Jadon Sancho - Chelsea (loan) watch

lex talionis said:
The only Chelsea forum I'm aware of is The Shed End and they're generally cautiously optimistic this might work out for. Somewhat doubtful of a significant impact, but cautiously optimistic.

And of course this take from a poster who goes by petre ispirescu:

If you go through the Sancho thread at RedCafe you will find it funny the way they act like United is going to instantly improve now that he is gone, even though Sancho has played like a total of 80 minutes in 4 matches for them for the past year

They signed him for 73M, sold him to us for 20-25M. Basically a 50M loss, but somehow a good deal for them haha.

And then they wonder how Chelsea is able to sign so many players and still cope with all the rules.

You will hardly ever find a club that is worse than United at selling their players for the slightest of profits.

If this violates any forum rules, mods please go ahead and delete this post.

For the most part the post is well taken, except for the insinuation that we will instantly improve because he is gone. We expect to improve because of the ins, but although getting rid of Sancho is a fantastic development for the club it won't be Sancho's absence that improves us. The players we've brought in need to improve the squad and I suspect even Chelsea fans would have to agree that bringing in De Ligt, Marzraoui and Ugarte in particular address weaknesses in the squad last year that opponents exploited again and again. But we shall see about that. Whatever the case may be, we are better off without Sancho; and if Chelsea are better off with Sancho, then it's a win-win.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends what you mean by working out. Sancho came in here with a significant transfer fee and an expectation that he would take our attack to the next level. Albeit still on big wages, he arrives at Chelsea for around a third of the transfer fee he came to us with and into a team that's unlikely to be dependent on him to make the difference.

He also has a coach at Chelsea who worked with him at youth level, so all of those conditions should be more conducive to getting more out of Sancho than what we did. There's no real pressure on him and they should have a better understanding of what they're receiving as a player relative to what we thought we were getting.

Ultimately it's difficult to see him really taking off though. I'm expecting a slightly elevated level of performance at Chelsea (how can it really get any worse?) but that's not necessarily an indicator of success either.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Worried about what? Sancho or Sterling? Selling Sancho is the best we’ve done in ages.
Click to expand...
Well, our coaches, the people that helped create him as a footballer, don’t think the PL was too much for him. They obviously seem to think it was who he was playing for that was the issue.

I mean, that’s the unspoken question in this whole thread: is Sancho not very good? Or is the problem us?

If you dropped his wages because he left on a lark to Italy, you never really have to ask that question. But he stayed in the PL, with essentially Man City coaches and front office personnel.

It’s a question Chelsea fans have certainly had to face… more than a few times. “Ship that De Bruyne kid off, he’s lazy, doesn’t have what it takes physically for the PL”.

Maybe that doesn’t happen. Maybe he fails. But he was one of the top rising talents in the world, played well for another very good European team, played well in the CL, and the assumption is he can’t play well in the PL because he didn’t do well at United?
 
It was clear he couldn't stay under Ten Hag so it's the best for all involved. I think there's every chance for that fee he could end up as a good signing for them, it all depends on whether the clean break gives Sancho the fresh start he needs. Some players need a perfect environment to perform.
 
Bluelion7 said:
Well, our coaches, the people that helped create him as a footballer, don’t think the PL was too much for him. They obviously seem to think it was who he was playing for that was the issue.

I mean, that’s the unspoken question in this whole thread: is Sancho not very good? Or is the problem us?

If you dropped his wages because he left on a lark to Italy, you never really have to ask that question. But he stayed in the PL, with essentially Man City coaches and front office personnel.

It’s a question Chelsea fans have certainly had to face… more than a few times. “Ship that De Bruyne kid off, he’s lazy, doesn’t have what it takes physically for the PL”.

Maybe that doesn’t happen. Maybe he fails. But he was one of the top rising talents in the world, played well for another very good European team, played well in the CL, and the assumption is he can’t play well in the PL because he didn’t do well at United?
Click to expand...
We’ve had some hard times, but we’ve won two trophies in two seasons with many players having plenty of good performances.
The problem is Sancho, I hope he learns to apply himself, but it won’t make his time at United any less on him. He can play in the PL on ability, but he needs to sort himself out, there isn’t a question there.
 
