Jadon Sancho - Chelsea (loan) watch

[TheBigLewandowski]

This is some of the biggest BS I've read so far in this thread, and that says a lot because dear God this thread is a rollercoaster. This perfectly represents the absolute ignorance of some fans on Sancho's time in the German league and how he actually played. It just shows most people simply judged him by YouTube highlights(which just shows goals, assists and some dribbles) instead of watching how the player actually plays and the particular system he is playing in that's producing said results.

People!! Youtube highlight reels and extended highlights of a match are the worst forms of judging a particular player's performance and playstyle. Mudryk is one of the best players in the world on YouTube, you can't say the same when you actually watch him play a full 90mins of football now can you?
If you have such a big hard on for Sancho that much, it's probably best to take the time to watch him play so you can love him or hate him without coming off as an absolute egghead, or simply just don't bother and spare us all the cringe.

Forgot your meds today?! Wow how football has pissed you off so much says alot about you! You must be one of those Stone Island Boys who think their wearing designer clothes Haha

I have seen Sancho at United & I've seen enough to know that he is better on the right than he is on the left.

If you think it's the opposite then fine. Good for you

People seem to forget all about where Reus was playing for Dortmund before he startedmoving centrally.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

Forgot your meds today?! Wow how football has pissed you off so much says alot about you! You must be one of those Stone Island Boys who think their wearing designer clothes Haha

I have seen Sancho at United & I've seen enough to know that he is better on the right than he is on the left.

If you think it's the opposite then fine. Good for you

People seem to forget all about where Reus was playing for Dortmund before he startedmoving centrally.

You're the one who compared him to Aaron Lennon - perhaps the two players in the same position with least overlap if you were to draw a Venn diagram of their attributes.

You are perfectly entitled to have an opinion that 2+2=5 and if you post that on a forum everyone else is perfectly entitled to point and laugh at you.

 

[Zehner]

Sancho played RW on 2018-19, 2019-2020.

Those were his best years at Dortmund. Just look at his highlights of the season and where he plays, scores & assists from. He may play LW sometimes but most of his goals and assists came from the right.

His worst high season was when he scored 8 and set up 11 during the 2020-21 season when he started playing more like a LW.

He is a better RW than he is a LW.

If Aaron Lennon is wrong, then an Antonio Valencia or Nico Williams RM that can dribble, cross, pass and finish is Sancho, a much all rounded player that ultimately stopped playing his best position. All I'm trying to do is show that he is a right footed RW than a right footed LW. It slows his game down too much playing LW.

I can't post highlights so do it for me - show me the bundesliga highlights of 2018-2019, 2019-2020 & finally 2020-2021.

2019-2020 he went from 33 g&a in 32 games to 18 non penalty goals and assists in 26 games in his 2020-21 season.

Soon as he started playing LW is when I knew we shouldn't sign him because he started becoming slower and trying to play more creative like current City players to break that lack of pace than playing by his instincs and at pace directly taking a player on from RW and the defender not knowing whether Sancho was cutting in or going out wide.

This is exactly what we saw vs PSG in the champions league. Him terrorising the opposition LB & then not terrorising the RB as we saw in the final.

Ole bought him to play at RW aswell, not to play LW because Rashford was our first team starter LW & even his best performances at United came as a RW.

I remember even under Ten Hag - Sancho started to deliver 2 consistent RW performances for United @ 7/10-7.5/10 & all of a sudden Ten Hag dropped him for Antony for no reason just like Rashford was dropped for Garnacho when he just started finding his form.

I'm sorry but no, he didn't. Sancho was primarily a LW after his first season at Dortmund and when he played "RW", it was really RAM in a 3-2-4-1 with lots of freedom to roam and Hakimi as RWB to hold the width. It was always a stupid idea to play him as a RW and if that was United's plan, it tells you more about your scouting than anything else.

 

[TheBigLewandowski]

You're the one who compared him to Aaron Lennon - perhaps the two players in the same position with least overlap if you were to draw a Venn diagram of their attributes.

You are perfectly entitled to have an opinion that 2+2=5 and if you post that on a forum everyone else is perfectly entitled to point and laugh at you.

Same to you mate. If you think your opinion is right then I have my right to laugh at you.

