Is Jadon Sancho really worth the 100 plus million fee?

Red_toad

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
8,241
Location
DownUnder
Andy Carroll went for 35M, 2 years later Van Persie went for 24M. Eden Hazard in last year of contract went for 100M+, Sane 50. Hazard also is not twice the player. Hundreds more such example we can give.
Transfer fee and player ability, especially when comparing different transfers have absolutely no relation. I have no idea why we get comments like these. Players transfer value depends on how hot player is in transfer market, his contract length, negotiating power selling club holds, buying club's desperation, buying club's financial status and some more factors. Player's ability is just 1 factor.
Because it's relevant!
A players worth and the valuation a club puts on the are 2 very different things. In the current market his valuation is way off.
 

matsdf

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 6, 2017
Messages
136
A house isn't necessarily worth the same to you, as it is to someone else. Maguire isn't a £80m defender, but he was probably worth it for us last season. Would Sancho be worth £100m for City/Pool? Probably not. For us? I'd say so.
 

ayushreddevil9

Full Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
5,591
Still isn't worth twice as much, regardless of how you spin it. Clubs all suffering from affected revenues, so have less money. Sane went for less than half when revenues were normal. Sancho won't be worth 100 million next summer either.
United should be exploring other avenues, as he's currently not worth his clubs valuation.
Are you talking about Sane's transfer to city? If yes, you choose to ignore Neymar transfer? Because before that all transfers for young talent were in that bracket.

If you're talking about Sane's transfer to Bayern then it happened this window where revenues weren't normal.

Havertz went for 90m euro. Use that as a reference.
 

Josh 76

Full Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
2,118
This may sound strange, but I've never seen a most over rated player. I've never watched a game hes played and thought, OMG what a player.

I think the board are right not to pay this stupid fee. 60-70m is about right for a player who's done nothing that merits a 100m fee.
 

Lemansky

Full Member
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
829
In this market? No way.

We have other spots in the team that is much more vital to strengthen than RW.
 

DRM

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
3,443
Sane went for half that, Sancho isn't twice as good, so it's a no from me....
Nail. Head.


I've said this many times in other threads, whats more damning is the fact we havent identified other alternatives and instead wasted an entire transfer window on Sancho. Dortmund clearly named their price, so either we pay up or we feck off and find someone else. Or better yet, use that money wisely for other positions!!!
 

youmeletsfly

Full Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2018
Messages
1,305
As player value, hell nawl, no. I don't think there are more than 10-15 players worth that.

As a value for Man United, yes, we have the huge need for him so for us he'd be worth. (and for Dortmund of course)
 

#07

makes new threads with tweets in the OP
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
18,479
A house isn't necessarily worth the same to you, as it is to someone else. Maguire isn't a £80m defender, but he was probably worth it for us last season. Would Sancho be worth £100m for City/Pool? Probably not. For us? I'd say so.
This is the key thing. The only thing that has intrinsic value is life itself. How much is your life worth? Its priceless because you can't put numbers on how much its worth to you.

When it comes to anything else its all a question of how much you need it. If I get a new job in a new town I might pay above the odds for a place to live because I need it right then and there. If I don't need it right then and there but in a year's time I might shop around see if I can get a better price.

You're exactly right about Maguire. In a vacuum he's never an £80m player. Was it worth it to us last season? Probably cos he played every game and we qualified for the Champions League, which earned us a lot of money.

With Sancho, quite clearly he is not worth £100m. However, we have almost nothing in the wide areas. The first half last night was horrifying. It got a bit better in the second half cos Wan Bissaka showed some effort to get down the outside and cross. Then, of course, Greenwood came on. However, behind that its bad. Really bad.
 

Falcow

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
806
Location
Dublin
There's no point raising this topic in the Sancho thread as every second post is a 'Happy Sancho Day' one and don't necessarily feel that a rational discussion can be covered there. Here's my thought process around the whole Sancho saga. Initially, I was a bit skeptical around the 100 million numbers being quoted and was relatively confident that we'll get him for figures quoted for Havertz i.e. 90 million including add-ons.