CM said:
I guess it depends what you mean by working out. Sancho came in here with a significant transfer fee and an expectation that he would take our attack to the next level. Albeit still on big wages, he arrives at Chelsea for around a third of the transfer fee he came to us with and into a team that's unlikely to be dependent on him to make the difference.

He also has a coach at Chelsea who worked with him at youth level, so all of those conditions should be more conducive to getting more out of Sancho than what we did. There's no real pressure on him and they should have a better understanding of what they're receiving as a player relative to what we thought we were getting.

Ultimately it's difficult to see him really taking off though. I'm expecting a slightly elevated level of performance at Chelsea (how can it really get any worse?) but that's not necessarily an indicator of success either.
Click to expand...

Coach didn't work with him at City. He joined in 2020 and Sancho left in 2017.
 
Bluelion7 said:
Well, our coaches, the people that helped create him as a footballer, don’t think the PL was too much for him. They obviously seem to think it was who he was playing for that was the issue.

I mean, that’s the unspoken question in this whole thread: is Sancho not very good? Or is the problem us?

If you dropped his wages because he left on a lark to Italy, you never really have to ask that question. But he stayed in the PL, with essentially Man City coaches and front office personnel.

It’s a question Chelsea fans have certainly had to face… more than a few times. “Ship that De Bruyne kid off, he’s lazy, doesn’t have what it takes physically for the PL”.

Maybe that doesn’t happen. Maybe he fails. But he was one of the top rising talents in the world, played well for another very good European team, played well in the CL, and the assumption is he can’t play well in the PL because he didn’t do well at United?
Click to expand...

This is just what everyone does when they take a player that everyone thought was going to be so good, but who has underperformed at another club.

If United had taken Mudryk from Chelsea there would be loads of us convincing ourselves that he will somehow be a different players at United, whilst most Chelsea fans would be laughing and rejoicing at the day he left.

Sancho was just ok at Dortmund last season imo, and not some suppressed superstar some would have had you think, and that was when everything was perfect for him in a league and team that suits him well.

There is a very good reason virtually every United fan is gald to see the back of him.
 
roonster09 said:
Coach didn't work with him at City. He joined in 2020 and Sancho left in 2017.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I was sure I saw a quote from Maresca saying he worked with him at City but I might've imagined that.
 
Bluelion7 said:
Well, our coaches, the people that helped create him as a footballer, don’t think the PL was too much for him. They obviously seem to think it was who he was playing for that was the issue.

I mean, that’s the unspoken question in this whole thread: is Sancho not very good? Or is the problem us?

If you dropped his wages because he left on a lark to Italy, you never really have to ask that question. But he stayed in the PL, with essentially Man City coaches and front office personnel.

It’s a question Chelsea fans have certainly had to face… more than a few times. “Ship that De Bruyne kid off, he’s lazy, doesn’t have what it takes physically for the PL”.

Maybe that doesn’t happen. Maybe he fails. But he was one of the top rising talents in the world, played well for another very good European team, played well in the CL, and the assumption is he can’t play well in the PL because he didn’t do well at United?
Click to expand...
People already know the answer to that question - he's not very good. He'll be a good addition for the conference league though.

Sancho was an incredible talent but he's a mental midget.
 
Bluelion7 said:
Why are you guys so worried about it? His original coaches, the people that developed him, brought him to City from Watford as a kid, believe he can be really special, and play on the wing in a way Sterling can’t. If they are wrong you can all laugh at us. No big deal.

Sterling is AWESOME! One of your teams should definitely buy him next year.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Is this what Chelsea fans are clinging to? The notion that someone who coached him when he was a kid knows more about getting the most out of him than multiple coaches who worked with him as an adult? Which he is right now. An adult. Physically, anyway.

Such a weird straw to grasp.
 
OverratedOpinion said:
The thing that genuinely baffles me from a Chelsea perspective is Sterling.

I'm not saying he's world class but who in their right minds doesn't think Sterling is a far better player than Sancho.

