Was Raiola a bad person?
Was Sancho a bad signing?
- Thread starter VanDeBank
- Start date
Ask again in 2-3 seasons time and we'll see if he has kicked on under a new manager with a full pre season, or whether he's destined to join the elite and special group of football players that arrive at United on the wings of success and depart in the talons of failure
Our accounts specifically say that the additions over the Summer will add around £65m to our salary bill (£1.25m per week).
I've checked most sources and they state the split is around £510k for Ronaldo and around £350k each for Sancho and Varane. That tallies pretty accurately to the £1.25m increase mentioned in our accounts.
It's possible that Tom Heaton is earning £650k a week and Ronaldo/Sancho/Varane are all earning around £200k, but far more likely is as stated in my second paragraph.
Nope, still very young and considering Rashford's regression he can make that left side his own. I think he will also benefit from Ten Hag's style as well.
Yes, definitely.
While this season one can argue that he entered a bad transition with the changing managers, the different playing style and level between Bundesliga and PL... His performances have been discrete, to say less... TBH, I do believe in Jadon's potential and I think what he achieved at Dortmund showed he can become World Class, but he needs to put the work, and unfortunately, if after 2 seasons he can't consolidate and with an arguably better manager such as Ten Hag, then I think the best option would be to sell him.
The same goes to Fernandes, Van de Beek, Rashford, De Gea and to a less extent, Shaw and AWB.
I think he’s one of our best signings post SAF, first season in the PL and the whole team is getting playing crap so can’t judge him just yet although I think he’s doing ok considering what happened at the Euros…
Don't think he is a 'bad signing', but I would say in many ways he was the wrong signing at the wrong time for us and we are therefore perhaps very quickly (too quickly in some respects) becoming the wrong club for him.
Under a new manager, in a new season, it is to be hoped we will get a better/consistent level of performance from Sancho that we know he has in him... and some of the bad habits he has already started to pick up... like not being too keen on defensive duties, starting to want 'ball to feet' all the time, beating a player, then going back and beating him again just to show how clever he is, and only occasionally (and when forced) trying to get to the bye-line, when that is the most effective position from which to play balls into the box, especially when you have a CR around.
Under a new manager, in a new season, it is to be hoped we will get a better/consistent level of performance from Sancho that we know he has in him... and some of the bad habits he has already started to pick up... like not being too keen on defensive duties, starting to want 'ball to feet' all the time, beating a player, then going back and beating him again just to show how clever he is, and only occasionally (and when forced) trying to get to the bye-line, when that is the most effective position from which to play balls into the box, especially when you have a CR around.
Time will tell, but for the price tag he has mostly been disappointing.
Absolutely this.
No doubt that Sancho is a good player with bags of potential. In this right system and under the right manager, he may even prove to be a world class player. But realistically, facts do not lie, Liverpool have got a better player for exactly half the price. Why do we keep getting our pants pulled down like this? What are our recruiting and scouting network doing?
I'll reserve judgement until next season
Put Sancho in a top team and he'd have done considerably better I expect. We seem to make everyone look shit at the moment.
Is he the better player though? Or is it just that he's playing under a much better manager, who has his side as a well functioned side? Not to mention that Diaz is also 3 years older, and did not perform as well as Sancho did prior to the transfer. This despite Sancho playing in a tougher league.
I feel like this thread is premature.
I hear you. But on that basis is Van Dijk better there is hope for Maguire? Our no 5 looks decent playing with in England in a system that clearly suits his talents. Should we suspend judgement on Harry because he played under an inept manager?
I suspect Sancho may well be a better player under Klopp, but he is not under Klopp,. It is worth remembering that no matter how good your manager is and how great the system you play in is, if you are inept then your ineptitude will only be exposed and amplified. Klopp cannot imbue players with capabilities that they do not have., but he can develop the potential that is there. Even with the best will in the world and despite repeated attempts Klopp failed to turn Jordan Henderson into a Van Dijk replacement.
Even based on various key stats, Diaz outperforms Sancho relative to the number of games played, more shots at goal, more shots on target. better pass completion %age and slightly higher number of passes per game with fewer PL matches played.
He's a good player, how well we make use of him is another matter. Theres no reason he shouldn't be a success.
Extremely talented player, but he needs to improve the intensity of his game (though tbf at the moment you could say that about pretty much all our players). If he can do that (and Ten Hag can create a functioning team) he'll be phenomenal.
No he wasn’t a bad signing, he was a signing that you didn’t particularly need over other areas of the pitch though. Like RW and CM. I don’t even think there was concrete interest from other sides that prompted the purchase. It’s the right signing at the wrong time.
I am absolutely glad we got him, probably our best footballer and will come good with better players surrounding him.
No but giving that salary was stupid.
