligation to buy was too good to be true. He was so poor at United anyone would have been crazy to take him on loan with a 25m buy obligation. We're stuck with him and Rashford.
He's an arrogant cnut who thought he'd light up the league at Chelsea and get his move. It has predictably blown up in his face.
He bought the hype of "players do better away from Utd" which the media was selling at the time.
Last edited:
Maybe because that was the only way to get rid of this clown. This whole sancho fiasco tells more about sancho than the management. The fact they chose to let him go to a rival like Chelsea with a 5m penalty to opt out shows how crap he must be in the eyes of the club.The management team really are clueless, how do you agree a loan with obligation to buy if there’s no obligation to buy
If there were any justice in the [football] world the morons who paid insane amounts for Sancho, Antony, and Hojlund and gave ridiculous salaries to half of our shit team should be sent behind the bars, at least for criminal negligence if not embezzlement, but here we are having to suffer while those at fault got away without a single consequence
Yes I think so too. We also have to remember the management team in place now didn't sign him, and were clearly desperate to get rid of him in any way possible.
The problem is we can't generate any money from them. If we just keep them on the books, it's not that expensive to get rid of Sancho end of contract. The club have a +1 option on Sancho's contract, so either one or two years left up to us.
~$13M left for Sancho (+$20M owed to Dortmund this summer in fees?)
~$80M left for Rashford
I think we save 15M or so next year by loaning them both out again. But if the management staff were competent, they'd call in some favors with agents and manage to offload these guys to Saudi or some place like that.
Is this the same "competent" team that is going to make deals this summer and going forward?
next season is his last year of contract with United right? if he comes back he's definitely going to sit out and leave for free like Lingard and Pogba 
You can term them as incompetent but there were simply no other takers. Which of the below alternatives do you feel is better?
1) Sancho staying with United for the season
2) Sancho being let go on a free - absorbing 35m amortization + 40m salary (total cost 70m)
OR
Sancho gets loaned to Chelsea where they pay his salary + 5m opt out penalty and we loan him out again another season to another club winding down his contract? (total cost 35m - 5m = 30m)
Chelsea aren't paying all of his salary.
this is awkward now
we need to shift him asap
we need to shift him asap
How much would it cost to terminate his contact? No way Chelsea keep him and he’s absolutely burnt his bridges with us. Stick him in the reserves bench indefinitely till he accepts an lower paying offer (which is in line with his worth as a footballer)
Just tell Chelsea to give him the £5 million instead and to not come back.
They clearly banked on him doing well at his boyhood club. If you don’t give max effort to secure a contract with your boyhood club while on loan, chances are you won’t anywhere…
Sell him to Dortmund seems the only place he likes.
Its a fecking joke. That is not a fecking obligation, we already paid him 5m of his salary this season. Fecking best in class, sack those donkeys.
Must be abhorrent for the individual, so difficult to come back from a confidence angle if someone pays real money to not work with you.
Still only 24 yo, out of the England setup, can't care to put in the work and just disgraceful.
This is not sympathy for him, just plain pity.
Still only 24 yo, out of the England setup, can't care to put in the work and just disgraceful.
This is not sympathy for him, just plain pity.
Even if he comes back, he knows Amorim won't tolerate him for a second and he won't be included in any of the first team trainings or games or even preseason, so he'll definitely chose to leave and accept lower wages somewhere in Germany or Spain, we'll be forced to accept a low-ball offer for him probably something like €10m-€15m.
I think posters criticizing INEOS for Sancho's return is extremely harsh.
He is a completely failed footballer on very high wages. No one wants him - not ETH, not Dortmund, not Chelsea and not Amorim.
They did the right thing in loaning him to Chelsea and gave him an opportunity to fight for a move. They also saved some money in doing so.
The reality is that there is no market for Sancho and they would have had to accept whatever Chelsea wanted to offer.
He is a completely failed footballer on very high wages. No one wants him - not ETH, not Dortmund, not Chelsea and not Amorim.
They did the right thing in loaning him to Chelsea and gave him an opportunity to fight for a move. They also saved some money in doing so.
The reality is that there is no market for Sancho and they would have had to accept whatever Chelsea wanted to offer.
As if it's only 5 million, how ridiculous. Still seems we have donkeys operating the transfers (or selling side at least)
Shambolic stuff.
Speaks volumes to his lack of ability if they don’t buy him. Hope he enjoys his “freedom” while he can.
Basically the rest of his salary if he doesn't want to compromise
We should contact Marseille about another loan - he may manage to look average in Ligue 1.
I really fecking hope not.
Still think that offloading his wages and getting paid £5M was the best of a bad situation last summer.
OblIgAtiOn To bUy
I don't think that's really fair in this situation at least, we didn't exactly have a lot of clubs looking to take Sancho and it was clear that he had no future in the United team so it was hardly a strong negotiating position to have us not want him but barely anywhere else want him either.
Going into the last few days of the window I didn't believe we would be able to get rid of him, even on loan, with effectively a £5m loan fee and an option for Chelsea to buy him for about £20m extra so in that sense they didn't do too badly. The other option was we paid him his full wages to sit around doing nothing for another year.
It's just frustrating that for whatever reason the press had it as being an obligation for 6 months and only in the last few weeks has the reality of the deal emerged.
Yeah that's fair, it was surprising to get anything significant for him.
Like Casemiro and Antony he'll be costing us £30+ (amortisation and wages) for another year. Best part of £90m a season offering nothing on the pitch. Until we get such dead weights off the books the funds will be limited to improve the squad. That's why I'm not expecting much this summer.
Never believe fees received by us are as good as reported either.