Of course it can still be money wasted. We could have spent £50m on bringing in Jordan Henderson and he’d have had his uses this season. Wouldn’t stop it being a shocking waste of money though.
Erik ten Hag | 2022/23 & 2023/24
- Thread starter sewey89
- Start date
- Status
Of course it can still be money wasted. We could have spent £50m on bringing in Jordan Henderson and he’d have had his uses this season. Wouldn’t stop it being a shocking waste of money though.
Go on then I'll bite. How is Mount an astute signing?
We gotta spread the good news…
No you've convinced me. Mount was definitely the best way of spending £55m+ (and £250k a week) last summer.
Simple question do you think the £400m could have been spent significantly better or not?
Martial (who is a certainty to leave), Shaw and Rashford are the only ones left from LVG.
Dalot (who didn't really play), McTominay (who didn't actually play as often as most think) and Lindelof are the only ones left from Mourinho.
The rest of the squad have all been bought in during Ole and ETH's reigns, so what LVG and Mourinho said doesn't have much basis on what is happening now. Even out of those six players, all of them bar Lindelof were just youngsters who really only became consistent starters under Ole. Well, both Martial and Shaw were kids that had a period of being first choice for LVG before losing their spots when Mourinho came in. So it's already a very very different group of players than what those two managers had.
Hell, even Ole only bought four players that are still in the squad. Maguire, AWB, Bruno and Varane (five if you want to include Amad). Although like I said, most of the players from the earlier two regimes can kind of be counted as Ole's players. It still means over half the current squad have been either bought or broke into the team in the last two years with ETH, which is obviously a significant turnover.
Oh, and there isn't any 'Southgate in' mob. A few people are saying that at this point even Southgate might be a bit better than ETH, but I don't think there's anyone who has him even remotely near the top of who they want.
It made sense and still does for these reasons:
1. By all accounts Chelsea offered flexible payment terms. Very useful for us at the time as we prioritised a GK and a ST.
2. He is extremely versatile. Can play on either wing, behind the striker or in midfield as an 8. Probably seen by the club as a good long-term Eriksen replacement.
3. Fits well into modern progressive systems, can press well and tactically flexible.
4. Young, entering peak years.
5. English so helps us with the quota.
5. Top level experience with Chelsea and England.
6. Good set piece taker
7. High resale value
Yes, I think Murtough is an idiot who can't negotiate for shit. And I agree a CM would have been a better play.
However I like Mount and for his price (which was attainable closer to the 40m mark had Murtough not been a tit) was a very good deal. Most certainly not a waste of money.
Why would I try when you continually argue in bad faith?
I'm arguing in bad faith?
You know you actually agree with me really that we could have spent the Mount money better but you're trying to argue otherwise and ask me to name names
I was happy and I remain happy with the Mount signing.I'm arguing in bad faith?
You know you actually agree with me really that we could have spent the Mount money better but you're trying to argue otherwise and ask me to name names
I think Ten Hag deserves a lot of criticism, but no coach is going to dominate a game where the players are losing almost all their duels.
You need to at least match the opponent‘s aggression and work rate before you can talk about tactics.
Maybe these players can‘t perform the way Ten Hag wants them too. If that is true, then we are in big trouble.
You need to at least match the opponent‘s aggression and work rate before you can talk about tactics.
Maybe these players can‘t perform the way Ten Hag wants them too. If that is true, then we are in big trouble.
We won‘t know until he stays fit a while and gets a run of games.
Same as with Højlund, who was written off by many.
Fair
You've boiled down my comment that £400m for maybe 3 starters next season was a waste of money to being about Mount (who you agree would have been better spent on a proper CM).
My original point that we've spent £400m badly stands, whether Mount proves to be a useful squad player or not.
I said injury crisis. You’re dancing around the point anyway. He obviously holds Mctominay in high regard. At this moment in time if given the choice he wouldn’t get rid of a Mctominay which was the initial point you tried to make.What
Casemiro has been injured mate.
Not dancing round anything. McTominay is benched when Casemiro is fit, end of story.
Well it isn’t is it?
Here’s what you said..
What are you basing him getting rid of McTominay on? He’s benched when Casemiro is fit is also not necessarily a thing. The last three games Casemiro has been fit to start for McTominay also started.
