Yes , but has Sarabia justified that salary thus far ?
No, but does that mean you should never do it ever again?
Maybe not, but you could use the same logic to say we ought to spend 35m on another lad with no senior football.
Not remotely the same. Clubs in similar position/status to ours don't spend £35m transfer fees on lads with no senior football very often. Plenty of them pay players £100k a week plus, there is a reason for both.
I don't disagree, I think there's probably more persuasive logic than "just ignore the failure" though.
Sarabia's transfer fee reflected his salary. You can't look at one without the other on that deal.
That's a bit nebulous isn't it? More things affected that fee than just his wages.
I didn't say "just ignore the failure" I was asking the question of, if something fails once do you then just give up and stop trying something similar in future? The answer is obviously no, we can and should try to learn lessons but going down that road shouldn't be scrapped for ever on the sample size of 1
Such as? We got him at a discounted price as PSG wanted him off their books, he wouldnt take a pay reduction and we couldn't afford the salary and the transfer fee which would have been consistent with his profile. Same principle as to why we never get anyone to pay a loan for Silva and his wages.
He was 31, no longer in the plans at PSG full stop, has never really been tremendously productive...
...but he already was, that's the point really
Just think we're not going to see this the same way so no real point continuing to make it an issue. Wouldn't be productive.
Biggie Smal?