So you send him to Arsenal to help them then replace him with a worse player and lose out financially.

So maybe the argument is Sterling having a bad attitude. If that's the case it baffles me that Sancho is the player you sign?

Their new manager either loves Sancho or there is literally no logic.
Click to expand...

It’s football as seen by accountants. Sancho is younger, therefore more valuable. Almost doesn’t matter what they do on the pitch. The twats running Chelsea don’t see any of these guys as footballers, they’re just financial assets.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
:lol:

Is this what Chelsea fans are clinging to? The notion that someone who coached him when he was a kid knows more about getting the most out of him than multiple coaches who worked with him as an adult? Which he is right now. An adult. Physically, anyway.

Such a weird straw to grasp.
Click to expand...

It's a loan with a small fee if we hit certain criteria. I don't think Chelsea fans are really "clinging" to anything regarding Sancho.
 
Sancho on 20M and 200K contract is a punt. If he doesnt work out for Chelsea, can they flog him? Probably, because they arguably the best selling club in England.

So best case scenario for us is he flops badly, and they are stuck with him. Worst case he turns out to be a bargain for them. I'm betting on the former though
 
duffer said:
It's a loan with a small fee if we hit certain criteria. I don't think Chelsea fans are really "clinging" to anything regarding Sancho.
Click to expand...

£25m isn’t really a “small fee”. Even more so when you consider the fat wages he’ll expect. Whatever, I found it weird that some Chelsea coach having worked with him at Watford might be the ace up your sleeve. But maybe that’s not an opinion shared by more than that one fan I quoted.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
£25m isn’t really a “small fee”. Even more so when you consider the fat wages he’ll expect. Whatever, I found it weird that some Chelsea coach having worked with him at Watford might be the ace up your sleeve. But maybe that’s not an opinion shared by more than that one fan I quoted.
Click to expand...

In a league where Solanke is £65 mil and Eddie Nketiah is £30 mil, £20 to £25 mil for Sancho is a small fee.

The stuff about his previous coaches isn't a huge deal to me but it certainly can't hurt to have people at the club who know and like him.
 
duffer said:
In a league where Solanke is £65 mil and Eddie Nketiah is £30 mil, £20 to £25 mil for Sancho is a small fee.

The stuff about his previous coaches isn't a huge deal to me but it certainly can't hurt to have people at the club who know and like him.
Click to expand...
Its not 25m fee. You are paying a large part of his wages this season which is likely about 10m
 
Obviously all fans attempt to bullshit to themselves whenever they make a new signing. We've done it enough times over the years with all the rubbish we've signed. Chelsea fans will convince themselves Sancho could turn out alright, maybe even a bargain. All he needs is a change of scenery, a fresh start, an arm around the shoulder.

Give it half a year and reality will set in.
 
duffer said:
You're right that it's not 25 mil. It's 20 mil possibly up to 25 mil.

And of course he gets wages but we're talking about the transfer fee.
Click to expand...
The transfer fee is obviously going to be less when you are paying for a year loan before. Pretend you are getting him for 25m though if you like
 
Bluelion7 said:
Well, our coaches, the people that helped create him as a footballer, don’t think the PL was too much for him. They obviously seem to think it was who he was playing for that was the issue.

I mean, that’s the unspoken question in this whole thread: is Sancho not very good? Or is the problem us?

If you dropped his wages because he left on a lark to Italy, you never really have to ask that question. But he stayed in the PL, with essentially Man City coaches and front office personnel.

It’s a question Chelsea fans have certainly had to face… more than a few times. “Ship that De Bruyne kid off, he’s lazy, doesn’t have what it takes physically for the PL”.

Maybe that doesn’t happen. Maybe he fails. But he was one of the top rising talents in the world, played well for another very good European team, played well in the CL, and the assumption is he can’t play well in the PL because he didn’t do well at United?
Click to expand...

I’m someone that really wanted Sancho to do well here - I don’t think Sancho to Chelsea will work due to two reasons.

1) He seemed way to slow for the Premier Legaue, that’s from his start of his time here until his final game. A slower and less physical league really suited his game much more.

