Jadon Sancho - Chelsea (loan) watch | £5M opt-out fee

But Ferguson didn’t stick to that mantra, though.

He had lapses no doubt but to be fair he was in the job for 26 years.

How about the Ruud Van Niselrooy incident at the 2006 League Cup final. Ruud got upset and directed a fair few pretty bad insults towards SAF in front of other players. But no huge drama was created, no grandstanding in press conferences, no players getting frozen out, none banished from the squad or made to train with the U21s. Ruud remained part the squad, played in most games to some degree but was then shown the door at first oopportunity. How would another manager have handled that situation when a Tweet sparked the Sancho debacle?
 
I don’t get why people are upset at the club for the opt out fee. It was probably the only way for Chelsea to take the risk on the deal, for them to have some sort of out. They probably wanted a loan with an option, rather than obligation, to buy. Especially when it came to a player that clearly wanted to leave, we clearly didn’t want, didn’t have any other realistic suitors, and was demanding a fortune in wages. It was a calculated gamble for both parties.

Worse case for us is that he comes back and we try and sell him this coming summer, but with the penalty fee, will have effectively removed him from the wage bill for nearly a year. Which is not inconsiderable.

Fact is, there is no easy out on this blunder of a transfer. The best case scenario for the club is if we get a great offer from SA and the player agrees to move there, but there are a lot of ifs. More likely we organise another loan for him, get all or most of his wages covered, until the end of his contract and he moves for free. Either that or we accept a really low fee for him, he takes lower wages elsewhere but makes up the difference in signing bonus. But we don’t have a lot of leverage to force that through.

The Sancho case should be a significant learning point for everyone at the club. Investing heavily in single transfers on big wages, represents a huge risk. They rarely work out, and when they don’t you have an economic ball and chain that can weigh you down for years.

I am not opposed to substantial - heavily structured, with performance related add-ons - fees for the right player; but the wages have to stay within a sustainable framework that allow us to find suitors for the player should it not work out. When you start giving players 250-350k a week, you narrow the pool of potential buyers to a tiny group. And if the player has not been performing, those elite or rich few are not likely to be interested.

From everything I have read and researched, the club is finally structuring contracts so they have much lower base wages with a ton of appearance and performance related bonuses. As it should be. Until that is accomplished squad wide, we will continue to struggle to move some of the “old guard” on.
 
Out of curiosity what type of reception would he get if he actually returned as a player? I was/am under the impression it would make our reaction to Benitez look like a massive love in.
Probably not great at first but I doubt it'd be anything dramatic. If he comes back and in pre season puts in work and gets his head down, fans will end up supporting him. Can't imagine United fans really shitting on their own player for too long.
 
was reading on Athletic that opt out fee was based on 'terms such as Sancho not agreeing terms'.

if this is the nature of the opt out clause then surely he goes. the last thing he will want to do is give up his 'freedom' and return to United
 
I don’t get why people are upset at the club for the opt out fee. It was probably the only way for Chelsea to take the risk on the deal, for them to have some sort of out. They probably wanted a loan with an option, rather than obligation, to buy.
They didn't have an agreement signed with the player. I think legally they quite literally can't trigger the buy clause without it. Like you can't buy out a player's contract and playing rights without the player's agreement, Bosman made sure of that. So yeah, of course the obligation to buy was conditional to Sancho agreeing a contract with Chelsea in the first place - which still hasn't happened - and the break clause was in United's favour, so they'd get something in that case

People are upset about the break clause being too small
 
They didn't have an agreement signed with the player. I think legally they quite literally can't trigger the buy clause without it. Like you can't buy out a player's contract and playing rights without the player's agreement, Bosman made sure of that. So yeah, of course the obligation to buy was conditional to Sancho agreeing a contract with Chelsea in the first place - which still hasn't happened - and the break clause was in United's favour, so they'd get something in that case

People are upset about the break clause being too small
Which in itself is quite preposterous. As I said, I am quite sure that Chelsea wanted an option not an obligation. So getting an obligation with an opt out penalty is a pretty decent result all things considered. Asking the penalty to be greater than 5m is, in my opinion, just unrealistic. People throwing around 10 or 15m just aren’t living in the real world. Not when you take all the relevant contextual factors into consideration.

The rest of your post about agreeing a contract with Sancho etc., is understood and correct, but not sure how it’s pertinent or contradictory to what I originally posted.
 