The only reason I think he was a 'bad' signing is the fact we have needed a RW for a long time and when he was bought, it was assumed to be for that position, yet he's played most of his football on the left.
I think he's our best option from the left, even if he has been underwhelming so far. Hopefully he kicks on next season under EtH and we get a proper RW this summer.
I think he's our best option from the left, even if he has been underwhelming so far. Hopefully he kicks on next season under EtH and we get a proper RW this summer.
I remember being shot down for asking whether he’s actually a RW. Clearly he’s stronger on the left. That’s why we could have done with signing someone else.
A lot of delusion in this thread he’s been fecking gash for £75m and £350k a week, can only hope he has a better second season and works best under Ten Hag.
He's been underwhelming but it's too early to say if he is a bad signing.
Even Ronaldo struggled at times in this team.
Even Ronaldo struggled at times in this team.
it was a bad signing for Ole, no doubt
he should've spent that budget on a top centre mid
whether it turns out to be a good or bad signing for United remains to be seen
he should've spent that budget on a top centre mid
whether it turns out to be a good or bad signing for United remains to be seen
The jury is still out but it was pretty obvious the funds should have been spent on a central midfielder as priority.
Start of the season, people were excited to see Sancho-Greenwood-Rashford trio lead the line. That hasn't aged very well but Sancho in the 2nd half of the season under Rangnick showed potential to be worth close to 30m in value. There's still a lot of catching up to do.
Ole had been trying to sign Sancho for 2 years, and regarding top centre midfield we tried to sign Carmavinga last summer, remember?
my bad, I forgot Carmavinga was the only centre midfielder in the world
How can you conclude after one season if he was a bad signing or not?
Well tell that to our precious board, after all they refused to sign any centre midfielder in January eventhough Dennis Zakaria was available for mere 7 millions.
do you disagree he was a bad signing for Ole then? he contributed feckall during Ole's reign
How on earth you can say he was a bad signing for Ole when they had only worked together for 3 months? such a bizzare take. a youngster coming from different league, working in different team, in different system, with different teammatesm and under different manager would need more time to adapt. Even Ronaldo took to adapt and he is among the GOATs. such silly take.
It’s been one season. Calm the feck down.
I wouldnt be entirely sure about that. I agree that he would have had a much easier time putting in solid performances, that tends to be easier when the team you play for controls the ball and the play et al.
Jack Grealish is Citys prestige signing and, while not a identical player to Sancho, is someone who relies a lot on his technique to get things done. Jack Grealish for all his value has probably been the worst signing in in the Premier League the past season
because Ole spent his budget on the wrong area, leaving glaring weaknesses in the team and subsequently got sacked
I'm not denying young players need time to adapt, but it's besides the point
Sancho was a long term target, the club and Ole had been trying to sign him since 2-3 years ago. You only need to read CAF last season where people clamouring for his signing and thought we need reinforcement on RW (which is funny because Sancho mostly plays on LW for us but then our LW have become big trouble after Sir Marcus forgot he was a footballer) and you simply CANNOT say no to a 21 years old midfielder who scored 50 goals for a club like Borrusia Dortmund in just 3 seasons can you? and if you think Sancho is a wrong signing, who do you think going to play on our flanks? Rashford? Martial? Pogba? Lingard? GREAT OPTIONS THERE!
You talked like we are rich of options. Regarding centre midfield area i dont understand either, because after we failed to sign Jude Bellingham and Carmavinga the club didnt look for another option and then this critical area is still being neglected under RR eventhough the alternatives were there (i mentioned Zakaria for example), so who do you think didnt want to spend money on additional midfielder, the managers like Ole and RR or the Board??
The strange thing is that we signed him for the right-wing apparently and we still need someone there to play next season. It is ridiculously hard to understand the way United has been trying to build the squad ignoring certain areas for years.
I don't think he is a bad signing. He might not be as good as we thought he was at this point.
I don't think he is a bad signing. He might not be as good as we thought he was at this point.
Ole
he had several windows to sort it out but didn't, including the equally if not more perplexing decision to buy DVB and not play him
Now Ole is gone and we are yet to sign any additional centre midfield?
Diaz has come into an extremely well-organized team flying high and with a style of play he was specifically signed for - the complete opposite of Sancho.
To conclude he's a better player than Sancho on the basis of their performances this season is ludicrous. There's a reason why nearly all of Liverpool's signings seem to go up a level when they arrive at the club, and ours seem to be going to shit.
Having said that, I've always been a bit skeptical of Sancho. Loads of potential obviously, and in terms of technique and intelligence he's excellent, but he's always seemed to lack a bit of edge and intensity, and that part of his game needs to improve if he is to fullfil his potential. Hopefully EtH is the man to bring that out of him (and the rest of our players).