I'm not calling Sancho the next Aaron Lennon. The only reason I mentioned his name is to show that Sancho is better using his right foot to take players on the right side of the pitch than being and inverted player. This has been the case for nearly a decade now where right footed players play predominantly inverted football on the left and vice versa.

Whether that's RAM, RM, RW doesn't make a difference to me.

All I was trying to do is show that in my opinion he isn't best as an inverted player.

I saw this both at Dortmund where his last 2 seasons were his worst. I think 4 g&a in 16 matches in his last season. Then I saw it at United where he looked better on the right than he did on the left.

I think the only reason you backed your new Chelsea friend is because I mentioned Stone Island & your clearly one of those supporters who wears it

 

[Zehner]

Same to you mate. If you think your opinion is right then I have my right to laugh at you.

I'm not calling Sancho the next Aaron Lennon. The only reason I mentioned his name is to show that Sancho is better using his right foot to take players on the right side of the pitch than being and inverted player. This has been the case for nearly a decade now where right footed players play predominantly inverted football on the left and vice versa.

Whether that's RAM, RM, RW doesn't make a difference to me.

All I was trying to do is show that in my opinion he isn't best as an inverted player.

I saw this both at Dortmund where his last 2 seasons were his worst. I think 4 g&a in 16 matches in his last season. Then I saw it at United where he looked better on the right than he did on the left.

I think the only reason you backed your new Chelsea friend is because I mentioned Stone Island & your clearly one of those supporters who wears it

But it makes zero sense that he should be better off in one on ones on the right because he lacks the skill set to beat players on the outside. For that you need pace and athleticism. Sancho dribbles with body feints and excels at breaking lines with flick passes and one twos. Plus there are few wingers better at finding the free man in the penalty box with a low pass. All that works much better when having the ball on your strong foot when cutting inside. Playing on the right limits his options and creativity severely.

And it does matter whether he played RW or RAM because he never was a player to attack his full back on the right but one for the half spaces, like a typical 10.

 

[cpresc]

I wonder how well this would have worked…

————— Zirkzee
Sancho — Mainoo — Amad

 

[TheBigLewandowski]

I wonder how well this would have worked…

————— Zirkzee
Sancho — Mainoo — Amad

Hojlund would need to play to utilise 3 creators.

 

[stefan92]

For Sancho it doesn't matter on which side he plays, as long as he is paired with an attacking, overlapping fullback who gives him the option to drift inside and pass in every direction.

He was great for Dortmund when he played with Pisczcek or Hakimi on the right or with Guerreiro on the left, and pretty shit when he had to play with fullbacks like Wolf or Schulz who weren’t able to do the same.

Sancho plays the better the more options he has, but he lacks the ability to enforce things when there are only a few options left how to proceed the play.

 

[TheMagicFoolBus]

Same to you mate. If you think your opinion is right then I have my right to laugh at you.

I'm not calling Sancho the next Aaron Lennon. The only reason I mentioned his name is to show that Sancho is better using his right foot to take players on the right side of the pitch than being and inverted player. This has been the case for nearly a decade now where right footed players play predominantly inverted football on the left and vice versa.

Whether that's RAM, RM, RW doesn't make a difference to me.

All I was trying to do is show that in my opinion he isn't best as an inverted player.

I saw this both at Dortmund where his last 2 seasons were his worst. I think 4 g&a in 16 matches in his last season. Then I saw it at United where he looked better on the right than he did on the left.

I think the only reason you backed your new Chelsea friend is because I mentioned Stone Island & your clearly one of those supporters who wears it

He is like a more all rounded Aaron Lennon.

You didn't present this as an opinion, you said something that is objectively and factually incorrect. Then you followed it up with Antonio Valencia and Nico Williams comparisons - two more players who couldn't be more different than Sancho.

Now you're just lashing out because despite your attempts at humor, you are only funny unintentionally. Keep it up though; it's a nice change of pace from the run of the mill toxicity plaguing this thread!

 

[Marwood]

For Sancho it doesn't matter on which side he plays, as long as he is paired with an attacking, overlapping fullback who gives him the option to drift inside and pass in every direction.

He was great for Dortmund when he played with Pisczcek or Hakimi on the right or with Guerreiro on the left, and pretty shit when he had to play with fullbacks like Wolf or Schulz who weren’t able to do the same.

Sancho plays the better the more options he has, but he lacks the ability to enforce things when there are only a few options left how to proceed the play.