Which in itself is quite preposterous. As I said, I am quite sure that Chelsea wanted an option not an obligation. So getting an obligation with an opt out penalty is a pretty decent result all things considered. Asking the penalty to be greater than 5m is, in my opinion, just unrealistic. People throwing around 10 or 15m just aren’t living in the real world. Not when you take all the relevant contextual factors into consideration.

The rest of your post about agreeing a contract with Sancho etc., is understood and correct, but not sure how it’s pertinent or contradictory to what I originally posted.
Missing the point because of semantics. There never was an obligation to buy. Clubs decided to present it as such publicly for their own reasons, but if the "obligation" doesn't come with an agreement between buying club and player, then it is obviously no such thing. It's merely a transfer fee pre-agreed between the clubs

Likewise, the "penalty", is basically just a loan compensation

Agree about Chelsea likely not willing to go further than covering full wages for the season of it remained a 1 year loan. They had all the leverage
 
Missing the point because of semantics. There never was an obligation to buy. Clubs decided to present it as such publicly for their own reasons, but if the "obligation" doesn't come with an agreement between buying club and player, then it is obviously no such thing. It's merely a transfer fee pre-agreed between the clubs

Likewise, the "penalty", is basically just a loan compensation

Agree about Chelsea likely not willing to go further than covering full wages for the season of it remained a 1 year loan. They had all the leverage
The entire argument is based around semantics. It’s probably a waste of time to even discuss. The reality is that United did what they could with a rubbish situation
 
It's always too good a deal for us by chelsea for the toxic player. Partial wages and was largely kept away from the main squad is already a bonus. We will somehow grant his freedom by july. Same with rashford. Come what may.
 
Sancho wants to go back to the Bundesliga & will manipulate the situation to make it happen. Chelsea are not going to sign a player who has gone public about his dream move. 5 mill is a cheap rental !!
 
Has Sancho been asked by the press about this yet? Would.be nice to see him squirm.
 
The entire argument is based around semantics. It’s probably a waste of time to even discuss. The reality is that United did what they could with a rubbish situation
Agreed. Not sure what the meltdowns from some posters are all about. All things considered, not paying his wages for a year is worth something. And worst case scenario is that he returns with his ego blown and only one year left until he’s done for good. And that’s not to say there isn’t a chance for another loan—whatever it takes to not pay his full wages.
 
Is it possible that we could ban him from the squad, with no squad number and all that, so that he can’t even appear in the next FC/FIFA game, at least not with a team? It’s petty but I’m here for that.
 
It doesn't achieve anything.

Amorim called out Rashford multiple times directly and he didn't improve his training performances, which subsequently forced his hand to leave. He went on loan to Villa, where he has got game time, got back into the England squad and has a whole media PR campaign behind him. All things considered, it's worked as well as you'd want as we now have a saleable asset. Amorim also called out Garnacho, who knuckled down in his performances even before his right wing switch.
 
No I'm obviously not buying this idea that there wasn't a club on the planet who wanted to buy Sancho or take him on loan in the summer of 2023. When we managed to find two clubs to take him on loan in the next two windows.

How do you know no club wanted to buy or loan him?

Because there was no offer... we live in a time where its not hard to tell when there is /isn't an offer. Its naive to think that Ten Hag and Manutd both

I'd say from the Sancho tweet onwards he handled it very poorly.

Having standards is poor handling of the player.. got it.

So was Fergie dishonest for 26 years then?

What I would like is for the manager of Manchester United to not feed stories to the British media.

As for what he could have said anything he wanted that couldn't be spun into a drama by the British tabloids. Say he wasn't quite ready for the game today but will hopefully be ready for the next one or similar.

Thing is fans need to realise, times move on, the landscape changes, what worked in 1990/2000 doesn't work now. During Fergie's era, there was no social media, players were scared of managers.

Also, do you remember when Fergie came out during Rooney's contract ?
 
Having standards is poor handling of the player.. got it.
History repeats. Sancho did throw his "scapegoat tantrum" also while he was at Dortmund, so we can easily compare the outcome.

Lucien Favre more or less said "I don't care about his opinion, he has to convince me on the pitch" and Sancho very quickly bounced back to top form.

EtH kicked him out of the squad.

And Favre also had standards, he didn't shy away from benching Sancho or (even worse imho) subbing him off in the first half.

So I guess we can say that EtH didn't get the best possible outcome of a situation that Sancho caused by being a stupid ******.
 
