Plastic Evra
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2023
- Messages
- 2,704
I'm not sure I follow how getting rid of Sancho would dramatically benefit our FFP position for the future, at least more so than any high value, high wages player we'd sold ?
Chelsea will have to pay him a lot of money to leave. Can't see any team paying him anywhere near 300k a week for the next 3 years.
Both the remaining of his unamortised fee and insane wages would make a huge difference.I'm not sure I follow how getting rid of Sancho would dramatically benefit our FFP position for the future, at least more so than any high value, high wages player we'd sold ?
Both the remaining of his unamortised fee and insane wages would make a huge difference.
I expect it to more than likely be a loan with option to buy (similar to Hannibal to Burnley, but his is obligation to buy, I just don't think we'd be lucky enough to get an obligation on Sancho). From what I remember, considering he's done 4 years of his six-year contract, we would need to sell him for around £25m if sold this season in order to 'break even' due to the price we paid for him. Of course he's cost us a lot in wages so it isn't necessarily as simple as that, but for the actual PSR it will work out around that I believe.Obviously though the amortised fee on the books is not an outstanding "cost". And Sancho would probably have to be replaced (this summer or next) by another player that we presumably will have to pay a compensation fee for and pay wages to (though hopefully one a bracket below).
I'm nitpicking a little but I'd be surprised whatever FFP/PSR inefficiencies we have would be uniquely alleviated by offloading Sancho specifically. Though he's certainly the one I'd get out the door first considering how little value he is contributing to the football playing.
I expect it to more than likely be a loan with option to buy (similar to Hannibal to Burnley, but his is obligation to buy, I just don't think we'd be lucky enough to get an obligation on Sancho). From what I remember, considering he's done 4 years of his six-year contract, we would need to sell him for around £25m if sold this season in order to 'break even' due to the price we paid for him. Of course he's cost us a lot in wages so it isn't necessarily as simple as that, but for the actual PSR it will work out around that I believe.
As for Sterling, to get this on topic, I didn't want him and I don't think many United fans would. However, I could see us signing an English/homegrown player or two this window given who we are offloading. We already moved on six players that count as homegrown this Summer and odds are we are getting rid of another three (McTominay, Hannibal, Sancho). I don't think we will even have the eight homegrown players in our squad unless youth players are promoted, but we don't have to register anyone under 21 obviously. In terms of bolstering the squad, I wouldn't be surprised to see us add homegrown players.
Just for reference, I think ours at the moment are (assuming all of the above leave): Heaton, Maguire, Shaw, Mainoo*, Mount, Rashford, Garnacho...
I guess if they mean FFP as in the UEFA squad cost rule which the PL are (I think) adopting next summer, then Sancho's wages are a pretty huge factor. Book value of ~£30m or whatever plus the wages of slightly less than that would account for something like 10% (I guess more like 7% or something next season) of our total revenue, when we'd be trying to get the whole playing squad down to 70% of total revenue to be in line with the rules going forward. All for a player who doesn't play.I'm not sure I follow how getting rid of Sancho would dramatically benefit our FFP position for the future, at least more so than any high value, high wages player we'd sold ?
I guess if they mean FFP as in the UEFA squad cost rule which the PL are (I think) adopting next summer, then Sancho's wages are a pretty huge factor. Book value of ~£30m or whatever plus the wages of slightly less than that would account for something like 10% (I guess more like 7% or something next season) of our total revenue, when we'd be trying to get the whole playing squad down to 70% of total revenue to be in line with the rules going forward. All for a player who doesn't play.
Apologies for the quick and dirty maths but I think it shows how much of a problem Sancho is in financial terms when he's otherwise a non-entity as a Man United footballer. He eats ~10% of your squad cost budget just by existing.
No he's not, he's never been a consistent scorer, if anything he's exactly like Rashford in how inconsistent he is. He hasn't even had a good season in yearsSay what you want but he a reliable and consistent scorer on paper which is one quality we could use. Big reservations otherwise.
Yep you’re right, they’ll have to. Probably where the interest ‘on our terms’ comes from.For 100-150k I'm okay with it. Chelsea will pay him off because he aint getting that elsewhere.
What the feck is a reliable and consistent scorer on paper? We got loads of those. They just don't actually score in real life.Say what you want but he a reliable and consistent scorer on paper which is one quality we could use. Big reservations otherwise.
I doubt Trossard is on £200k+. I'd also much prefer Trossard at this pointSterling as the Trossard. Just need to sell Rashford for someone truly elite.
I was in the same camp. But I’m warming up to the idea of adding him. IF he comes on reduced wages and a short 2+1 kind of deal.He's the last thing we need.
- Approaching 30
- On big wages
- Ex Liverpool and City
- Misses big chances constantly
If we're seriously interested here I'll be extremely concerned.
I doubt Sterling would earn £200k a week with us.I doubt Trossard is on £200k+. I'd also much prefer Trossard at this point