40m is too much for an English, 24 year old, two-time Chelsea player of the year, in a transfer between two rival clubs in the same league? Have a word.
Mason Mount | Confirmed
- Thread starter UnitedSofa
- Start date
- Status
Kinda agree with this.
I think ETH’s transfers have ranged from good to appalling.
Mount doesn’t seem an obvious transfer to me for what Utd actually need, but obviously ETH knows best, but going North of 50m I’d be very wary tbh.
Does anyone have a sense of other clubs are really in for him?
If it’s just us, we are in a great position to negotiate (as long as there are alternatives to pursue). We could just walk away, and Chelsea will be left with an unhappy player likely to leave for free in a year.
If it’s just us, we are in a great position to negotiate (as long as there are alternatives to pursue). We could just walk away, and Chelsea will be left with an unhappy player likely to leave for free in a year.
Do you always leave out very relevant information?
Good if we set a price and walk away. Especially with Arsenal after Havertz. Chelsea should be in a really weak position to negotiate and I hope clubs let them flounder.
They refused that offer. It will be too much by the time they accept. Dealing with clubs who are all rich…too much is a given.
Management staff will have their best and final number in their back pocket when they sit down in earnest -- no doubt after months of "preparing their bid" -- with Chelsea. None of us have any idea what the real transfer budget is and I wouldn't be surprised if it's far above the 100m that's being quoted. We have no choice but to be patient but it would be nice to have a few new players on board when training begins in a few weeks.
Go on then?
Appalling? Who? Weghorst doesn't count.
Weghorst absolutely does count, he’s included in literally every list of ETH’s transfers.
I also think allowing the club to waste 90m of his budget on Antony is an appalling transfer personally, but am fine with others having a different opinion.
For me Weghorst and Antony are dodgy enough to show that ETH should certainly not be followed blindly. He seems very limited in his scope and overly reliant on average to poor Dutch talent.
Also the last 10 years have shown us that blindly following managers isn’t the best way. I understand it’s what many fans crave as a hangover from the image Fergie had, but it’s not the way to go.
I’ll throw it back to you and ask, what transfers that ETH’s made do you view as excellent - Casemiro doesn’t count.
One year on his contract
Oh, I see. So we hang around for a year to save 50 or 60m? Or should we just pay the 50m, get ETH what he wants and hit the ground running when the season starts? Widely accepted that if we wait until next year ETH will face competition from many more clubs so no guarantee then either. Like it or not, players with a year left on their contract still have a value - Mount's is definitely more than 40m.And? So we wait? Continue with the midfield from last season in the hope that we get him next year - which is not a guarantee? We won't be close to competitive this season if we don't upgrade the midfield and ETH clearly wants Mount to be part of that upgrade.
Funnily enough, Mount is not the only midfielder we are allowed to buy. If he says he's set on us this year, hence why Arsenal have dropped out, I'm pretty sure he'd want to join the summer too.
We just shouldn’t bend over backwards and accept Chelsea’s demands, when they need to get rid just as much as we need the player. More than £40m would be crazy giving the quality of the player and his contract situation.
Rather look for alternatives in that case. Chelsea need to be reasonable.
Weghorst absolutely does count, he’s included in literally every list of ETH’s transfers.
I also think allowing the club to waste 90m of his budget on Antony is an appalling transfer personally, but am fine with others having a different opinion.
For me Weghorst and Antony are dodgy enough to show that ETH should certainly not be followed blindly. He seems very limited in his scope and overly reliant on average to poor Dutch talent.
Also the last 10 years have shown us that blindly following managers isn’t the best way. I understand it’s what many fans crave as a hangover from the image Fergie had, but it’s not the way to go.
I’ll throw it back to you and ask, what transfers that ETH’s made do you view as excellent - Casemiro doesn’t count.
Weghorst doesn't count in my opinion as we literally had no money in January and Weghorst was the best that was available. He also wasn't a permanent signing. Antony has been up and down, but he hasn't been appalling. Casemiro clearly does count and has been arguably signing of the season. Martinez has been amazing too. As for his reliance on Dutch talent - who is that? Malacia is the only Dutch player we have signed (apart from WW) and has been excellent. Eriksen slowed down towards the end of the season but overall has been great for us this year - he was also a free transfer.
i'm not saying we blindly trust the manager, but there is a degree of trust that ETH has earned, at least from me. No manager is going to get it right every time.
If needs be. Part of being astute in the market (which we very much aren’t/haven’t been) is being willing to show other clubs you will walk away if they take the piss. Otherwise you end up having your pants taken down time and time again.
A competent negotiation tactic would be to show Chelsea a list of alternatives to Mount that we’ve already sounded out. Hopefully we’ve been doing exactly that. This trend we’ve been on of working on only one deal at a time, with only that target and nobody else is likely to be why we keep over paying, because the longer it drags on the more we have to lose.
Fair enough - so who would the alternative be? Are there actual, viable alternatives? Would they be less than Mount? If not, then what's the point?
