Andre Brooks transfer call leaves Sheffield United owners at a crossroads - and next move will speak volumes amid fan anger
Selling Andre Brooks may have been a financial necessity for Sheffield United, but how COH Sports respond now will reveal far more about their ambitions than the transfer itself.
Hundreds of players have joined and left Sheffield United over the years and although it may just be recency bias, not many seem to have angered Blades fans as much as the most recent departure. Andre Brooks’ departure to Norwich City was confirmed yesterday.
The academy product was named players’ player and player of the season in his breakthrough campaign, earning him both a call-up to the Jamaica national side and interest from elsewhere.
The Blades turned down an offer in January but did business this time around after the bid was received from Carrow Road. Although reports in Norfolk have pegged the fee at £9m should they be promoted, United sources suggest it could top £10m with add-ons.
Either claim didn’t dampen the anger amongst Unitedites, concerned that their side was repeating the mistake of two summers ago when they sold another key player to a divisional rival. Jayden Bogle went on to win promotion with Leeds United and was some people’s shout for a place in the England World Cup squad.
It seems that, on the whole, it is the destination rather than the departure that has caused so much concern amongst Blades fans. Norwich’s bid was boosted by money from the sale of Josh Sargent and their American owners, but are United really in a position where they couldn’t have said no to a potential rival next season?
The flip side of the argument is that every player in world football has a price and when they express a desire to move - and who can blame a player if the chance is there to increase his salary by many multiples? - then it becomes a case of getting the best deal.
There was a broad acceptance that United would have to sell players this summer, after the dual blow of losing parachute payments and new financial rules coming into play.
This move helps plug the multi-million black hole in the Blades’ coffers but doesn’t wipe it out completely. There may be more pain between now and the end of the summer transfer window and losing Brooks is undoubtedly a disappointment.
He is a Blade through and through, who rose through the ranks and became a genuinely quality winger after being transformed from a midfielder. He was a bit of a throwback as a wideman who actually tried to beat a defender and even if he didn’t that wouldn’t deter him from trying again and again. In that respect I really enjoyed watching him but he is now gone.
What matters is the response.
United had identified a number of potential replacements for Brooks even before he left, and the names are a closely-guarded secret to avoid other clubs hijacking the moves.
It was interesting to hear Brooks speak about the “ambition” of Norwich in his first interview as a Canaries player, and the calibre of his replacement will say a lot about that of United’s owners COH Sports.
Do they still see United as having the capability of challenging for promotion next season or is the goal more modest? They have a fair chunk of change from the sale of Brooks to play with; how much will be allocated to his replacement and how much will be swallowed up elsewhere?
In many ways Norwich have set the standards now. They also don’t have parachute payments, and they are playing to the same squad cost ratio rules as United and the rest of the Championship.
Yet, with the support of their ambitious American owners, they have walked into South Yorkshire and left with one of United’s most promising young players for a fee that many Blades believe should have been the start of negotiations, rather than the end.
Now it’s over to COH to respond - and how they do so could be the clearest signal yet of the direction the Blades are going in.