Completely agree with this. Rashford and Sancho's situations are different and they shouldn't be grouped together as though they're the same. Sancho really seems to be a toxic influence who doesn't care about the club at all. I don't think the same is true of Rashford, or even Garnacho and Antony, should the manager look to push them out too.
Sancho and Rashford: If you had to choose to freeze them out or loan them for partial wage coverage, what would you do?
- Thread starter Bastian
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood), Jamie (@Vault Dweller) and Ed (@That'sHernandez) give their end of season awards out! They celebrate the best players, goals and moments of the season (there were some, honestly) and also give out awards for the worst and most disappointing players/moments of the season.
They then discuss all the latest transfer rumours and get into the potential ins and outs this summer at Old Trafford.
We should never even consider loaning players to super rich clubs like Barcelona. That's just ridiculous as a concept.
The problem is if you allow them to be part of the every day squad they'll drag the mood and conditions down with their negativity.
It's why managers are always so concerned with bad apples as one bad apple affects the lot.
We've all worked with someone who has an appalling attribute and it does stink things up, especially if they look like escape punishment.
Some mental comments in here.
Just loan him out if we can't sell him. United's fault for putting him on a huge contract.
I can see how Sancho is unpopular, but really, what did he do wrong? Snapped back at ETH on Twitter after ETH questioned publically his professionalism in training. And chose not to take a big paycut to move to Chelsea?
"Freezing him out" or even taking legal action is just madness.
Legal action for what? Not being great? What has he done wrong, exactly, to justify legal action, or even termination of contract?
And how does that look to players deciding to come to United? Why would a player want to come to United when they know you may risk having your contract terminated and sued ?
Just loan him out if we can't sell him. United's fault for putting him on a huge contract.
I can see how Sancho is unpopular, but really, what did he do wrong? Snapped back at ETH on Twitter after ETH questioned publically his professionalism in training. And chose not to take a big paycut to move to Chelsea?
"Freezing him out" or even taking legal action is just madness.
Legal action for what? Not being great? What has he done wrong, exactly, to justify legal action, or even termination of contract?
And how does that look to players deciding to come to United? Why would a player want to come to United when they know you may risk having your contract terminated and sued ?
Why would that be ridiculous?
You loan him out to whoever can pay his wages, could pay a fee in the future and whoever the player has an interest in going to.
Fact is, Sancho and Rashford aint accepting a loan deal to Stockport Country, are they? They will only go to clubs that can pay them and they see as a step up, or at the very least, as sideways move.
There's limited space in a squad. Players become surplus. When you're one of the highest payed players and cant make the substitute bench your not getting a step up. You'll be very, very lucky to get a step sideways. You can hang around and see out your contract but it'll basically be the last contract you get.
Manchester United is basically the peak for earning potential. Your not going to earn as much elsewhere. If the team is finishing 8th your failing and will struggle to maintain the conditions you currently enjoy.
Neither are being asked to play for Stockport.
Obviously loan them out. Even covering £300k wages between them is an extra £15 million savings.
United have only signed on player so far, so im not quite buying the "room in the squad" argument. We went into some games in the second half of last season with over 5 youth team players on the bench.
All for selling Sancho and Rashford, but the point is, they deal has to work for United, the club that takes the and the player(s).
Fact is, no one has come in for either player yet, so it is a mute point.
Sancho was perfectly in his right to turn down the Chelsea contract. No player takes a 30-60% pay cut (depending on reports) when they have multiple years left on their contract.
He doesn't have multiple years left. He has one. He's almost certainly taking a 50%+ pay cut. He'd be lucky to get that much, its a huge amount for every club that isn't Manchester United
Rashford has some credit in the bank,
Id love to punch Sancho.
So is loan Rashford so he has a career after. Id let Sancho train with the u16s, make him report to Carrington at 7am, with a weeks wage fine every time he's late.
Id love to punch Sancho.
So is loan Rashford so he has a career after. Id let Sancho train with the u16s, make him report to Carrington at 7am, with a weeks wage fine every time he's late.
That's a fake problem. You don't sanction people for bad things they haven't done, if they misbehave you exclude them until then you treat them normally.
You discredited yourself immediately with the bizarre little ad hominem.
The rest of what you've said is just a lot of ramble. There's a reason that won't happen. I know you think you'd act all Billy big balls but there's a reason you're not being paid to make decisions.
If he only wants to go to barca then he's entitled to only want to go to barca. The fact that you don't like it doesn't change that simple fact. We have frozen him out. Did you miss that fact? It doesn't do us any good though, does it? Hence why we loaned him.
The club offered him terms that he's accepted. The club are legally obligated to keep to those terms.
None of this is me saying I like it or I wish it wasn't different. The difference between me and you is I'm able to not be childish and emotional.
The stupidity some people post with is honestly astounding.
Now go back to your childish ranting.