100% agree. All I'm saying is that 40m is unreasonable for Mount. I think 55m would be a fair price, certainly not the 70 or 80m that Chelsea were quoting.
I agree that we shouldn't cave to Chelsea, but I disagree on your valuation of Mount. If you're unwilling to go over 40m for Mount then who is your alternative at that price or less?
Well I would imagine if we have to move on, we'd plan to invest now in areas that come next season we'll need to think about. RB for example, or maybe spend more on a proper no 6. A competent recruitment team should be able to plan more than one season at a time, so adjust the overal squad building plan to wait until summer to get him in, or even come back in January.
We're not only Mason Mount away from challenging for the league, so it's only sensible to over pay in that scenario, we should be more pragmatic and think more long term.
I was under the assumption that the manager will be working closely with the recruitment team. Both parties will need to come to an agreement. If the recruitment team thought Mount was not good enough, I think he would not be a target. Maybe this assumption is wrong though.
I don’t have anyone specific in mind. I’d hope the scouting department does, but I wouldn’t actually count on it.
It wouldn’t even have to be £40m or less though. It could also be more for a player of higher quality.
But yeah, you are right that it’s just the valuation we disagree on. It would just be such a shame to blow a large chunk of the budget on someone I consider to be fairly average, where we should be in a strong position to negotiate.
Clearest sign yet that Sheikh Jassim is our new owner.
What are you laughing at?
Paying 60m for a player with one season of a contract left is mental unless it's a world class player which Mount clearly isnt.
that 60m is 60% of our reported budget so Mount and Chelsea can't be dealt with in isolation and further if he was out of contract and chose another club for more money then feck him
Do you remember a few years back when Alexis Sanchez was coming to the end of his contract at Arsenal and it became essentially a bidding war between United and City. Pep said something like, "We aren't as wealthy as United, we can't pay those wages" and he let it go. The world was shocked since Alexis was among the most in-demand forwards in the world at that time. Well, since then, City have paid reasonable fees for all of their players, nobody has quoted them ridiculous fees on players and they're the better for it. I think we need a few of those: where we say:, "Sorry, Todd, we can't afford that. We'll make do and see you next year when he's free". Would do wonders for our recruitment generally.
With all due respect to Mount we’re giving him the De Jong treatment. I like him & think he’d be a decent addition but if Chelsea don’t want to accept our terms surely our scouts can identify another player of similar skill set.
Hate to draw a comparison but we’ve seen our neighbours walk away from deals over crap like this, if Chelsea don’t want to sell for what we offer we should move on.
Hate to draw a comparison but we’ve seen our neighbours walk away from deals over crap like this, if Chelsea don’t want to sell for what we offer we should move on.
Feel like we are too nice as a club sometimes.
I want Mount here but he is clearly made his mind up about joining here - id Just give him some money under the table and tell him to join us on free next season.
It’s literally all City’s & Barcas do with FFP and referees - no one needs to know anything.
I want Mount here but he is clearly made his mind up about joining here - id Just give him some money under the table and tell him to join us on free next season.
It’s literally all City’s & Barcas do with FFP and referees - no one needs to know anything.
Bayern!
Exactly.
We don’t know the ins & outs but if a club rejects your bid you don’t have to enter into lengthy negotiations, tell them fair play then move on.
There are certain players you go above & beyond for, I’m yet to see anything about Mount that suggests this should be the case.
Rabiot on a free, Guler for 17.5 mil, Alex Scott, Amad and Mainoo in place of him until next summer, to name a few, there’s plenty of options. 55-60 million on an out an form player with a year left on his contract, with a limited budget, is a perfect example of modern day Utd getting financially rinsed, yet again.
1000%
Throw in Chelsea literally have to sell players this Summer.
Why?
For people more in the know of Chelsea's finances, how bad is it for them if he leaves for a free? They must be pretty desperate for the funds given FFP, no?
On another note, if we refuse to go beyond £50m and Chelsea refuse to sell at this price, is it possible Liverpool or Arsenal could come in with an offer Chelsea will accept and Mount will abandon his plan on joining us and go elsewhere? Or will Mount sit it out and leave for free next summer?
As long as Mount stays committed that he'll join United and only United, or assuming Liverpool/Arsenal aren't prepared to go over £50m either, we're in a very strong negotiating position and we've no excuses for getting rinsed on this deal. If Chelsea are happy to let him leave for free though that changes everything.
It's nice to see we're taking a clear stance with time wasters this summer instead of getting embroiled in sagas that last the entire window. As with Kane, we're in a position of relative strength - either sell for a reasonable fee this summer or we'll come back next year when those players are out of contract.
Yeah. Is there any prolong transfer saga involving City? The only one i recall was involving Kane. Other than that, they seems to just buying smoothly. They set the price, and stick with it. No "monitoring", "preparing", "submitting bid 1", "bid 2", "Director to chase the player signature". Nothing seems like "panic buying" also.
If they don't get the player at their set price, they just swiftly go for another target.
- Status