This is just another player issue that has to be resolved this summer…..quite a few for Wilcox and his staff….

Not sure the queue of takers for Sancho will be very long - I’m sure he will dig in on his salary as he is never going to be earning that kind of money again.

He really is our worst ever signing.
 
He had lapses no doubt but to be fair he was in the job for 26 years.

How about the Ruud Van Niselrooy incident at the 2006 League Cup final. Ruud got upset and directed a fair few pretty bad insults towards SAF in front of other players. But no huge drama was created, no grandstanding in press conferences, no players getting frozen out, none banished from the squad or made to train with the U21s. Ruud remained part the squad, played in most games to some degree but was then shown the door at first oopportunity. How would another manager have handled that situation when a Tweet sparked the Sancho debacle?

Not sure why this is still a thing, but Fergie rarely had a problem with things happening in the heat of the moment. There was a high tolerance. While Ruuds behavior wasn't acceptable, it wasn't shocking that a key player like Ruud would have a strong response to not being involved in a league cup final, like most players with a winners mentality would. Ruud also backed down and made a public statement that there was no issue and he respected the managers decision, but he was disappointed, so there was no need for it to be an ongoing issue. It did however make it clear to Fergie that it was time to get rid of Ruud, and there was a few more incidents (like the spats with Ronaldo) that sealed his fate. Meanwhile, Keane was the exact opposite and that instantly led to him being fecked off.

Sancho wasn't a heat of the moment situation, he was sat at home and decided to take it public despite the original comments being quite innocent. Despite being given several chances to apologize behind closed doors, not needing to make anything public rather the club would let it be known that the situation had been sorted, he decided to stick to his guns and hold out.

No idea why people still think Sancho was poorly treated.
 
History repeats. Sancho did throw his "scapegoat tantrum" also while he was at Dortmund, so we can easily compare the outcome.

Lucien Favre more or less said "I don't care about his opinion, he has to convince me on the pitch" and Sancho very quickly bounced back to top form.

EtH kicked him out of the squad.

And Favre also had standards, he didn't shy away from benching Sancho or (even worse imho) subbing him off in the first half.

So I guess we can say that EtH didn't get the best possible outcome of a situation that Sancho caused by being a stupid ******.

Does it? Can you show me a link or evidence that Sancho tweeted a whole monologue of how he is a scapegoat at Dortmund?

Well, different managers have different standards, Ten Hag was called out in public by a player saying he is being treated unfairly... when he got 3 months off from the manager the season before.

ETH said, apologise to me, Sancho didnt want to do that.

Its interesting to see people defend Sancho when he has had history all his career.. Pep, Favre, Ten Hag, Rangnick all had issues with him but ofcoruse Stefan thinks Ten Hag was being a *****.
 
Does it? Can you show me a link or evidence that Sancho tweeted a whole monologue of how he is a scapegoat at Dortmund?

Well, different managers have different standards, Ten Hag was called out in public by a player saying he is being treated unfairly... when he got 3 months off from the manager the season before.

ETH said, apologise to me, Sancho didnt want to do that.

Its interesting to see people defend Sancho when he has had history all his career.. Pep, Favre, Ten Hag, Rangnick all had issues with him but ofcoruse Stefan thinks Ten Hag was being a *****.

Why don't we stay with the facts? :) Pep said he wanted to keep Sancho but was unable to since he wanted to leave, Rangnick said Sancho conducted himself flawlessly under him and Favre was the coach under whom Sancho had his breakthrough.The "issues" Favre had with Sancho were minor and you can find similar stories about many young players coming through. Those incidents would have been completely forgotten by now if not for the Ten Hag situation. From a neutral perspective, the pattern of careers derailing after joining Manchester United, players not being able to replicate their former performances and footballers developing bad habits is much clearer than that of Sancho clashing with his coaches.
 
Does it? Can you show me a link or evidence that Sancho tweeted a whole monologue of how he is a scapegoat at Dortmund?

Well, different managers have different standards, Ten Hag was called out in public by a player saying he is being treated unfairly... when he got 3 months off from the manager the season before.

ETH said, apologise to me, Sancho didnt want to do that.

