Willian - worth a punt?

Pav1878

Full Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2014
Messages
866
Quality player and excellent work rate

Age is the only concern but if the price and wages are right, a definite asset for the squad.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,182
Supports
Chelsea
It's just a minor policy disagreement. Has years left of his prime. United should be all over this guy.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
48,478
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
Been very good this season but you have to question whether that form is in relation to trying to earn a new contract or not? Feels like it would be a blow to Chelsea to loose him but maybe not to the extent where they're committing to paying him until he's 35
Chelsea have literally replaced him buy adding Ziyech and Werner to Pulisic. Yet they still have Hudson-Odoi and Mount on the books. He is a very good player but losing him is not really a loss any longer for them
 

charlenefan

Far less insightful than the other Charley
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
23,675
Chelsea have literally replaced him buy adding Ziyech and Werner to Pulisic. Yet they still have Hudson-Odoi and Mount on the books. He is a very good player but losing him is not really a loss any longer for them
Thing is though coming into this season you'd of expected CHO to have kicked on and replaced Willian, that hasn't happened (not at all) and so right now Willian is a better option to have in your squad. Pulisic is looking a bit injury prone and will no doubt miss games next season as well. Any time you loose one of your better players it's a blow even if you think you have the replacements lined up
 

tomaldinho1

Full Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
4,700
I'm so confused with how this forum assess players.
  1. We currently have no RW and it's the biggest hole we have had in the team for years. Whilst we are trying to bring Sancho in, why would you not want to at least talk to a free agent who is PL proven.
  2. If we do sign Sancho then you have an excellent backup RW and someone who can play across the front three
  3. If we don't sign Sancho you have a good RW option for the coming season whilst we keep negotiating for Sancho/try for another big name signing.
This isn't like people are saying we should sign Ryan Fraser because he's on a free and plays RW, Willian is a Brazil international who has played and performed for Chelsea for years, won 2 PL's and multiple cups and has great work rate/attitude. Just because he's not exactly world class and is 31 doesn't make him useless. Signing Sancho or not shouldn't come into the question because we are so light on the RW.
 

gza the genius

Full Member
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
4,676
Location
supply and command
Seems like a Herrera type situation. He'd obviously be a valuable squad option but with his reported salary and 3 year contract demands I don't think it'd be worth it.
 

Irwin99

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
2,872
It'd be worth it just for the song: "Willian , it was really nothing!"
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
48,478
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
I'm so confused with how this forum assess players.
  1. We currently have no RW and it's the biggest hole we have had in the team for years. Whilst we are trying to bring Sancho in, why would you not want to at least talk to a free agent who is PL proven.
  2. If we do sign Sancho then you have an excellent backup RW and someone who can play across the front three
  3. If we don't sign Sancho you have a good RW option for the coming season whilst we keep negotiating for Sancho/try for another big name signing.
This isn't like people are saying we should sign Ryan Fraser because he's on a free and plays RW, Willian is a Brazil international who has played and performed for Chelsea for years, won 2 PL's and multiple cups and has great work rate/attitude. Just because he's not exactly world class and is 31 doesn't make him useless. Signing Sancho or not shouldn't come into the question because we are so light on the RW.
If you have sancho. Plus you have greenwood on the books. why on earth would you need a Willian? Don't conflate not needing him with him being useless
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2002
Messages
48,478
Location
Founder of IhateMakeleles.org and Gourcufffanboysa
Thing is though coming into this season you'd of expected CHO to have kicked on and replaced Willian, that hasn't happened (not at all) and so right now Willian is a better option to have in your squad. Pulisic is looking a bit injury prone and will no doubt miss games next season as well. Any time you loose one of your better players it's a blow even if you think you have the replacements lined up
fair enough. Id' even agree with you in terms of the experience inevitably lost
 
Last edited:

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
17,261
The ship has sailed. He would've been useful to us this season, but now he'll just be a super expensive squad option taking minutes away from Mason.
 

In Rainbows

Full Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
5,439
I'm so confused with how this forum assess players.
  1. We currently have no RW and it's the biggest hole we have had in the team for years. Whilst we are trying to bring Sancho in, why would you not want to at least talk to a free agent who is PL proven.
  2. If we do sign Sancho then you have an excellent backup RW and someone who can play across the front three
  3. If we don't sign Sancho you have a good RW option for the coming season whilst we keep negotiating for Sancho/try for another big name signing.
This isn't like people are saying we should sign Ryan Fraser because he's on a free and plays RW, Willian is a Brazil international who has played and performed for Chelsea for years, won 2 PL's and multiple cups and has great work rate/attitude. Just because he's not exactly world class and is 31 doesn't make him useless. Signing Sancho or not shouldn't come into the question because we are so light on the RW.
We have Greenwood to fill in at RW too. His minutes will be after Greenwood gets his fill. He is staying until he's 34 years old. Even if he does well this next season, he can be awful the last 2 years on those wages. Potentially those last 2 years will be more important for our team as that is when we should be competing for titles. Next year won't quite have the same expectations, though I'll be hopeful.
 

Cassidy

No longer at risk of being mistaken for a Scouser
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
21,083
It's just a minor policy disagreement. Has years left of his prime. United should be all over this guy.
He wants a 3 year deal, we shouldn't be going near it. Not on the wages he is after.
He wouldn't have been a good signing on a shorter term deal
 

SAFMUTD

Full Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2018
Messages
3,401
All things considered Id say no, of course he's a good player and on a free sound like a no brainer but the thing is that he wants a 3 year contract.

He's a week away of turning 32 and while he has not declined massively he probably will and we would be stuck with him of high wages. Anything beyond 2 years its a high risk.
 