Pretty sure you'd have a legal case on your hands. That's just blatant bullying.
Some of the posts in here are actually incredible. All these fantasies must sound great in your heads whilst your stacking shelves or whatever it is you do.
Let's force them to spend 9-5 in cages at the side of the pitch and get the under 13s to pelt them with gone off veg from the canteen whilst we're at it. That'll really show em, they'll definitely willingly sack off the terms they were offered then.
Absolute clown show.
Not really all the big clubs demote players to youth squads they don't want and apply fines for not showing up to training. We did it with Bastian when we wanted him gone. Works pretty well and is perfectly legal. Half the companies around the world are laying off people by making them relocate etc.
With a year left on the contact, even more reason to hold out and get that free transfer.
Sancho has one year and he can get lost after that.
Eriksen, Lindelof & Evans have all left. Rashford, Antony and Sancho spent a lot of last season out on loan, and we won't have European football this season. I don't feel like our squad is currently huge and bloated, but we can definitely lose Rashford, Antony and Sancho without any pain. If we also sell Garnacho then I think we need to bring at least one more forward in - which is presumably Mbuemo.
Ha Ha Ha, how did united end up paying huge salaries for unproven players above 300m is something I cannot understand. This demonstrate poor recruitment strategy and negotiation skills. Wirtz is only paid 200k per week plus add ons.....
Freeze them out completely. Don't allow them into the training ground. Same as what Arse did to get rid of Adebayor. Soon they will be running to their agents to get their exit completed. Enough is enough, we need to draw a line somewhere.
The problem with both is that they are on contractual wages far above their abilities and everybody except themselves knows that. Other than that there would be some interest for both.
So my approach would be to sell them for massive cut prices respectively pay off their inflated wages.
We talk about 40m for Rashford and 25m for Sancho but from that we would need to pay appr. 10m for Sancho and 20m for Rashford so that they agree on wages fitting their profile at the new club.
However, I would be fine getting net 30m for both together but get these topics out of day way once and for all. Not sure what that means for PSR though.
So my approach would be to sell them for massive cut prices respectively pay off their inflated wages.
We talk about 40m for Rashford and 25m for Sancho but from that we would need to pay appr. 10m for Sancho and 20m for Rashford so that they agree on wages fitting their profile at the new club.
However, I would be fine getting net 30m for both together but get these topics out of day way once and for all. Not sure what that means for PSR though.
The pair of them have constantly been punished for misbehaving. So it's not like it's a harsh thing to say.
Get them away from the club.
They haven't constantly been punished for "their negativity", as far as I can remember the punishments were for being late in training and in the case of Rashford for missing training, they received their fines and there is no reason to go back and randomly punish them. As I said, the angle is in my opinion wrong, you are justifying a bad action by creating faults before they occur. I'm not for keeping them but I will never support punishing someone for something they haven't done or for something that has been dealt with years ago, if either of them behave in a way that damages the mood of the group I will agree with excluding them until then the club should act with integrity and treat them like everybody else.
They both had to be shipped out on loan. Was that just to save money? Or do you think there might have been something else to do with it?
In the case of Rashford it was about money and in the case of Sancho it was because he was underperforming for a while and not paying his full wage was seen as a pretty good thing.
You cant loan Sancho out as he is in his last season here. Even if we were offered £10-20 mill we need to take it. We have the £5 mill from Chelsea as well.
Rashford could be loaned, but we need to sell for as much as possible. £30-40 mill hopefully. Trouble is he hasnt done anything to make him attractive to clubs, as shown by the lack of offers. Barca preferred Williams over him.
Rashford could be loaned, but we need to sell for as much as possible. £30-40 mill hopefully. Trouble is he hasnt done anything to make him attractive to clubs, as shown by the lack of offers. Barca preferred Williams over him.
Rashford in peak form is worth big wages and a good transfer fee. He’s not in peak form and I just feel he’s never going to be in the headspace to raise his level to where it should be. I think if we are brutally honest he’s had two good seasons for us in his history.
Hes steadily getting worse. The fact Villa didnt make a bid is evidence its not just at Utd where the problem is.
Loan them out if that was the only option. Don't cut your nose off to spite your face.
Rashford is only in peak form for the 6 months before his contract is due for renewal. The lad is a waste of space
Freeze them out, no loans or get out of jail free cards. They have had there chance, Sancho especially. Be tough now and force there hand before season begins, force the move. Can't have it easy here, infecting this already useless group of players worse. Keep the unprofessional players away from the rest.
The only fact Villa didn't make a bid is because they literally can't afford him.
It's well documented that they are the club most at risk of PSR in the league.
Yeah, wage bill is something like 90% of revenue so a high salary player like Rashford is especially tough for them to manage.
I would say some strategy to balance power dynamics is necessary.
Both players need to feel sitting on this contract value is going to be painful and the club is not going to cave.
Currently Sancho probably feels he can get this last years high pay as dragging his feet means the club are closer to losing him for nothing. Also he probably thinks a free transfer is better financially.
Rashford I genuinely think has been aware for awhile that his body cant hold up the game his reputation was built on. He also seems to have lost some love of the game. He seems happy to go to barca as a stop gap, sub. It seems less about the football than the status and lifestyle. He probably feels he can enjoy his remaining three years(?) pay and define his environment.
Both players need to feel sitting on this contract value is going to be painful and the club is not going to cave.
Currently Sancho probably feels he can get this last years high pay as dragging his feet means the club are closer to losing him for nothing. Also he probably thinks a free transfer is better financially.
Rashford I genuinely think has been aware for awhile that his body cant hold up the game his reputation was built on. He also seems to have lost some love of the game. He seems happy to go to barca as a stop gap, sub. It seems less about the football than the status and lifestyle. He probably feels he can enjoy his remaining three years(?) pay and define his environment.
Sancho you accept any fee for that means you can entirely ditch his wages. Even if it’s 10m. He has a year on his contract and is leaving next summer for free anyway. Failing that, you take a loan that pays the most of his wages you can. You want to keep him away from the club, period. And minimising the economic impact is paramount. “Letting him rot” is small time, doesn’t shed us in a good light, and economically is the worst of all the available options. The ONLY thing I’d exclude him from is the pre-season squad.
Rashford, you take a loan if you can’t make a sale. If he does well, you can still make a sum on him in January or next summer. I’d include him in pre-season if he’s still here and just drive him with upmost discipline. If he sorted his act out, he could still be the best striking option at the club. Massive IF, and not one I’d be working towards, but I’d send the message that we still see value in him, for the sake of negotiating with other clubs.
I would let either player “rot” and freeze them out. I think we have to uphold decent principles as a club. If Rashford ending up staying because there were no takers for him at his wages and he couldn’t find a club he wanted to go to, I’d want to work towards getting the best out of him again. If he failed to apply himself, I wouldn’t have a problem sending him to the reserves. But I certainly wouldn’t start out with the position of “leave or we’ll ostracise you”.
Rashford, you take a loan if you can’t make a sale. If he does well, you can still make a sum on him in January or next summer. I’d include him in pre-season if he’s still here and just drive him with upmost discipline. If he sorted his act out, he could still be the best striking option at the club. Massive IF, and not one I’d be working towards, but I’d send the message that we still see value in him, for the sake of negotiating with other clubs.
I would let either player “rot” and freeze them out. I think we have to uphold decent principles as a club. If Rashford ending up staying because there were no takers for him at his wages and he couldn’t find a club he wanted to go to, I’d want to work towards getting the best out of him again. If he failed to apply himself, I wouldn’t have a problem sending him to the reserves. But I certainly wouldn’t start out with the position of “leave or we’ll ostracise you”.
The contract situation is simple. Both Rashford and Sancho have every right to just sit on those big money deals and earn that money week in week out. The club gave them those contacts.
Casemiro the same. Antony to a lesser degree. You can't really punish any of them for what is essentially the clubs mistake.
Casemiro the same. Antony to a lesser degree. You can't really punish any of them for what is essentially the clubs mistake.
Of course it’s their right. It’s also their right to publicly demonstrate money is paramount and football is secondary. Sitting on their contracts effectively kills their careers are serious footballers.
The same is true for the club. If the club wants these players out all costs for Football reasons, they can pay their contract outs or ask for extremely low compensation from other clubs. Truth of the matter is that in this case money is rightfully important for all parties, we are talking about professional sport and it's disingenuous to use this money angle for players when the club motivations are largely financial.
If we can't sell them, and can't charge a loan fee for them like a normal loan for players with their CV, then all other choices are pretty sh*t.
If they - or the club - have no intention of them being around the first team squad and playing, then it looks like it would end up having to be another subsidised loan as I think keeping them around but not featuring is the worst scenario in terms of club morale and media talk.
However the amount of subsidised loans we end up doing are incredibly frustrating and something I'd love to see end very soon - the fact that we give a top flight and international player to another big club and then, rather than getting a good loan fee for them as other clubs do, we actually have to help pay for them to play for another club, is just so symbolic of how poorly run we've been. Especially with how frequently it's happened due to the mad wages our underachieving players have been on.
If they - or the club - have no intention of them being around the first team squad and playing, then it looks like it would end up having to be another subsidised loan as I think keeping them around but not featuring is the worst scenario in terms of club morale and media talk.
However the amount of subsidised loans we end up doing are incredibly frustrating and something I'd love to see end very soon - the fact that we give a top flight and international player to another big club and then, rather than getting a good loan fee for them as other clubs do, we actually have to help pay for them to play for another club, is just so symbolic of how poorly run we've been. Especially with how frequently it's happened due to the mad wages our underachieving players have been on.