The more the saga has went on, the more people seem to be convinced that Sancho is absolutely worth it and is the answer to all our problems. In my opinion, Sancho was never going to be the only missing piece and we had to sign 2-3 first team quality players to get near challenging. With the pressure rising on the board, there's a good chance that we might succumb and pay the full fee (assuming Dortmund accept) which would leave us in a precarious position towards other weaker positions. Similar to when Pogba was signed, I expect Sancho to be a good player in the short term without having the groundbreaking impact that suddenly makes us challengers. I don't think even the most ardent advocate of Sancho's signing would disagree with this. Naturally, we can't just consider the short term as he might be a longer term signing. There arises another of my doubts considering that we need short term improvements as well. Now let me point out some facts which outline my skepticism:
  • A potential 100 million player is still not first choice for England and hasn't really sparkled when given the chance
  • His stats are exceptional but Bundesliga stats can go the Mkhitaryan way or the Aubameyang way. But the element of uncertainty still persists
  • There are disciplinary issues which led him to being dropped last year
  • In general, 100 plus million players have rarely been particularly successful signings for anyone
Some other points raised in other threads include a lack of options for RW apart from Sancho. I refuse to buy this argument because if Sancho is the only option in the world then why do we have scouts. A 10 year old playing FIFA could tell us who to sign.

I know that there are advocates of buy one world class 100 million than 3 average 30 million player arguments are there and I'm one of them too. I just don't think that Sancho should be worth this much and if we were to sign him, I could already visualize the extra scrutiny that would be there on him and how journalists would be dying to declare him a flop. A start like Havertz for him would be fodder for clickbaits all through the season.

Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic and he might turn out to be the world beater he's made out to be. I'm just not sold on the risk associated with it and the impact it will have on the player fees for our future prospects. I think being financially prudent and successful in the market aren't mutually exclusive and we should try to find cheaper alternatives. Currently, even if we find a decent rotation option for Greenwood/Rashford in the range of sub-50 million, we should be good.

TL;DR: Not convinced that we should spend 100 million on Sancho. Cheaper alternatives should be looked at.
Good post and thread. I dont feel he is worth it. Not in a post Covid economic environment. The amount of people who dont get the economic catastrophe that Covid has brought, astounds me.

Liverpool have had a great summer transfer wise and have managed to find great value in the market. So have spurs. Value exists and 108m stg for Sancho is not value.
 

Falcow

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
806
Location
Dublin
The amount of posters posting Happy Sancho day is a good reminder of the age of your average poster on here.

Dont you have to be at least 18 or something to post on here?
 

The Man Himself

asked for a tagline change and all I got was this.
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
22,118
Because it's relevant!
A players worth and the valuation a club puts on the are 2 very different things. In the current market his valuation is way off.
But that's the thing. His valuation is not wrong even in current market because of his importance to Dortmund, his contract length and our desperation. They can still quote 100M for him next summer too whereas Sane would have been free agent. Whether we can afford to buy 100M+ player in current situation is a different thing but not much wrong with his valuation.
Regarding Sane, I am sure if buying club was Real Madrid or Barcelona, City would have hold out for more than 50M.
 

MikeUpNorth

Wobbles like a massive pair of tits
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
18,861
It would be a huge gamble, and I can see why the club is reluctant to make it. Who even knows when fans will be allowed back in stadiums.
 

Red_toad

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
8,241
Location
DownUnder
Are you talking about Sane's transfer to city? If yes, you choose to ignore Neymar transfer? Because before that all transfers for young talent were in that bracket.

If you're talking about Sane's transfer to Bayern then it happened this window where revenues weren't normal.

Havertz went for 90m euro. Use that as a reference.
Neymar is a class above Sancho.
Sane both ways combined didn't cost what is being asked for Sancho.
I'd also say Chelsea over paid for Havertz by about 20 million euro.
 

Denis79

Full Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2014
Messages
4,627
He still has 3 years left on his contract? Why should Dortmund hurry up with the sale? When they know other clubs will most likely match our current offer next season anyway.

I don't understand why some people either go attacking Dortmund or try to make Sancho a lesser footballer just because we can't agree on a price?

Is he worth the pricetag? Not to us apparently, so we move on to our next target.
 

do.ob

Full Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2010
Messages
8,545
Location
Germany
If Bayern did their usual thing they basically already tied down Sane for next year and gave City the choice of accepting their low-ball offer or watch him leave on a free. Not exactly comaparable to Sancho and his 2023 contract, is it?
 