Basically a fullback who does all the hard work, all the running for him.
So that he gets to get a 5 a side player.

 

[AngeloHenriquez]

Why do people keep saying "Should we bring him back?" on radio shows, I thought he is as good as gone and that if Chelsea finish top 14 they have an obligation to buy him irrelevant of how he performs which means 99% he is gone and we don't really have an option, have I missed something?

 

[stefan92]

Basically a fullback who does all the hard work, all the running for him.
So that he gets to get a 5 a side player.

Harsh way to phrase it

Not saying you are wrong but I think Sancho is one of the very best "5 a side players" and worth it to setup this way. Or I thought so during his first four years in Dortmund, never seen him play on that level after he moved to United.

 

[red_de_pologne]

Why do people keep saying "Should we bring him back?" on radio shows, I thought he is as good as gone and that if Chelsea finish top 14 they have an obligation to buy him irrelevant of how he performs which means 99% he is gone and we don't really have an option, have I missed something?

People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis

 

[Woodzy]

Why do people keep saying "Should we bring him back?" on radio shows, I thought he is as good as gone and that if Chelsea finish top 14 they have an obligation to buy him irrelevant of how he performs which means 99% he is gone and we don't really have an option, have I missed something?

Noticed this the the other day watching Talksport. Mike Phelan was on and even he was saying he could still have a future at United.

 

[saivet]

Why do people keep saying "Should we bring him back?" on radio shows, I thought he is as good as gone and that if Chelsea finish top 14 they have an obligation to buy him irrelevant of how he performs which means 99% he is gone and we don't really have an option, have I missed something?

You haven't missed anything - it would effectively require us buying him back from Chelsea next summer. If he's been rubbish, why would we want to buy him and if he's been great why would Chelsea (and Sancho himself) entertain a move? He's gone barring a Chelsea disaster season or they get hit with a huge points deduction that sees them finish below 14th (I would like to think the obligation may mitigate this point anyway).

 

[AngeloHenriquez]

Cheers guys thought as much

 

[Zehner]

Why do people keep saying "Should we bring him back?" on radio shows, I thought he is as good as gone and that if Chelsea finish top 14 they have an obligation to buy him irrelevant of how he performs which means 99% he is gone and we don't really have an option, have I missed something?

Has Sancho a say in this? As in, Chelsea finishes top 14 and has to sign him, can he veto it?

Maybe the line of thinking is that you could convince him to give it another try at United if Ten Hag is gone after the season.

 

[Semper Fudge]

Has Sancho a say in this? As in, Chelsea finishes top 14 and has to sign him, can he veto it?

Maybe the line of thinking is that you could convince him to give it another try at United if Ten Hag is gone after the season.

No thank you.

 

[AngeloHenriquez]

Has Sancho a say in this? As in, Chelsea finishes top 14 and has to sign him, can he veto it?

Maybe the line of thinking is that you could convince him to give it another try at United if Ten Hag is gone after the season.

Fair point but Sancho never seemed to really connect with the club, even before he fell out with ETH he rarely posted to social about us like he did Dortmund or even now with Chelsea, it's such a strange transfer all over.

 

[Cassidy]

Has Sancho a say in this? As in, Chelsea finishes top 14 and has to sign him, can he veto it?

Maybe the line of thinking is that you could convince him to give it another try at United if Ten Hag is gone after the season.

Why the feck would anyone want to do that?

 

[Rooney in Paris]

No thank you.

Yeah we're good, he's all Chelsea's.

 

[Ole'sgunnarwin]

I wonder how well this would have worked…

————— Zirkzee
Sancho — Mainoo — Amad

Eh, awfully. Who's scoring goals here?

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Eh, awfully. Who's scoring goals here?

We don't score goals - this is the way to arrive at the pinnacle of that.

 

[Zehner]

No thank you.

Fair point but Sancho never seemed to really connect with the club, even before he fell out with ETH he rarely posted to social about us like he did Dortmund or even now with Chelsea, it's such a strange transfer all over.

Why the feck would anyone want to do that?

I was theorizing why people wonder if United should give it another try with Sancho, perso ally I think it is in everyone's best interest to part ways

 

[Doracle]

I was theorizing why people wonder if United should give it another try with Sancho, perso ally I think it is in everyone's best interest to part ways

It does seem a little odd that we’ve kicked out Sancho at bargain basement price in circumstances where the manager with whom he’s fallen out probably won’t last the season. You’d have thought we might have wanted a new manager to at least have a look at him.