Web of Bissaka

Full Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
7,081
Location
Losing to Comeback Winning!
I'm so confused with how this forum assess players.
  1. We currently have no RW and it's the biggest hole we have had in the team for years. Whilst we are trying to bring Sancho in, why would you not want to at least talk to a free agent who is PL proven.
  2. If we do sign Sancho then you have an excellent backup RW and someone who can play across the front three
  3. If we don't sign Sancho you have a good RW option for the coming season whilst we keep negotiating for Sancho/try for another big name signing.
2 Right Wingers with Sancho and Greenwood.

Do we need more?
Do we need an old RW given a long expensive contract for a back-up who will only play cup games at most?
 

TheLord

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2018
Messages
644
All things considered Id say no, of course he's a good player and on a free sound like a no brainer but the thing is that he wants a 3 year contract.

He's a week away of turning 32 and while he has not declined massively he probably will and we would be stuck with him of high wages. Anything beyond 2 years its a high risk.
Exactly. If Chelsea don't want to offer him a three-year contract, there's no reason why United should. We are no dumping place for declining Chelsea players.
 

Superunknown

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
1,399
I'm sure that if we were to get Willian we could get him some game time without it hindering too much on the progress of Mason, especially with the option of being able to use 5 subs. There will be tons of games to go around in all competitions, so there is some sense in this transfer. Could be a handy player to have. If there's the possibility of a short term (a year or so) deal that wouldn't be too expensive with wage demands, then it might be worth looking at. If he's after a long-term deal with us, or if the wage demands are too high, then he's one we can skip out on.
 

WeePat

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,182
Supports
Chelsea
He wants a 3 year deal, we shouldn't be going near it. Not on the wages he is after.
He wouldn't have been a good signing on a shorter term deal
I wholeheartedly disagree. He'd be an immense pro for United. Well worth a 3 year contract and a fat signing fee. Do it now.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
31,380
No no no.
We dodged a bullet years back, albeit with a big fee. But let's not start bringing in pay check players now, we've only just started getting our transfer house in order.
 

el3mel

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
32,147
Location
Egypt
Seems he's going to Arsenal on free. I think he'll be a decent signing for them all things considered.
 

charlenefan

Far less insightful than the other Charley
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
23,675
It's weird, while I think it would be a blow to Chelsea to loose him I think he'd be a horrific signing for Arsenal :lol:
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
17,261
It's weird, while I think it would be a blow to Chelsea to loose him I think he'd be a horrific signing for Arsenal :lol:
Underwhelming, albeit safe signing. After blowing that money on Pepe it's understandable going down this route.
 

el3mel

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
32,147
Location
Egypt
Chelsea aren't losing much as they signed great attacking players and Willian would have probably been dropped to the bench. It's a win-win for everyone, Chelsea, Arsenal and William himself I guess.
 

KennyBurner

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
2,614
Location
ATL
Very high and he won't accept less than a 3 year deal. Turns 32 next week. There's a reason we're letting him go.
Yh I guessed as much. Only reason we aren’t in for him because we lack so much squad depth in attack. It’s so bad Ole had to play Bruno and rashford 3 games in 7 days. Madness.

Also weird how many are quick to dismiss him especially after such a great season. Id rather have him off the bench than lingard or James.
 

KennyBurner

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
2,614
Location
ATL
Don’t know whats funny? We could have a quality player on a free and it’s provides great depth that we are lacking.

Rashford, Sancho and Greenwood is not enough for the amount of games next season. James and lingard is a massive drop from what we want as backup.
 

cmacgregor93

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 29, 2017
Messages
60
Watch Troopz make up an obnoxious nickname for him to get trending for AFTV.
 

KennyBurner

Full Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
2,614
Location
ATL
I'm so confused with how this forum assess players.
  1. We currently have no RW and it's the biggest hole we have had in the team for years. Whilst we are trying to bring Sancho in, why would you not want to at least talk to a free agent who is PL proven.
  2. If we do sign Sancho then you have an excellent backup RW and someone who can play across the front three
  3. If we don't sign Sancho you have a good RW option for the coming season whilst we keep negotiating for Sancho/try for another big name signing.
This isn't like people are saying we should sign Ryan Fraser because he's on a free and plays RW, Willian is a Brazil international who has played and performed for Chelsea for years, won 2 PL's and multiple cups and has great work rate/attitude. Just because he's not exactly world class and is 31 doesn't make him useless. Signing Sancho or not shouldn't come into the question because we are so light on the RW.
Don’t know why you are surprised. This Is the same forum that thinks martial and rashford are not good enough.

Willian is good enough for another 2 years. We should be all over him. great set piece taker and is actually a winger. Also good at moving with the ball to evade pressure which he did so many times for Chelsea this season. Yet we will sign just Sancho and god forbid injuries occur we are back to lingard.
 

ThatsGreat

Full Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
894
Supports
Arsenal
He'll be good as a squad player. Only problem is we're probably getting him to be a starter. Also reeks of Kia Joorabchian getting his smelly nose deeper into our affairs.
 

Tony247

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
2,596
There are always times during rebuild to fill tactical gap by cheap short term fix while waiting for a long term solution. Willian can be a good tactical fix for our midfield depth issue, like Ighalo for striking department. Not every signee should be seen as 'strategic' or 'long term'. A good team always has good mix of both.
 

lex talionis

Full Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
1,221
If Sancho is coming, then no to Willian. But if not, and for whatever reason we need to wait another season for Sancho, then a punt on Sancho wouldn't have been such a bad idea at all.

There's a sense out there that we're also bringing in Grealish. I'm on board with bringing in Grealish as a super sub, so long as we don't have to spend a super transfer fee to make it happen.