The only starting players ETH ''bought' last saturday were Hojlund and Onana. What all other managers said and with the Kane refusal to buy by the Glazers, is that nobody got the players they wanted.
It's this why INEOS is renovating the entire structure behind the manager. LvG, Ole, Jose all said the same thing: they didn't get the players they wanted.
It is mis match of players who simply cannot play together in one system.
You sack Ten Hag and the whole saga can start again. Many will point how Ten Hag wasted 400 million on players like Weghorst. New manager wants other players than Ten Hag.
However, if the Brentford form continues at Chelsea and Liverpool I cannot see Ten Hag stay beyond the summer. But since the new DoF loves Southgate and Allardyce, be prepared that either of them will come in.
Casemiro, once again, has been injured and is not ready to start yet.
McTominay is likely to be sold for financial reasons being a home-grown which is more profit. I said it makes it more likely, not that he definitely would be.
He's not first choice ahead of Casemiro. Our first choice is clearly Casemiro-Mainoo-Bruno. However McTominay is next in line and is currently ahead of Eriksen, Amrabat and Mount, so he's first into the team whenever any of the main three aren't available or are rested.
I've always been one of McTominay's biggest critics, but I do try to be fair about it. For Ole, based on the options he had available Scott was sadly the best of a bad bunch towards the end (well, Fred was the best but Scott was the best option for the second spot). Matic and Pogba were clearly finished by that time, and for all of Scott's limitations the team was more solid with him in it than them. The issue was more that Ole never seemed to prioritise strengthening that midfield to push him down the pecking order.
ETH has completely changed the midfield and tried to sell McTominay, but it really hasn't worked out. He bought Eriksen who is pretty much finished, bought Casemiro who looks almost as finished, bought Mount who has spent the entire season injured and is probably the wrong type of player, loaned in Amrabat who has struggled, and sold Fred who almost certainly would have been still our best option for that third spot next to Mainoo and Bruno. Due to all that McTominay almost got that spot by default for a large part of the season, and even now that the other options are back none of them have really stepped up to deserve the spot ahead of him. I do think ETH has prioritised him a bit too much, but at the same time I have to admit none of the other options are making it easy.
While valid reasons there are also many reasons why he wasn't a sensible signing too. I think the biggest one is that we would have been better suited with a player that could play as a no.6 and no.8
Even you mention Mount can play as an 8 but most of his experience was in more advanced positions. It can be make him an asset but also and asset that wasn't really needed right now.
1. We overpaid badly whatever the payment plan. He was going to be free in 6 months. We also made him one of the top earners immediately another overpay
2. Versatile sure but that doesn't mean talented
3. Tactically flexible is just another way of saying versatile. I don't know if he presses well but sure I'll take your word for it.
4. Sure
5. Sure
6. Sure
7. If we are going to sell mount it means he will have flopped here and that means we will again struggle to offload him on those wages. So I highly doubt we will get much for him. More likely he runs his contract down.
So to sum up he's young, English, versatile and takes decent set pieces.
Not one point about if he's actually good in all those positions he can play though.
Agree to disagree. I didn't think much of Mount before he joined us and nothing he has shown so far has made me change my mind.
I think Mount was a good buy and we should have got him for 40m, not £55m plus 5. We also overspent on Hojlund who is still an asset.
I think Murtough should have been able to turf out players better to fund the CM.
My comment is actually that you can't call mount a waste of money but still insinuate he has a potentially key role next season. Those are two mutually exclusive statements.
I think Mount was more or a club decision than an ETH decision (although he obviously must have said yes)
I think we can see this by him seemingly not really wanting to pick him at times.
12 months. You can't agree pre-contracts until June with domestic players.
Yes, spending 60m on a pseudo 10 coming off a poor season riddled with injuries, going into his final year under contract, and now having another entire season riddled with more injuries was a very astute signing. Brilliant logic.
Oh and the position he was signed to play he had never had success in at his previous club. Everything was theoretical based on his attributes as a player to whether our vision would work out (next to Bruno of all people)
It’s the type of gamble you take if you’re already a top team and see value in getting squad depth with a versatile player as a supplementary signing and experiment with where he works best. You don’t make him the marquee midfield choice and slap the 7 on him. It was a fecking ludicrous decision that has turned out even worse because he’s been unavailable for much of the year.