Stacks

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,126
Location
Between a rock and Gibraltar
There's no point raising this topic in the Sancho thread as every second post is a 'Happy Sancho Day' one and don't necessarily feel that a rational discussion can be covered there. Here's my thought process around the whole Sancho saga. Initially, I was a bit skeptical around the 100 million numbers being quoted and was relatively confident that we'll get him for figures quoted for Havertz i.e. 90 million including add-ons.

The more the saga has went on, the more people seem to be convinced that Sancho is absolutely worth it and is the answer to all our problems. In my opinion, Sancho was never going to be the only missing piece and we had to sign 2-3 first team quality players to get near challenging. With the pressure rising on the board, there's a good chance that we might succumb and pay the full fee (assuming Dortmund accept) which would leave us in a precarious position towards other weaker positions. Similar to when Pogba was signed, I expect Sancho to be a good player in the short term without having the groundbreaking impact that suddenly makes us challengers. I don't think even the most ardent advocate of Sancho's signing would disagree with this. Naturally, we can't just consider the short term as he might be a longer term signing. There arises another of my doubts considering that we need short term improvements as well. Now let me point out some facts which outline my skepticism:
  • A potential 100 million player is still not first choice for England and hasn't really sparkled when given the chance
  • His stats are exceptional but Bundesliga stats can go the Mkhitaryan way or the Aubameyang way. But the element of uncertainty still persists
  • There are disciplinary issues which led him to being dropped last year
  • In general, 100 plus million players have rarely been particularly successful signings for anyone
Some other points raised in other threads include a lack of options for RW apart from Sancho. I refuse to buy this argument because if Sancho is the only option in the world then why do we have scouts. A 10 year old playing FIFA could tell us who to sign.

I know that there are advocates of buy one world class 100 million than 3 average 30 million player arguments are there and I'm one of them too. I just don't think that Sancho should be worth this much and if we were to sign him, I could already visualize the extra scrutiny that would be there on him and how journalists would be dying to declare him a flop. A start like Havertz for him would be fodder for clickbaits all through the season.

Maybe I'm being overly pessimistic and he might turn out to be the world beater he's made out to be. I'm just not sold on the risk associated with it and the impact it will have on the player fees for our future prospects. I think being financially prudent and successful in the market aren't mutually exclusive and we should try to find cheaper alternatives. Currently, even if we find a decent rotation option for Greenwood/Rashford in the range of sub-50 million, we should be good.

TL;DR: Not convinced that we should spend 100 million on Sancho. Cheaper alternatives should be looked at.
I agree with 3 of the points, especially that rarely do 100m players live up to their cost. They always seem to disappoint.

Based off performances statistics and comparable transfers yes Dormtmund are correct to want 120 million if not more.

In his age group he is only second to Mbappe.

He completely outperforms KDBs Bundesliga stats
at a younger age and in much less minutes which can only be a good thing.

Sancho is the real deal. We will regret not getting him for sure. This will be our next Hazard or Aguero I suspect.
Mbappe has performed in CL as well as international competition which you cannot say for Sancho. He has been great in the Bundesliaga but that isn;t the be all and end all of football.


stats don't tell the full story. very basic view of things
In Germany, KDB earned


Jadon Sancho earned

Bundesliga Team of the Season: 2018–19[

No one in Germany believed Sancho was better than De Bruyne. I doubt Sancho will even be better than Sane. Look how good Gnabry looks now. (I am not trying to disrespect the Bundesliga though)
 

K Stand Knut

Full Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,408
Location
Stretford End
You’re asking if one single person is worth £100m???

The answer is, and always should be a categorical NO!

However, the football world exists outside the realms of reality.
 

Leftback99

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
6,074
It's a big gamble and I don't buy into the idea that there will be a big market for him at that sort of price next summer either.

With potentially 6 months or more of no fans I don't blame us for being cautious. Financially things could look a lot different in a year's time. I think teams are gambling on a rapidly improving situation.

As others have said, for the superstar he's touted to be he's never shone for England like say a Rooney did or even anywhere near. A forward at that sort of price and hype you almost expect to winning games on his own.

Is he worth that much more to us this season than say loaning a Perisic or similar before reassessing next summer?
 

do.ob

Full Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2010
Messages
8,545
Location
Germany
I agree with 3 of the points, especially that rarely do 100m players live up to their cost. They always seem to disappoint.



