We shouldn't rush into anything, the season is long and he'll have plenty of games to prove he can play consistently like this or better. The time to think about buying Rashford is in May, not now.
But even if he plays well, should we really give him a top 3 salary in the squad? That's my main argument against him. I don't think he deserves a salary like that when you compare his quality to our other players but that what'll take to sign him. It can break the wage structure that the club tries to make in the last few season.
He's on 12m now. I am sure we will try to reduce it even more next season.
Let's assume reasonable stuff. He performs OK. Not exceptional, but not bad either. Continues his current form, is a good "Backup" which means, 3rd or 4th player in the Front 3. We achieve some success, and he achieves his goal of WC starting Spot.
Pretty reasonable, I would say. He's already at 10G/A, being our main front man out of the 4 positon. When everyone's fit, he becomes the super sub. Or a different tactical implementation.
I think seeing this, the guy could be rationalised into taking a lower salary closer to 10m. Maybe? Would you say that's a possibility?
Now come next year. We are getting a player for 30m (can be negotiated too, but not sure) and having around the 10-11m salary.
Do you think this is not a good deal?
Don't think 11m salary for a forward who is giving us so many options is bad.
On top if you the Amortisation, it will be around the 17m mark. I think we can't do better than this.
Ofcourse, going for Leao or a similar player will be better, but they are starters and their amortisation will be closer to 30m a year.
Or even a cheaper player but they wont show anything close to the level Rashford can. I don't think if we had a cheaper player like Puado, Ben Seghir, or someone else, we would have won the games we did up until now. And their amortisation will be closer to 10m anyway. So its not that much of a saving.