2) for him to succeed, it’ll probably be a well organised team where he’s the final piece of the puzzle, which is probably Arsenal and City - neither of which will take him due to his low work rate.

It’s not just ten Hag he didn’t do well for - even under Ole, who would probably suit his game better and let them shine, he didn’t. (This may or may not have been due to Ronaldo, who knows). Chelsea I see as in a similar situation as United right now, that’s why I don’t see it working, and will be surprised if I am wrong
 
duffer said:
In a league where Solanke is £65 mil and Eddie Nketiah is £30 mil, £20 to £25 mil for Sancho is a small fee.

The stuff about his previous coaches isn't a huge deal to me but it certainly can't hurt to have people at the club who know and like him.
Click to expand...
Spurs paying a stupid fee isn’t a justification.

I think Sancho may be an ok deal for you (and at least Chelsea have learned not to waste £100m) but if I was Chelsea, I’d have given this one a miss
 
Chelsea fans obviously trying to put a positive spin on things.

The club and player suit eachother. That says it all.
 


Sancho's love-letter style leaving message after his loan spell at Dortmund, compared to his leaving message with us. :lol:

What a guy.
 
BeforeKeanetherewasRobson said:
Spurs paying a stupid fee isn’t a justification.

I think Sancho may be an ok deal for you (and at least Chelsea have learned not to waste £100m) but if I was Chelsea, I’d have given this one a miss
Click to expand...
I'm not justifying it, just giving context. £20 mil these days is not a lot.

I'd have personally passed on Sancho if he was on a free transfer but that's because we've already got a boatload of players, not because the transfer fee was high.
 
duffer said:
In a league where Solanke is £65 mil and Eddie Nketiah is £30 mil, £20 to £25 mil for Sancho is a small fee.

The stuff about his previous coaches isn't a huge deal to me but it certainly can't hurt to have people at the club who know and like him.
Click to expand...
Maybe so but it comes with the obvious caveat of his pay packet. Those other players commanded higher transfer fees in this window but once you factor in the overall package it takes to sign them, Sancho will likely cost more by the end of his contract.
 
Neither his £25 million fee or a bunch of coaches who were once nice to him as a child isn’t really going to impact upon the fact that he is physically unable to make the most of his talent in the Premier League. These factors don’t alter his poor mindset and work ethic either.

Sancho will do alright in as much as he’ll score every now and then and have some good games. He’s not a bad footballer, far from it. But he’s not a United one either. We’re best rid; he can dick around with his mates on the PlayStation from London instead.
 
Superunknown said:


Sancho's love-letter style leaving message after his loan spell at Dortmund, compared to his leaving message with us. :lol:

What a guy.
Click to expand...


Well United fans everywhere are celebrating his departure, I’m sure he knows how United fans online feel about him. Can hardly blame him for just keeping it simple ;)
 
Really weir he went for EPL move, he'd boss the Italian league.
Anyway, I don't like him, have no sympathy for super talented players who can't be arsed and are unprofessional, can't wait to see him against United.
 
Borys said:
Really weir he went for EPL move, he'd boss the Italian league.
Anyway, I don't like him, have no sympathy for super talented players who can't be arsed and are unprofessional, can't wait to see him against United.
Click to expand...
You'll have to wait a while, he's not allowed to play against you this season at least.
 
AndySmith1990 said:
Obviously all fans attempt to bullshit to themselves whenever they make a new signing. We've done it enough times over the years with all the rubbish we've signed. Chelsea fans will convince themselves Sancho could turn out alright, maybe even a bargain. All he needs is a change of scenery, a fresh start, an arm around the shoulder.

Give it half a year and reality will set in.
Click to expand...

Sideways move from Raheem for me, not an upgrade.

Mainly our defence and GK looked awful so far this season, another luxury winger won't make a material difference I think.
 
Borys said:
Really weir he went for EPL move, he'd boss the Italian league.
Anyway, I don't like him, have no sympathy for super talented players who can't be arsed and are unprofessional, can't wait to see him against United.
Click to expand...
Yeah he'd show those hard tackling Italian defenders real grit and physicality. Loves a challenge does our Jadon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.