pascell
Full Member
Because we can't afford him at the fee/structure Dortmund want the deal to be done at.If it was always Sancho or bust, why didn't we just cough up and be done with it?
Because we can't afford him at the fee/structure Dortmund want the deal to be done at.If it was always Sancho or bust, why didn't we just cough up and be done with it?
I'm unsure how United aren't paying the money still.
The reality is the following:
If Sancho doesn't sign for United the board really do need to have a word with themselves.
- Dortmund are unlikely to win the league, they'll finish 2nd or 3rd
- Dortmund with or without Sancho will finish either 2nd of 3rd because of their squad
- Keeping Sancho would actually increase his value, he will only be worth more as he develops more
- Dortmund have set a £108M value on Sancho which is a fair valuation considering his age and his output
- United need Sancho because they lack a RW and have done, especially since Ronaldo leaving in 2009
- United have missed out on key targets in the past including Eden Hazard (which was obviously a bad moment for the club)
- United have a free run at Sancho, they have the money and there's no other team competing for him.
- United have also said that he is the number one priority this summer.
Looking at 'Bale' as an alternative on Loan is really not the solution long-term.
I'd take Bale on loan and Sancho sure, but any situation where Sancho doesn't sign is disastrous.
Because we can't afford him at the fee/structure Dortmund want the deal to be done at.
Well, we don't really have proof of any brief in all fairnessTo those saying "we don't know the financial situation". Why did Woodward brief to ducker a week ago that we had a deal with Sancho and now Sancho was pushing the deal? Woodward knows the situation a week ago. Why the feck did we get a full guns blazing brief, in the process implying a deal was still was possible...if we know it's not financially possible?
I've given up on the deal, but we need this answered. Why were we briefed about the saga so late in the window if it wasn't a guaranteed signing?
Another thing about next summer, I am not sure we will be in the Champions League.
Well, we don't really have proof of any brief in all fairness
So why haven't we got Sancho yet it we can afford him?I don't believe that. We are Manchester United, we can still afford pretty much any player out there.
I don't believe that. We are Manchester United, we can still afford pretty much any player out there.
So Simon Stone and Ducker writing the exact same articles, within the same hour, using the same wording implies what exactly?
So why haven't we got Sancho yet it we can afford him?
That one of them copied the other?
So Simon Stone and Ducker writing the exact same articles, within the same hour, using the same wording implies what exactly?
Disastrous? Jesus wept. How would it be disastrous? We didn't have him the season just finished and we came 3rd and we had lots of bad luck last season too with injuries. We also didn't have Bruno for 5 months of it.
Be disappointing to not get him perhaps but it's far from disastrous.
Any why did we not have Bruno for 5 months? Because the board was pulling the same shit they're pulling with Sancho.
Why was a lot of injuries really bad luck? Because we did not have adequate cover for our first team, and ended up playing with Lingard and Perreira.
We're going into the season praying that we don't have any injuries and that our main RW, who is not really an RW, will not get burned out.
Still not disastrous is it? How can it be disastrous to not have a player we have never owned? And even if we get him we won't win the league. We're more than Jadon Sancho away from finishing above the top 2.
But surely we had been speaking to them in the expectation that we would get CL. The price shouldn’t have been a surprise.
Hahaha ahh yes, the BBC, you know, that bastion of rampant plagiarism
That's the simpler answer, not Woodward being a clown and briefing for no reason, but the BBC journo risks credibility just to copy an article.
To be fair, buying expensive players can get you to where you want to be. Look at PSG for example. Paid £100m plus for both Mbappe and Neymar (regarded as two of the best in the world). Lead them to their first champions league final. Fair enough they didn’t win it on the night, but with the chances they had they should have.Ever wondered why EPL teams assemble very expensive squads that hardly match up to Bayern , Madrid or Barcelona? Well this is it. You pay 120million for the 3rd best player of a team that doesn’t even threaten to win the champions league.
I’m willing to bet that Mason Greenwood in BVB will score 20goals a season and probably get some odd 15 assists. Is he worth 100million? Not yet.
it was the same with Pogba. Good midfielder but not the best in Juventus at that time. Vidal and Pirlo were better.
Next time if you wonder why we spend 400 million and still lose to Juventus or BVB then there is your answer.
People can talk all they want about the market changing but why does it not change for other leagues in Europe? Only EPL teams and Barcelona fall victim
That’s the reason why you always have the player you want to get, and a backup or two in case the deal doesn’t go through. By the looks of it, this just looks poorly planned. Even worse if we cave in now and end up paying what they wanted all along.I respect the club position, because every business is suffering due to covid. Spunking 120M Euros for one player is a dangerous game to play. Especially if we still need to fill other position of need.
People complains how United been taken to the cleaners in previous transfers, and now the same people complains when United takes a stand. "Not now" they said.
Well, if not now then when? If United wanted to have stronger position in future transfer market, then they should be able to walk away on a deal.
However, this requires a backup target that must be successful. And that's one area that United must be able to improve
If you think 20% is good enough for a club like Dortmund then so be it. No discussion necessary.Our league starts this weekend, and clubs are allowed to operate at 20% capacity. That means there will be around 16.000 fans in Dortmund when they play their first match on Saturday. You'll never know how it goes on, but the worst seems to be behind us, at least in Germany.
They didn't want a lump sum btw, but acceptable installments.