Its interesting to see people defend Sancho when he has had history all his career.. Pep, Favre, Ten Hag, Rangnick all had issues with him but ofcoruse Stefan thinks Ten Hag was being a *****.
He didn't tweet it, but I don't see a big difference in a tweet and effectively saying the same through semi-official channels: https://talksport.com/football/6341...ortmund-manchester-united-liverpool-interest/ (yes it's talksport, but it was the first English source I found - there were a bunch more in German, but they all refer to The Athletic about that feeling). You also find stuff like this in German: https://www.sport.de/diashow/sl4810/die-skandal-akte-jadon-sancho/#slide=1; (I don't think you need a translation of the title).

And please read carefully, I didn't insult EtH but Sancho ;)

In the end the pattern is that in Dortmund every manager got Sancho to perform well despite issues, while at United every manager failed to do so. That is an interesting observation to make, but doesn't change the fact that Sancho is the culprit here.
 
Why don't we stay with the facts? :) Pep said he wanted to keep Sancho but was unable to since he wanted to leave, Rangnick said Sancho conducted himself flawlessly under him and Favre was the coach under whom Sancho had his breakthrough.The "issues" Favre had with Sancho were minor and you can find similar stories about many young players coming through. Those incidents would have been completely forgotten by now if not for the Ten Hag situation. From a neutral perspective, the pattern of careers derailing after joining Manchester United, players not being able to replicate their former performances and footballers developing bad habits is much clearer than that of Sancho clashing with his coaches.

Right, lets stick to facts.

Pep Guardiola - "I don't know [why Sancho left]. He didn't want to take this challenge [to fight his way into the first team], this opportunity to discover if he was able to. He decided to go there. So, it's perfect. It's going well and congratulations on what he is doing"

Favre - ""We need players on the pitch who are focused and ready"

Lets see, Sancho derailed at Manutd... went on loan, had 1 good game, went to Chelsea and is crap. But ofcourse Manutd are the problem.

Its also players not having the mental strength to wear the Manutd shirt which weighs heavily.

Not clashing with coaches as much, its his attitude towards the game.
 
In the end the pattern is that in Dortmund every manager got Sancho to perform well despite issues, while at United every manager failed to do so. That is an interesting observation to make, but doesn't change the fact that Sancho is the culprit here

No point going back and forth, we agree Sancho was an issue.

This statement is incorrect... he did not do well when he went on loan, so not every Dortmund manager got him to perform well.

You saying its only Manutd managers but what is the Chelsea manager done to get him to "perform well"?
 
This statement is incorrect... he did not do well when he went on loan, so not every Dortmund manager got him to perform well.
But technically it is correct :lol:

Because Sancho played excellent in Edin Terzic' interim season. The same manager who was in charge during Sancho's loan to Dortmund.
You saying its only Manutd managers but what is the Chelsea manager done to get him to "perform well"?
No, I didn't say that only at United managers failed to get him to perform well.

The way I see it Sancho always lacked maturity but he loved the game which always was able to even things out. He lost that love for the game at United and it didn't come back when he moved on loan to Dortmund or Chelsea, not as much as he had it at least.
 
Pep Guardiola - "I don't know [why Sancho left]. He didn't want to take this challenge [to fight his way into the first team], this opportunity to discover if he was able to. He decided to go there. So, it's perfect. It's going well and congratulations on what he is doing"

He continued with: "We wanted him to stay but he decided to leave, and when people decide to leave all we can do is [let them] leave."

Favre - ""We need players on the pitch who are focused and ready"

Favre said that amidst ongoing transfer rumours around then 19 year old Sancho. You can interpret that as criticism of his professionalism or as Favre thinking he was distracted. One way or another, if you dig deep enough you'll find similar quotes about most footballers who started games as teenagers.

Lets see, Sancho derailed at Manutd... went on loan, had 1 good game, went to Chelsea and is crap. But ofcourse Manutd are the problem.

You claimed Sancho has a trackrecord of clashing with coaches. I'm merely pointing out that United has a much bigger trackrecord of being unable to get the best out of young players than Sancho has of clashing with managers, players having too much power, developing airs and graces and so forth.
 
He continued with: "We wanted him to stay but he decided to leave, and when people decide to leave all we can do is [let them] leave."
There are many players that leave clubs, Pep would want him to stay, like Cole Palmer too, did he mention Cole Palmer had issues no, but he did with Sancho.

Favre said that amidst ongoing transfer rumours around then 19 year old Sancho. You can interpret that as criticism of his professionalism or as Favre thinking he was distracted. One way or another, if you dig deep enough you'll find similar quotes about most footballers who started games as teenagers.