That said, it’s not like he was doing well before ETH. His wages mean he has to be a guaranteed starter really to justify keeping him around and it’s hard to see how that would occur without a quantum leap in his performance level.

 

[stefan92]

That said, it’s not like he was doing well before ETH

Exactly, he hasn't performed on a level that would justify his wages for none of Ole, Rangnick and EtH. At this point it's safe to cut your losses even if he only fell out with one of them on a personal level, simply because the performances never have been good enough.

 

[romufc]

It does seem a little odd that we’ve kicked out Sancho at bargain basement price in circumstances where the manager with whom he’s fallen out probably won’t last the season. You’d have thought we might have wanted a new manager to at least have a look at him.

That said, it’s not like he was doing well before ETH. His wages mean he has to be a guaranteed starter really to justify keeping him around and it’s hard to see how that would occur without a quantum leap in his performance level.

I think this is bigger than the manager. We have seen things go differently this summer and they probably assessed that he is not an option for us because of various reasons.

I saw Phil Jones interview and he said how the shirt is too heavy for some players, this was definitely the case with Sancho, he was always buckling under that pressure.

His ability didnt suit this team, he ended up being a basic player if that with no real urgency on/off the ball

He had already checked out of Manutd, his socials are evidence of this.

Having an expensive player whos mentality wasn't one of a united player, not rated by the manager and didn't suit the style.

Was better to let him go.

 

[afrocentricity]

If he performed for Chelsea, I wouldn't be against him coming back, but as it stands? Na

He's burnt his bridges with the fans and I doubt he's enamored with Manchester....

 

[cpresc]

Eh, awfully. Who's scoring goals here?

Harry Maguire, set piece haha

 

[Zehner]

It does seem a little odd that we’ve kicked out Sancho at bargain basement price in circumstances where the manager with whom he’s fallen out probably won’t last the season. You’d have thought we might have wanted a new manager to at least have a look at him.

That said, it’s not like he was doing well before ETH. His wages mean he has to be a guaranteed starter really to justify keeping him around and it’s hard to see how that would occur without a quantum leap in his performance level.

I think your bargaining position was very difficult. Sancho is on a very high salary and when you decided to stick with Ten Hag, every potential interest knew that you couldn't keep him around after things escalated like they did.

The question is rather why you decided to keep Ten Hag. From a managerial perspective, his treatment of Sancho effectively destroyed millions of asset value. You can look past that when the coach delivers in terms of results but he didn't exactly convince on that front either. Even if you did decide to sell Sancho regardless of the new coach because all bridges were burnt, you'd have a better leverage in the negotiations without Ten Hag around. Sure, you don't fire a manager to have a better bargaining position for a player sale but it is another argument against an already weak head coach.

 

[stevoc]

I think your bargaining position was very difficult. Sancho is on a very high salary and when you decided to stick with Ten Hag, every potential interest knew that you couldn't keep him around after things escalated like they did.

The question is rather why you decided to keep Ten Hag. From a managerial perspective, his treatment of Sancho effectively destroyed millions of asset value. You can look past that when the coach delivers in terms of results but he didn't exactly convince on that front either. Even if you did decide to sell Sancho regardless of the new coach because all bridges were burnt, you'd have a better leverage in the negotiations without Ten Hag around. Sure, you don't fire a manager to have a better bargaining position for a player sale but it is another argument against an already weak head coach.

No one really knows, it was a head screatcher alright.

 

[rimaldo]

interesting how grealish cost 20 odd million more, with a similar trajectory, but a fraction of the scrutiny.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

I think your bargaining position was very difficult. Sancho is on a very high salary and when you decided to stick with Ten Hag, every potential interest knew that you couldn't keep him around after things escalated like they did.

The question is rather why you decided to keep Ten Hag. From a managerial perspective, his treatment of Sancho effectively destroyed millions of asset value. You can look past that when the coach delivers in terms of results but he didn't exactly convince on that front either. Even if you did decide to sell Sancho regardless of the new coach because all bridges were burnt, you'd have a better leverage in the negotiations without Ten Hag around. Sure, you don't fire a manager to have a better bargaining position for a player sale but it is another argument against an already weak head coach.