That sense of entitlement here is amazing. They don't want to sell him, they agreed on some sort of RC with Sancho, which your club isn't willing to meet. He's got 3 years on his contract, they have 0 obligation to make you muppets happy.
They have set a deadline because they aren't run by dorks. Losing 40+ G+A requires mitigation, means they would've needed time fo find a decent replacement and ease it into the squad. You won't give a damn about that, but they certainly do.
The same reason we didn’t buy Bruno last summer. We could afford him but wanted him cheaper. We still went and bought him in Jan.So why haven't we got Sancho yet it we can afford him?
To be fair, buying expensive players can get you to where you want to be. Look at PSG for example. Paid £100m plus for both Mbappe and Neymar (regarded as two of the best in the world). Lead them to their first champions league final. Fair enough they didn’t win it on the night, but with the chances they had they should have.
Yes absolutely. There are examples for both sides. But even Liverpool still had to spend £140m on two players to get them there. (Alisson and VVD). My response was to the OP who suggested spending big wasn’t the way to do it.Meanwhile Liverpool have a net spend of 25m and have won the title and the champions league. You can push for tail examples with either method - the best approach is likely somewhere in between.
To those saying "we don't know the financial situation". Why did Woodward brief to ducker a week ago that we had a deal with Sancho and now Sancho was pushing the deal? Woodward knows the situation a week ago. Why the feck did we get a full guns blazing brief, in the process implying a deal was still was possible...if we know it's not financially possible?
I've given up on the deal, but we need this answered. Why were we briefed about the saga so late in the window if it wasn't a guaranteed signing?
Without Sancho, I'd be very surprised if we were to be honest. We just don't have the depth required for what is going to be a ridiculously intense season.
Any why did we not have Bruno for 5 months? Because the board was pulling the same shit they're pulling with Sancho.
Why was a lot of injuries really bad luck? Because we did not have adequate cover for our first team, and ended up playing with Lingard and Perreira.
We're going into the season praying that we don't have any injuries and that our main RW, who is not really an RW, will not get burned out.
This is ridiculous though. We should not lower expectations to nothing just because of a poor transfer window. We finished 3rd last season and we'll start this season with a better squad. It's disappointing that we're not taking steps to catch up to the top teams but the expectation should still be that we improve on last season's points total. Around 75 points is a reasonable target without signing anyone else. If we're mid-table in December, then our coaching team will have seriously fecked up.I’m a huge critic of Solskjaer. I don’t think the guy should ever have been appointed. But he gets a free pass from me this year.
When we completely fall to pieces in December and we are hovering mid table due to our players being exhausted, that will be 100% on the board!
I respect the club position, because every business is suffering due to covid. Spunking 120M Euros for one player is a dangerous game to play. Especially if we still need to fill other position of need.
People complains how United been taken to the cleaners in previous transfers, and now the same people complains when United takes a stand. "Not now" they said.
Well, if not now then when? If United wanted to have stronger position in future transfer market, then they should be able to walk away on a deal.
However, this requires a backup target that must be successful. And that's one area that United must be able to improve
True. And United has been very poor in that regard. Lack of alternatives has been a huge issue since Fergie retired. United usually had a plan B that would work out equally or better in some cases. Targeted players would be more inclined to push for a transfer because they know if they don't get this move, United could get another player. We don't do that nowThat’s the reason why you always have the player you want to get, and a backup or two in case the deal doesn’t go through. By the looks of it, this just looks poorly planned. Even worse if we cave in now and end up paying what they wanted all along.
This is ridiculous though. We should not lower expectations to nothing just because of a poor transfer window. We finished 3rd last season and we'll start this season with a better squad. It's disappointing that we're not taking steps to catch up to the top teams but the expectation should still be that we improve on last season's points total. Around 75 points is a reasonable target without signing anyone else. If we're mid-table in December, then our coaching team will have seriously fecked up.
Without Sancho, I'd be very surprised if we were to be honest. We just don't have the depth required for what is going to be a ridiculously intense season.
I’m a huge critic of Solskjaer. I don’t think the guy should ever have been appointed. But he gets a free pass from me this year.
When we completely fall to pieces in December and we are hovering mid table due to our players being exhausted, that will be 100% on the board!
A well run club would either have Sancho signed already or would Have walked away weeks ago and signed an alternative for the manager. It’s utterly insane that we are a couple of days away from our season resuming and this is the situation.
Assuming that a brief even happened - doubtful in my view - then its rather obvious what the play is here. We are trying to put pressure on Dortmund to reduce the asking price.
How would you feel as a United fan if Barcelona were trying to buy Greenwood but wouldn't meet our asking price? Probably not a lot. What about if you then knew that the player had agreed terms with them? You'd be thinking 'he wants to go'.
Now look at it from Dortmunds perspective. They've already put a price tag on him - ie they are willing to sell him. Now the player has agree terms - ie he wants to go. As a fan of Dortmund you'd probably be questioning that players commitment to your club, and the club are also wondering if its worth keeping a player that wants to leave
Dortmunds perspective must be piss easy, as long as the player isn't being vocal about his desires to leave the club and acting like a cnut, combined with the fact that his value isn't likely to go down due to his contract length, there's no reason to ship him out.
So Simon Stone and Ducker writing the exact same articles, within the same hour, using the same wording implies what exactly?