You're absolutely within your rights to have doubts. But for me Mason Mount is a player that is a obvious pick up for any head coach who wants to implement a proactive attacking brand of football. Because not only are you expected to control the game in possession but control has to be exerted off the ball to manage the opponent's transition or when applying the press/counter press to force high turnovers. We're really bad at those things currently and along with the eye test, the data also backs up Mount being a key cog within the system that I believe Erik ten Hag is attempting to implement in a high defensive line. And like yourself, I also didn't have Mason Mount as someone that I thought we'd sign or I wanted us to sign. But I can understand why Mason Mount would be of interest to coaches like ten Hag, Arteta and Klopp.That’s a view. I see no reason why I am obligated to dismiss the reports that Mount has been a POI since Vitesse, and there’s no reason that I am obligated to dismiss it or reference it in addition to other things that suggest at a pattern.
Everyone here is just so fiercely defensive of Erik Ten Hag, which is understandable, however, I just think the fact that I like him shouldn’t obstruct me from pointing out things that concern me.
We’ve gone 60m and 250/300k a week on Mason Mount and I suspect that EVERYONE is suggesting that is a fantastic idea largely on the basis that ‘Ten Hag wants him’. You all watch football, especially English football, if you would have thought that was a terrible idea 3 months ago then I don’t see why people cannot form their own views. This is an England international, not an unseen player from Brazil. It’s Mason Mount. Who apparently now everyone wanted us to sign for our midfield.
As for the wider analysis of Ten Hag in the market, he leaves a bit to be desired for me. I don’t see it as his strength, and that supports reports we had before he joined us. I’m just concerned that we are committing big money to players who won’t have transformative impact on our team. 60m Mount, 85m Antony. You only get a few of those in your team, and we need one or two of them to be the leaders/stars of the team. The difference makers, the Haaland/KDB/Salah/Odegaard etc in the team, and if the few times we get to commit big money (fees/wages) then we need players of that calibre. Admittedly, I wanted us to sign Antony, but fact is the impact has been little.
I love the manager as much as the rest, but would prefer a different approach in the market. And everyone trying to imply that some sort of preference for Dutch, present/former Eredivise players is something randomly cooked up by Rozay is laughable. Sorry to disappoint you as a poster, but you should also know me well enough to know that I don’t really care for consensus posting for the sake of it and will call anything as I happen to see it.
In the summer of 2016, we signed Pogba for a then world record transfer fee and Liverpool signed Wijnaldum for around a fraction of that price from relegated Newcastle. Pogba was the more talented player in possession but Wijnaldum's ability with and without the ball in Klopp's proactive attacking system where the press and counter press was a additional weapon, became more beneficial to Klopp's system due to him being technically good in possession but even better at managing transitions off the ball. And it's important to understand the idea the manager wants to implement before we pass judgement on players on a individual basis without connecting them to the idea of the manager IMHO.
I've said consistently that the best attacking teams in the EPL, are those teams who have the best build up phase which is backed up by data. And our post Fergie problem is in that build up phase in a EPL which is now being dominated by teams who build from the back, which allows them to raise their defensive line and hence commit more and more players into the opponent's half because their players at the back can resist and evade pressure starting with their goalkeepers.
So for Mason Mount to be a effective second phase player where he can receive the ball on the half half turn and progress the ball into the front line, the GK, CBs, deeper midfield and fullbacks are required to be as close to elite as possible in possession. Because the strategy against us is simple with De Gea in goal and that is to press all the outfield players and force them to go back to De Gea who will give the ball away. And the best pressing teams were doing that to us and were emboldened in their attempts by how bad the GK was in possession.
We obviously need a striker but it's imperative that the build up phase is improved on. And any new keeper who is good in possession should make a difference in the build up phase, but what is ten Hag going to do with the RB position and Casemiro backup is going to be key to how things develop next season imo. Because the system is currently reliant on Casemiro staying fit and Dalot and Wan Bissaka inverting in-field, which again is something that worries me. And I'm not sure if the actual plan is to play both Mount and Bruno as high #8s and I wouldn't be surprised if we sign a deeper lying midfielder near the end of the window.
My focus is on how the team is going to develop as a proactive attacking unit. And it looks like the GK is incoming in that regard which for me is a big step towards transitioning into being a more dominant team. We seem to be under financial constraints but so far we seem to be heading into the the right direction as far as developing the team towards a more proactive play-style.
Last edited: