Both have been piss poor. Sanchez has been the bigger flop though simply due to the expectation. He is getting paid a fair bit more too.
Mkhi did more for us than Sanchez has tbf to him.
Mkhi did more for us than Sanchez has tbf to him.
Who do you reckon will turn out to have had the better deal out of the Sanchez, Mkhitaryan swap?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
Neither have set the world alight, but based on the wages Alexis is supposedly on, and the dressing room issues he “allegedly” was at the heart of during the latter stages of his Arsenal tenure, you’d have to say Arsenal edge the deal thus far, making the most out of a bad situation where Alexis’ situation was disrupting squad harmony and potentially losing him on a free.
Mkhi’s had some decent performances and you feel he’ll be serviceable for several seasons, whereas Alexis seems like a player who’ll fall off a cliff (he might belong in the “players with steep declines” thread one day), but that’s pure speculation on my part.
Mkhi’s had some decent performances and you feel he’ll be serviceable for several seasons, whereas Alexis seems like a player who’ll fall off a cliff (he might belong in the “players with steep declines” thread one day), but that’s pure speculation on my part.
How much did Sanchez actually cost, can someone explain (without fudging things) please? My Aunt Bertie reckons he was around 90mil - 50 to him and 35 worth of Mikki (she’s a blue, maths not a strong point). Anyway if it even close to that and the ‘alleged’ 400k per week for a four year deal then it could work out at what, lots? $$$
Ok I guess part two as I’m obviously making a point; assuming he carries on as is then also how the hell do we sell him on to someone who would even consider half his wages? So we bench him as one of the worlds highest players for 4 years. Sheesh, makes my head hurt
Ok I guess part two as I’m obviously making a point; assuming he carries on as is then also how the hell do we sell him on to someone who would even consider half his wages? So we bench him as one of the worlds highest players for 4 years. Sheesh, makes my head hurt
When the swap first happened I think 99.9% of people agreed United got the much much better deal. Almost a year on and Im really surprised at Sanchez and his performances for United. Id still say Arsenal lost out as Miky isnt performing at the level Sanchez was for Arsenal.
City got the best deal. Saved 60 mil and let Utd take him on massive wages which have prevented subsequent signings.
United paid £24m for Mkhitaryan, however, he was out of favour so how much could we have sold him for is another question. I guess around £20m. Sanchez got a £10m signing on fee from memory, so the total transfer was around £30m. City bid £60m for him 6 months earlier, so we did get him for under his value due to his Contract situation.
Both have been crap. Having mkhi here would have changed nothing. He is a perfect guy for a player who wants to be in a small pond. Glad mkhi is gone but Sanchez has been disappointing.
Arsenal without a doubt?
They lost Sanchez, who would have left 6 mths later anyway. Gained Miki, while being poor is still a rotational asset.
Man Utd got Sanchez to play on the left, which so far is no tangible upgrade over Martial and Rashford. Also burdened with a huge contract.
They lost Sanchez, who would have left 6 mths later anyway. Gained Miki, while being poor is still a rotational asset.
Man Utd got Sanchez to play on the left, which so far is no tangible upgrade over Martial and Rashford. Also burdened with a huge contract.
Miki was actually important to our Europa league win with his goals. Even in his poorer form before he left he was making the most key passes for us with 1.9 per game, same as Pogba's best in his career.
Right now Sanchez is doing the 2nd part. Giving a teammate the opportunity to get a shot in over twice per game. He's not flying, he's not at his best, but when taken out of the team who does create those chances to get a shot away? Statistically nobody other than Sanchez and Young in his 2 games so far.
Liverpool have Salah with almost 3 per game, City have Silva with 4 and both Aguero and Sterling at 2 or more.
Mata hasn't managed it since his last half season at Chelsea and first half season at United.
I think from being here and seeing all he comments towards Nani, Miki and now Sanchez I can see that posters here have a lack of appreciation for players who take risks in the final third in order to create something for someone else.
Which is frankly bizarre given the amount of hype posts I've seen for Maguire, who takes risks in his own half to create something which is far more risky and far less rewarding.
Personally I hope we just try moving Sanchez off the left wing to give Martial the chance to play with him. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why Sanchez can't play as an inside right player, instead of his current inside left position.
Right now Sanchez is doing the 2nd part. Giving a teammate the opportunity to get a shot in over twice per game. He's not flying, he's not at his best, but when taken out of the team who does create those chances to get a shot away? Statistically nobody other than Sanchez and Young in his 2 games so far.
Liverpool have Salah with almost 3 per game, City have Silva with 4 and both Aguero and Sterling at 2 or more.
Mata hasn't managed it since his last half season at Chelsea and first half season at United.
I think from being here and seeing all he comments towards Nani, Miki and now Sanchez I can see that posters here have a lack of appreciation for players who take risks in the final third in order to create something for someone else.
Which is frankly bizarre given the amount of hype posts I've seen for Maguire, who takes risks in his own half to create something which is far more risky and far less rewarding.
Personally I hope we just try moving Sanchez off the left wing to give Martial the chance to play with him. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why Sanchez can't play as an inside right player, instead of his current inside left position.
Thanks for clarifying some of it; unless he was running out of contract 20m doesn’t get you a league 2 benchwarmer regardless of what we thought of him. They’ll have been an agent wad somewhere too I’m sure but it still looks lower than the other numbers I’ve heard
What’s confusing now then is if city bid 60 before and then were definitely in the race again why did they pull out quoting it was now too expensive? Wages?
They're both utter fecking shite.
Even someone like mr dt can't try and claim mhky has been anything but a wet lunch there.
The ultimate flimsy player you can't rely on.
The ultimate flimsy player you can't rely on.
Arsenal
simply because of the Sanchez wage packed that would pay at least 2 Mhikis and the Sanchez deal harmed both Martial and United's momentum last season
simply because of the Sanchez wage packed that would pay at least 2 Mhikis and the Sanchez deal harmed both Martial and United's momentum last season
I always said Sanches would flop at United. They were not a match and it was an "unnecessary" signing.
We had a player who was sometimes unplayable, and when he wasn't he would be left on the bench.
We now have a player who has done absolutely nothing for us and he seemingly cannot be dropped.
We now have a player who has done absolutely nothing for us and he seemingly cannot be dropped.
I can't believe I'm saying this but I think Arsenal got the better out of the deal given they appear to have lost lesser. However how fricking great is this for City? Madness.
City had to do nothing and still ended on the winning side of it all.
I refuse to believe Alexis Sanchez is a bad player. He's come into a team that has absolutely no structure to support him.
I think it will be us....but only when we get a new manager.
City.
He's obviously not a bad player, but he's not particularly young and it's not ridiculous to suggest we just happened to sign him as he was getting past his prime. He wouldn't be the first quality player to suddenly dramatically decline in his late 20s. Happens all the time.
Although there is a concerning trend of us making big-money signings who either turn out to be just alright and fail to consistently be top class, or players who flop completely despite the hype surrounding them.
He isn't a bad player, but when a young player like Martial is more productive than you in the same team previously., its not an excuse, he should have been able to outperform what Martial was previously doing IMO by now. I at least expected that, but what we are seeing is seriously poor even in the context of a dysfunctional team.
He didnt do an awful lot but the handful of good games he had for us is far more than Sanchez has managed, and on half the money.
I reckon Sanchez would have looked a far better player if he’d has as many games against Europa League opponents.
tbh Mhiki has more PL goals and assists....Infact Mhiki was better in a United shirt than Sanchez has been so far...
I don’t think so. Sanchez has been horrendously sloppy but far more involved than Mkhi. It was the completely anonymous crap from the latter that got my goat. That and pussying out of 50:50s. Neither of which has been an issue with Sanchez, for all his flaws.
Infact Mhiki was better in a United shirt than Sanchez has been so far...
When Mhiki was bad yes he was really bad... so is Sanchez though, but when he was on good form (something I don't even think we can say Sanchez has ever been in here) maybe on or 2 games. Mhiki had some really good moments and spells of form. My main issue with Mhiki was that he seemed to shrink on the big occasion.
I think if you only remember Mhiki in his last spell, the season we got rid then fair enough, even then he started the season really well in his first 5/6 games
Then at Arsenal for instance his performance vs Chelsea this season is better than anything Ive seen from Sanchez in a United shirt IMO
That last sentence confuses me. He was fecking AWFUL against Chelsea IMO. There was a 15 minute spell in and around the time he scored when he looked decent but he had been absolutely piss poor up until that point.
Anyhoo. I’ll agree to disagree. Arguing who’s been least crap is as pointless as it is depressing.
Haha agreed.
Even if Sanchez performs a bit better than Mkhi (statistically wise, he is not), the deal seems a bit better for Arsenal as they would have lost Sanchez on free anyway and would have to pay tens of millions for a decent attacking midfielder.
Edit: in the league:
Mkhi at Arsenal - 3 goals and 5 assists in 1100 min.
Sanchez at United - 2 goals and 4 assists in 1400 min.
Edit: in the league:
Mkhi at Arsenal - 3 goals and 5 assists in 1100 min.
Sanchez at United - 2 goals and 4 assists in 1400 min.
Last edited:
If I had to choose one purely in terms of football it'd be Sanchez, because I think there's more chance of him hitting a real run of form (although I doubt he will now).
In terms of the deal...I suppose Arsenal really.
In terms of the deal...I suppose Arsenal really.
Arsenal probably got the better deal as they wouldn't have much trouble moving Mkhitaryan on. We're going to be stuck with a shitty old Sanchez for years whilst he drains millions out the club every year. We replaced Rooney with another Rooney.
Mhkitaryan has pretty good goal/assist ratio at Arsenal and is on half the wages.
I think although inconsistent, he was far better for us than Sanchez too. Finished 2nd top goal scorer with 11 behind zlatan in 16/17. Was man of the match or in the running for about 2 months when he first broke into the team.
His premier league form nosedived in the first season after a couple of very strong months in all competitions but his vital away goals in the EL is what got us CL football the following year.
He scored an away goal against Zorya (?) in the group stage in the second half when we were 3rd in the group with 2 matches left. Broke the deadlock with his goal In the second half. Then scored an away goal against St Etienne to seal the deal. Scored the deciding away goal against Rostov (2-1 aggregate). Scored both goals against Anderlecht home and away (2-2 aggregate that took us to extra time where Rashford scored that peach of a free kick to win the tie). And he got the 2-0 goal in the finals to seal the deal.
Also IIRC he had goal of the month 3 months in a row including one of the best goals ever at Old Trafford.
So he’s got some good memories and contributions here.
I fail to think one of memorable moment or contribution that Alexis has given us thus far. Maybe the city comeback but we know that was all in vain and all it did is give us bragging rights for a week.
At the end of the day I wouldn’t completely blame either one of them as the manager has a lot to do with our attacker’s shortcomings.
I think although inconsistent, he was far better for us than Sanchez too. Finished 2nd top goal scorer with 11 behind zlatan in 16/17. Was man of the match or in the running for about 2 months when he first broke into the team.
His premier league form nosedived in the first season after a couple of very strong months in all competitions but his vital away goals in the EL is what got us CL football the following year.
He scored an away goal against Zorya (?) in the group stage in the second half when we were 3rd in the group with 2 matches left. Broke the deadlock with his goal In the second half. Then scored an away goal against St Etienne to seal the deal. Scored the deciding away goal against Rostov (2-1 aggregate). Scored both goals against Anderlecht home and away (2-2 aggregate that took us to extra time where Rashford scored that peach of a free kick to win the tie). And he got the 2-0 goal in the finals to seal the deal.
Also IIRC he had goal of the month 3 months in a row including one of the best goals ever at Old Trafford.
So he’s got some good memories and contributions here.
I fail to think one of memorable moment or contribution that Alexis has given us thus far. Maybe the city comeback but we know that was all in vain and all it did is give us bragging rights for a week.
At the end of the day I wouldn’t completely blame either one of them as the manager has a lot to do with our attacker’s shortcomings.
No contest these days. I think OGS would get far more out of Mkhi than the dud we currently have.
They did, easily. Mkhi was pretty good in his first season, and while bad in his second, he was still way better than Sanchez. He could actually play on the right, also. Less wages too.
Mkhi right now on the right or through the middle would have been very useful for us
Neither has been great but Sanchez has been one of the worst signings I can remember.
Rather have neither tbh.
Swap them back. feck it.