Mbappe has performed in CL as well as international competition which you cannot say for Sancho. He has been great in the Bundesliaga but that isn;t the be all and end all of football.


stats don't tell the full story. very basic view of things
In Germany, KDB earned


Jadon Sancho earned

Bundesliga Team of the Season: 2018–19[

No one in Germany believed Sancho was better than De Bruyne. I doubt Sancho will even be better than Sane. Look how good Gnabry looks now. (I am not trying to disrespect the Bundesliga though)
That's a very dodgy point you're trying to make. Sancho's last two season were easily better than KdB's first two seasons. The Belgian's last season might have been better than last season, but he was like mid 20s by then.
 

jackal&hyde

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
2,097
Will he single handedly make us challengers? Are you confident about it? I'm genuinely not sure that Sancho is the only missing piece.
But why think like that? I don't get all this talk of a saviour, single handedly make us challenge etc. He is an exceptional player in a position we desperately need to strengthen. If we are rich enough to go for a top talent like this then we should, it doesn't mean other areas are not to be looked at.

The project is for 3 years as i understand and at the end of that we want to have the best possible team we can assemble. You can go for cheaper options and buy more players and complete the rebuild faster, but then you risk coming of short in quality and you need to upgrade again thus actually prolonging the process and potentially making it even more expensive.

Sometimes you get a bit of a break in getting top talent for reasonable fees, Mane, Salah, Bruno; a lot of other times though, you simply have to pay the big money.
 

Siorac

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
18,327
Location
16th century
Probably not but then we're not very good at identifying great players at reasonable prices. Once you pay 80m for Harry fecking Maguire, you've pretty much given up the right to call any player overvalued.
 

RUCK4444

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
3,818
Location
FIFA Headquarters
20+ goals and assists per season for 10 years? That’s his current output so I’ve not allowed for improvement, he has 7 years or so before he’s at his peak.

Yeah, it’s a feckin bargain. Covid or no Covid.
 

JuriM

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
105
Same could have said about the insane 180m that was payed for Mbappe.. Yes had one dazzling season in him, but that was it. It is what it is, if you go after a young star like him and they have enough of the current contract left, you have to pay up.
 

Lentwood

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
3,434
Location
West Didsbury, Manchester
Yes, because the bit fans increasingly miss is that football transfers nowadays are treated more like classic business transactions than ever before.

Sancho is 20. If Utd pay £100m we will either;

* have Sancho for one contract then sell
* have Sancho for two contracts, which is effectively a decade

So in that respect, the club know in scenario one they get, for example 5yrs at £20m a season, plus a transfer fee for a player who should at that point be in his prime and have big resale value

In the latter scenario, we get Sancho for ten years at £10m per annum. Plus he will still be “only” 30, so you would hope is resale value won’t be negligible.

So comparing one transfer fee to another based on a players ability is pretty pointless. Clubs will break it down financially like an investment in IT, Machinery, hardware etc...
 

UNITED ACADEMY

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
6,169
On his current level, he's not worth that much of fees. However, based on potential, he is worth the fees because the likes of Dembele also cost 100m plus.

The real question is that whether we should invest that much of money right now on him?

I think this is where the board is uncertain whether they should invest the money especially during the pandemic year where they don't know what's the club's position financially in the future. Spending 100m plus on Sancho is nothing but only big step forward to get closed to Liverpool & City so it doesn't really put us into favourite to win the league or even challenging. Mainly because right side attacker isn't the only issue that we need to sort out. On top of it, we have Greenwood come in who also has the same potential as Sancho that will benefit for getting more regular game time if we don't spend that 100m on Sancho. If they invest big now and next year there is no financial improvement due to covid then we might run out of money to buy players for other positions.

IMO, if we really are financially in doubt then the club should act earlier and give up on Sancho, find and get an alternative that is better than James & Lingard, good enough to back up & step up when needed in place of Martial, Rashford & Greenwood when they are rested, injured or off form. Since July, clubs like Bayern & Real already knew their financial situation and they made clear statement to give up on their target and move on to the next one, while we are clueless and pretend like we got money to buy Sancho. Embarrassing board.
 

