Southampton's long term pursuit to take Brandon Williams from Old Trafford To St Mary's on loan could be about to come to a dead end with Manchester united said to be demanding a £2 million loan fee, will Saints budge and pay it ?

Saints appear to have coveted Brandon Williams for some time allegedly trying to take him on loan last summer and then again in the January transfer window, they looked to have made it third time lucky when it seemed that both clubs had agreed a package that would see the 20 year old spend the 2021/22 season at St Mary's in exchange for paying his £65k a week wages in full.

But now it seems that it has come to a halt with United demanding a £2 million loan fee on top.

That would mean that with wages and loan fee combined it would cost Saints somewhere in the region of £5.5 million for the season.

That is a big figure for a player who so far has played just 21 times in the Premier Leagueand 1,191 minutes in total, just over 13 games in total game time.

Last season he started just 2 games and another 2 off the bench and was an unused sub on 16 occasions, his career seemingly stalling after a promising breakthrough the season before.

Some would say why don't Saints just pay the fee and be done with it, but when you look at Williams career it has been mainly played as a left back with occasional periods on his natural side on the right, with Saints signing Romain Peraud this summer to replace Ryan Bertrand and Kyle Walker Peters one of our most consistent performers last season , the big question is just where will we play him.

What is the point in spending £5.5 million of a very limited budget on a player who could well be spending as much time on the bench as he did at Old Trafford.

It has been said he can play as a wing back so could fill a gap in a more attacking role for us out wide, but again would he get in the side ahead of some of the more experienced players that we have available, including our recent permanent signing Theo Walcott.

Brandon Williams who turning 21 in September has plenty of potential, but so far most of his experience has been in the early round of cup competitions rather than at the highest level of the Premier League.

It is hard to see why Saints are pursuing him so avidly and for that matter why United would let him go to a club where he may well not be a first choice.

We are short of cover for the full backs, but we do have players who can fill in at those positions and cover for full backs is surely not a priority compared with other positions.

Photo: Action Images

PeterL22 added 21:27 - Jul 14 We are still short of fullbacks/wing backs, so he could be a useful addition. The 2million fee doesn't seem prohibitive (especially with the outgoings so far), but how can we justify 65K a week for him!
1

Big_T added 23:51 - Jul 14 Not worth that sort of money imo
5

saintmark1976 added 07:26 - Jul 15 A piece which shows the absurdity of modern day football. Considering paying over £3 million a year to a kid not yet 21 who has played but a handful of games at top flight level. No wonder we needed to recently arrange a loan facility with a prohibitive rate of interest simply to survive.
4

highfield49 added 10:57 - Jul 15 Even paying his inflated wages is questionable but a loan fee on top is bordering on the ridiculous. For that sort of money he might as well continue to warm the bench in Manchester before he eventually leaves on a free transfer in three years time.
4

WestSussexSaint added 13:26 - Jul 15 I agree with the points made above. Use the money to invest in a decent back up that we can develop ourselves and potentially will be first choice in a couple of years. We know the player is keen so Is there the option to speak to his agent to apply some pressure?
3

ElijahK added 14:01 - Jul 15 Sorry but how Man U expect us to pay what’ll come to £3.5 mill with his wages this season and then another £2 mill for a player that LOOKS LIKE he’s got potential, but has barely played us just absurd! I mean with that £5 we might be able to sign that Armstrong if they did want more money for him, as well as other positions in which we need the players, as this kids barely played and seeing that we’ve just signed a new fullback already I don’t see why we’d wanna spend £5 on someone who’s just gonna spend most of the season on the bench, whilst that £5 mill could make the difference between us signing the replacement for Ings or getting in a new player permanently for a position available in the starting lineup and not the bench. So unless that £2 mill extra is removed then I certainly don’t see him as worth that, especially not for just a single season

3

NewburySaint added 19:59 - Jul 15 Spend / invest our money more wisely rather than giving it to clubs who reportedly have ridiculous demands-let’s move on to our next target…..
1

underweststand added 15:45 - Jul 17 I agree with you all (above). £5 million on a loan player who might play half the season..(!). That sort of money can surely be better-placed elsewhere...
1

underweststand added 11:02 - Jul 18 Right now we are stuck between a rock and a hard place over the full back issue. Jake Vokins has a long contract with saints and a good season at another level will help him develop, whilst the issue over Yan Valery's future seems "uncertain " to say the least. Ramsay, another good prospect will also have a season on loan at Crewe, whilst the B team's LB Will Ferry , is yet to get a first team start. All three are either too young / inexperienced to DAJFU in the coming season. We must move on from this obsession with Williams if there is no compromise from MU.

0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Chelsea Polls