Not really, Sancho is not 19 anymore and has the same issues still, whilst you can keep defending him, saying he hasn't done anything wrong, the facts are he has not worked out at United, Dortmund loan and Chelsea. You could also add England into the equation too.

You claimed Sancho has a trackrecord of clashing with coaches. I'm merely pointing out that United has a much bigger trackrecord of being unable to get the best out of young players than Sancho has of clashing with managers, players having too much power, developing airs and graces and so forth.

Yes, clashes because of his lack of maturity, professionalism and respect. Which players have United been unable to get the best out of?
 
There are many players that leave clubs, Pep would want him to stay, like Cole Palmer too, did he mention Cole Palmer had issues no, but he did with Sancho.



Not really, Sancho is not 19 anymore and has the same issues still, whilst you can keep defending him, saying he hasn't done anything wrong, the facts are he has not worked out at United, Dortmund loan and Chelsea. You could also add England into the equation too.



Yes, clashes because of his lack of maturity, professionalism and respect. Which players have United been unable to get the best out of?

See, if it is such a obvious case, why do you need to make things up to support your point? Pep didn't mention any issues and he definitely did work out in his Dortmund loan. Many BVB fans I know said he was their best player at that time and are hoping that he returns if it doesn't work out at Chelsea.

And do you really want me to enlist all players who underperformed at Untied compared to their previous level? Or players with a trackrecord of unprofessional behaviour? Do you honestly believe there was no problem with player power and culture at United in the post-Fergie era?
 
See, if it is such a obvious case, why do you need to make things up to support your point? Pep didn't mention any issues and he definitely did work out in his Dortmund loan. Many BVB fans I know said he was their best player at that time and are hoping that he returns if it doesn't work out at Chelsea.

And do you really want me to enlist all players who underperformed at Untied compared to their previous level? Or players with a trackrecord of unprofessional behaviour? Do you honestly believe there was no problem with player power and culture at United in the post-Fergie era?

I have made up things yes. I lied about Pep's comments, I lied about Favre, I lied about Ten Hag.. I'm sorry to offend you, Sancho is a saint and does no wrong, is professional.

No I know United have had a cultural issue, you said "I'm merely pointing out that United has a much bigger trackrecord of being unable to get the best out of young players" so I was wondering who are all these players?

I dont care what Dortmund fans think.. if they want him back they can have him back. The difference between Dortmund and United is huge... whilst we have been bad, we as a club still have ambition unlike Dortmund.
 
I have made up things yes. I lied about Pep's comments, I lied about Favre, I lied about Ten Hag.. I'm sorry to offend you, Sancho is a saint and does no wrong, is professional.

I never said that Sancho is a saint or a role model professional. But you made up or at least overinterpretated stuff. Your conclusion determines the assessment when it should be the other way round.

No I know United have had a cultural issue, you said "I'm merely pointing out that United has a much bigger trackrecord of being unable to get the best out of young players" so I was wondering who are all these players?

Antony, Rashford, Pogba, Sancho, Januzaj, Hojlund, Zirkzee, Garnacho, van de Beek, Shaw, Wan-Bissaka just from the top of my head.

I dont care what Dortmund fans think..

Then you never cared about making a somewhat profound judgment of his loan spell at Dortmund to begin with.
 
Antony, Rashford, Pogba, Sancho, Januzaj, Hojlund, Zirkzee, Garnacho, van de Beek, Shaw, Wan-Bissaka just from the top of my head.
Antony was never a top player.
Rashford we made him as good as he is, he was never rated in the academy.
Pogba won trophies at United and didnt sign when he was young.
Janujaz was academy product that we sold on and he did nothing
Hojlund, Zirkzee are young players - Hojlund scored 15 goals last season for us... Zirkzee has only just signed.
Garnacho - Come through the youth and won the Puskas, probably wont play for a bigger club than United.
Wan Bissaka – Playing at his level right now
Donny – Playing at his level.
Shaw – He had a double leg break and has struggled to stay fit…
The thing is the players signed were clearly not good enough, which is our issue, we sign players who are not good for large fees. The fact that most of those players play at mid/ lower table teams shows you what level they are.
So really out of those, I would say, United have ruined none of them, most of them got a chance because of United, coming through the academy.


Then you never cared about making a somewhat profound judgment of his loan spell at Dortmund to begin with.