KW2006

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 5, 2018
Messages
193
Sure, just like Paul Scholes has never been first choice for ENGLAND in his entire career, we should have sold him 20 years ago.
 

Crustanoid

Full Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
17,157
Yes, Harry McGuire was 20 mil less

But the imbecilic, leeching, wankerous feckheads that run our club choose to ignore this
 

Skills

Snitch
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
32,988
I kind of hope we don't sign him or else we're going to be the laughing stuck it European football.

The most expensive defender in the world, most expensive midfielder in the league (world?), most expensive forward in the league. Target : top 4.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
13,868
Location
Inside right
Will he single handedly make us challengers? Are you confident about it? I'm genuinely not sure that Sancho is the only missing piece.
'single-handed' takes you up to £150m+ bracket where the Neymar's, Mbappe's [fit] Kane's, Messi's, De Bruyne's et al reside, and if not that, then older players or ones with lengthy injury records or even players in the final year - 18 months of their contract reside - but still, in the bracket of 'single-handed' you're talking astronomical wages. So I think your perspective, or concept of value, is skewed and not in line with the reality of football.

People constantly apply real-world logic, economics and reasoning to something that resides in a bubble. It doesn't really work.

Sancho is barely in his 20's; he's English; has no real injuries to date; has phenomenal numbers that factually put him up there as one of the best wide forwards in the game; any buyer faces a markup for the intangible that is potential, too. You can take one or even two factors out of the above and he'd still be worth equal to, or more than someone like Havertz; when you put it all together, the only player in his age range who is worth more is Mbappe and that's because his credentials catapult him into the aforementioned 'single-handed' echelon of player, which nobody should be thinking Sancho is.

What he is is about the best component that can be bought who enables others to maximise goal returns (he's an assist machine) whilst occupying a flank and affording his full-back acres of space to operate in. That is worth a fortune in itself and makes a team more superfluous and collectively threatening. If Sancho was to start taking over games outright, you can forget about the lower end of £100m for him, as you're then entering the category where you're paying a premium for match-winners in their own right, which is exactly what those players mentioned in the first paragraph are, hence their worth.
 

RedorDead21

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
8,286
Still isn't worth twice as much, regardless of how you spin it. Clubs all suffering from affected revenues, so have less money. Sane went for less than half when revenues were normal. Sancho won't be worth 100 million next summer either.
United should be exploring other avenues, as he's currently not worth his clubs valuation.
We could sell him for 100m in 10 years time. Dortmund dont need 100m. Thats the problem here. They can get that or say 80% of that next summer after another season. In such circumstances for anything in life you will need to pay well over the odds to get anything you want! Now ok if we cant afford in bring in the 3 players we ideally need if we spend that much on Sancho, I can accept why we are playing this game, but in that case, before this stage, you need to accept your bluff has been called and you move for the others at least. At the last min you can try and tempt them again with whatever cash you still have left!
 

Stacks

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
7,126
Location
Between a rock and Gibraltar
That's a very dodgy point you're trying to make. Sancho's last two season were easily better than KdB's first two seasons. The Belgian's last season might have been better than last season, but he was like mid 20s by then.
Kevin's first season he won young player of the year playing for a mid table team. Jadon's 1st season was not that impressive, as wasn't Kevin's 2nd season.
 

jackal&hyde

Full Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
2,097
We could sell him for 100m in 10 years time. Dortmund dont need 100m. Thats the problem here. They can get that or say 80% of that next summer after another season. In such circumstances for anything in life you will need to pay well over the odds to get anything you want! Now ok if we cant afford in bring in the 3 players we ideally need if we spend that much on Sancho, I can accept why we are playing this game, but in that case, before this stage, you need to accept your bluff has been called and you move for the others at least. At the last min you can try and tempt them again with whatever cash you still have left!
Good post and we probably will not get a decent view of what was going on until the window shuts. The club might not be as clueless as we think, or they might be.
 

Fortitude

TV/Monitor Expert
Scout
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
13,868
Location
Inside right
Yeah Ive only seen him for England and he hasn't really stood out at all in any of the matches I've watched.
If you're going by England, then Kane's worth about £60m based on his recent showings, as is Sterling.

None of the so-called stars of the PL are covering themselves in glory in the England side lately.

It points toward the obvious issues with supply behind the attack, which makes the frontline look so bereft and underwhelming.