Oh and the position he was signed to play he had never had success in at his previous club. Everything was theoretical based on his attributes as a player to whether our vision would work out (next to Bruno of all people)
It’s the type of gamble you take if you’re already a top team and see value in getting squad depth with a versatile player as a supplementary signing and experiment with where he works best. You don’t make him the marquee midfield choice and slap the 7 on him. It was a fecking ludicrous decision that has turned out even worse because he’s been unavailable for much of the year.
He is never dropping either of them sadly because unlike the fanbase he can't see an issue
Casemiro once again in his last three starts has started alongside Mctominay. Mctominay when he plays instead of Casemiro doesn’t even play in the position Casemiro normally plays. Granted I don’t know what fecking position ETH tells Mctominay to play in. False midfielder?
Yeah can’t disagree with any of that. If (and it never happens) everyone is fit he won’t start. The problem in itself is that is never the case and so he plays a lot, especially recently, this making him current first choice. He’s ahead of a number of other midfield players so won’t be getting sold by Ten Hag anytime soon that’s for sure. The effort appears to have been made last summer to sell him but that didn’t happen and now we’re back at this stage where a manager is on his last legs so trusts the guys who show passion, train well etc which wil be Mctominay. It’s an endless cycle.
They got a lot of players they wanted. Then they complained because they didn't get EVERYONE they wanted.
Casemiro, Mainoo, Bruno is the first choice. Don’t really understand how you could dispute this.
With players like Maguire, Lindelof, McT, Awb and Rashford on the pitch you don't expect to control the game or possession. Nobody should expect anything different from these players at this stage, but they do and the blame falls on the manager when it doesn't happen.
But there's an entire planet worth of players who can tick similar boxes.
In the position we actually needed.
And there was me thinking that it would be impossible to appoint someone worse than Ole.
Those still backing this guy are surely trolling now. He’s completely out of his depth.
Those still backing this guy are surely trolling now. He’s completely out of his depth.
Alexis Mac Allister was available for half the price, a player with a proven track record in a midfield 3 unlike Mount.
Not sure what this set-piece business is about, he's not taking any so long as Bruno's captain and re-sale value's aren't really there when the player is on 250,000/300,000 a week.
I believe the Glazers (Joel) cost us when it comes to him. Liverpool just much better operators in the transfer market.
No manager gets all the players they want. Ferguson didn't. Klopp didn't. They had to make do with players who were further down their order of preference. Mourinho especially got most of the players he wanted in the early days, and then when they failed and he wanted to sign new players in the same positions he threw a tantrum that the club didn't trust his judgement on players anymore. It's worth noting we know many of the players he wanted to bring in, and almost every single one of them would also have been a failure and further waste of money on old players on the decline.
Indeed, these days the manager should have limited influence on which players we sign. The club board decides how they want us to play, then the footballing structure builds both the playing squad and the managerial department to fulfil that style. Obviously the manager should have some influence, but not to the extent that they can bitch and moan about not getting the individual players that they wanted. The new structure should be getting built to that understanding, so we won't be buying new players for particular managers.
Your point about it being better to continue signing players for ETH rather than starting over again is very short sighted. If Ten Hag isn't the right manager going forward and doesn't have the style we want, then the more players we sign for him is more money being wasted and more players we have to replace when we do move him on a further 12 or 24 months later.
Also, I'd hardly say that the fact that ETH is so reliant on previous managers signings despite over the half squad being his own players is a good reason to continue allowing him to pick the signings.
Allardyce?
The Southgate links are bad enough and I'm fairly certain they are mostly coming from his end as he tries to drum up interest, but where did you pull the Allardyce idea from?It's wasted money however you want to spin it
- overpaid
- better spent on a CM
- most likely back up unless Bruno doesn't perform
I agree he's not the biggest waste of money in the £400m (which is why you're focusing on it)
It is strange that fans do not seem to recognize that there are ups and downs when trying to rebuild a team. It is far too impatient to demand ETH's dismissal on the basis of the current season, when you were so satisfied with the last one. And I'm not a fan of ETH, but just think it's too impatient. And I haven't forgotten the tactical changes - I just don't see them as decisive for the worse season this year.
- Status