Then you never cared about making a somewhat profound judgment of his loan spell at Dortmund to begin with.
I don’t care about Dortmund fans is not the same as I don’t watch football. I still watch football to make a judgement on players. So what I saw in his loan spell was rubbish, if Dortmund fans loved it, that’s their opinion. They are fighting to play CL and being the bridesmaid at best, where as we want to be the best.
 
Amorim called out Rashford multiple times directly and he didn't improve his training performances, which subsequently forced his hand to leave. He went on loan to Villa, where he has got game time, got back into the England squad and has a whole media PR campaign behind him. All things considered, it's worked as well as you'd want as we now have a saleable asset. Amorim also called out Garnacho, who knuckled down in his performances even before his right wing switch.

All of which could have happened without having a public drama and freezing a player out for 2-3 months.
 
Because there was no offer... we live in a time where its not hard to tell when there is /isn't an offer. Its naive to think that Ten Hag and Manutd both

I'm not sure United even tried to find a club for him that summer to be honest. I don't know if they were actively looking to sell, which they should have been if he was such a problem behind the scenes.

Having standards is poor handling of the player.. got it.

Having standards is great, waffling on about your standards in the media, feeding the tabloid media and creating drama is unnecessary.

Thing is fans need to realise, times move on, the landscape changes, what worked in 1990/2000 doesn't work now. During Fergie's era, there was no social media, players were scared of managers.

Also, do you remember when Fergie came out during Rooney's contract ?

I do and as I've said Fergie did speak out a few times. But there wasn't many times over 26/27 years.

Social media has absolutely nothing to do with managers spouting nonsense in public to be fair.
 
Not sure why this is still a thing, but Fergie rarely had a problem with things happening in the heat of the moment. There was a high tolerance. While Ruuds behavior wasn't acceptable, it wasn't shocking that a key player like Ruud would have a strong response to not being involved in a league cup final, like most players with a winners mentality would. Ruud also backed down and made a public statement that there was no issue and he respected the managers decision, but he was disappointed, so there was no need for it to be an ongoing issue. It did however make it clear to Fergie that it was time to get rid of Ruud, and there was a few more incidents (like the spats with Ronaldo) that sealed his fate. Meanwhile, Keane was the exact opposite and that instantly led to him being fecked off.

Sancho wasn't a heat of the moment situation, he was sat at home and decided to take it public despite the original comments being quite innocent. Despite being given several chances to apologize behind closed doors, not needing to make anything public rather the club would let it be known that the situation had been sorted, he decided to stick to his guns and hold out.

No idea why people still think Sancho was poorly treated.

My point isn't that Sancho was poorly treated my point is Ten Hag and the club handled the whole situation poorly. A drama played out in the media when it could have been quietly handled behind closed doors.

Out of interest what was Ruud's statement and when was it made. Do you have a link?
 
Antony was never a top player.
Rashford we made him as good as he is, he was never rated in the academy.
Pogba won trophies at United and didnt sign when he was young.
Janujaz was academy product that we sold on and he did nothing
Hojlund, Zirkzee are young players - Hojlund scored 15 goals last season for us... Zirkzee has only just signed.
Garnacho - Come through the youth and won the Puskas, probably wont play for a bigger club than United.
Wan Bissaka – Playing at his level right now
Donny – Playing at his level.
Shaw – He had a double leg break and has struggled to stay fit…
The thing is the players signed were clearly not good enough, which is our issue, we sign players who are not good for large fees. The fact that most of those players play at mid/ lower table teams shows you what level they are.
So really out of those, I would say, United have ruined none of them, most of them got a chance because of United, coming through the academy.




Then you never cared about making a somewhat profound judgment of his loan spell at Dortmund to begin with.
I don’t care about Dortmund fans is not the same as I don’t watch football. I still watch football to make a judgement on players. So what I saw in his loan spell was rubbish, if Dortmund fans loved it, that’s their opinion. They are fighting to play CL and being the bridesmaid at best, where as we want to be the best.

I know these players, you don't need to describe them to me :) And all of them were either disappointments based on the performances they had shown prior to their United move or conducted themselves unprofessionally at some point (at least when held against the standard you set for Sancho by quoting Favre), some of them even both. I mean, you already admitted yourself that United has problems in regards to dressing room power and culture post-Fergie so I don't really understand the point you're trying to make.

And how many games have you seen of Sancho for Dortmund? To me, it feels as if most people judged his loan spell based on goal involvements although it was his playmaking that really improved Dortmund.

I haven't seen much of him at Chelsea but his highlights and advanced stats look at least decent.