Only if you pick and choose aspects of his management of Sancho.

Sancho is the one who destroyed his asset value, and whether or not Ten Hag had gone, Sancho's time at Utd was finished.

 

[Zehner]

Only if you pick and choose aspects of his management of Sancho.

Sancho is the one who destroyed his asset value, and whether or not Ten Hag had gone, Sancho's time at Utd was finished.

I'm not saying you would have been in a good bargaining position without Ten Hag around, far from it. But you could have at least argued that you prefer to sell but the new coach is willing to work with Sancho if you don't receive an acceptable offer when a potential buyer tried to lowball you. With Ten Hag in charge, everybody would have called the bluff.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

I'm not saying you would have been in a good bargaining position without Ten Hag around, far from it. But you could have at least argued that you prefer to sell but the new coach is willing to work with Sancho if you don't receive an acceptable offer when a potential buyer tried to lowball you. With Ten Hag in charge, everybody would have called the bluff.

Potentially slightly better - but considering the wages he's on and the terrible form that extends beyond a season, around 25-30m€ seems reasonable and not exactly the terrible deal that some are trying to portray. I've seen nothing as of yet in his time at Chelsea to suggest he's worth more than that currently.

 

[Zehner]

Potentially slightly better - but considering the wages he's on and the terrible form that extends beyond a season, around 25-30m€ seems reasonable and not exactly the terrible deal that some are trying to portray. I've seen nothing as of yet in his time at Chelsea to suggest he's worth more than that currently.

I don't think it's a terrible price either considering his wages.

 

[AneRu]

I think your bargaining position was very difficult. Sancho is on a very high salary and when you decided to stick with Ten Hag, every potential interest knew that you couldn't keep him around after things escalated like they did.

The question is rather why you decided to keep Ten Hag. From a managerial perspective, his treatment of Sancho effectively destroyed millions of asset value. You can look past that when the coach delivers in terms of results but he didn't exactly convince on that front either. Even if you did decide to sell Sancho regardless of the new coach because all bridges were burnt, you'd have a better leverage in the negotiations without Ten Hag around. Sure, you don't fire a manager to have a better bargaining position for a player sale but it is another argument against an already weak head coach.

Ten Hag is an incompetent manager who should have gone months ago but I am completely with him on Sancho. He didn't cost us millions in asset value, those who signed Sancho at such a wage did. Clearly all the hunger died inside of him when he got that contract, he didn't have the personal pride to drive himself to match his talent and be amongst the best.

Getting his wage off and 25m to boot is a good deal, all things considered. His form and lack of effort predate Ten Hag. He tried his best to extract performances out of him to no avail and his repayment was a dagger in the back. If he becomes the player he was supposed to be for Chelsea then fair play, I doubt he will but maybe they have a better environment for him. Let's see.

 

[Zehner]

Ten Hag is an incompetent manager who should have gone months ago but I am completely with him on Sancho. He didn't cost us millions in asset value, those who signed Sancho at such a wage did. Clearly all the hunger died inside of him when he got that contract, he didn't have the personal pride to drive himself to match his talent and be amongst the best.

Getting his wage off and 25m to boot is a good deal, all things considered. His form and lack of effort predate Ten Hag. He tried his best to extract performances out of him to no avail and his repayment was a dagger in the back. If he becomes the player he was supposed to be for Chelsea then fair play, I doubt he will but maybe they have a better environment for him. Let's see.

Let's just agree to disagree on that part. I'm still a fan of Sancho and hope he fulfills his potential whereever he plays (unless he somehow ends up at Bayern Munich, them he can feck off )

 

[AneRu]

Let's just agree to disagree on that part. I'm still a fan of Sancho and hope he fulfills his potential whereever he plays (unless he somehow ends up at Bayern Munich, them he can feck off )

Well we watched him fail here for three seasons, saw him betray the one manager that stood by him and watched him choose pride over his club, his career and his teammates. Part of me wished we had just kept him frozen, told Dortmund and Chelsea to feck off until his contract expired.

 

[1950]

interesting how grealish cost 20 odd million more, with a similar trajectory, but a fraction of the scrutiny.

True. If you ignore the Champions League title, the three league titles in a row, not falling out with the manager via social media, not having a reputation for being lazy in training and not being shipped out on loan twice, their trajectory has been eerily similar.