Mason Mount | Confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whoever else we are linked to instead we should immediately walk away, even before hearing an asking price we should never consider paying
 
from what I remember before the bidding began United wanted to pay 50, Chelsea wanted 70. 60 is the compromise. Not exactly great negotiating for a player who plans on leaving next year but it is what it is. Will Mason end being worth 60 million pound? I don't know, I guess that depends on how well ETH can get him to work as an #8. Mount and Onana would be a good start if they can also shift enough out to get a couple more signings.
 
MonkeysMagic said:
This transfer deal just highlights the utter incompetence of our scouting department where they are not in a position to offer ETH with alternatives. ETH knows it, we know it and most importantly, Chelsea know it! Teams can always have us over the barrel as they know we'll keep coming back! Just look at the transfer over the last few years. I would love to think that ETH can draw a line in the sand and tell Chavs to sod off with their demands, and if Mount himself is intent on coming, they'll return themselves cap in hand!
Click to expand...
How the hell do you know who the alternatives are or aren't?
Not everything is made public.
 
Faetheshire86 said:
We're talking about 5%-10% on our highest priority signings, not £5m on every signing. I also reject the idea that other clubs don't do this, especially clubs in similar positions to ours. Chelsea with Fernandez. Liverpool with Nunez. City with Grealish. I expect Arsenal and Newcastle will start to do the same, now that they are looking at a higher bracket of player, to try and improve their team. Spurs tend not to overpay, but they also tend not to win anything.

I fail to see a world where we are £5m short for an elite striker, I'm sure there are measures we could take to get avoid this. My guess also is that we aren't getting Kane or Osimhen so we are probably compromising on our striker target already. So we should miss out on our first choice #8 (or whatever position he will play) so that we have £5m more to go after our 3rd, 4th, 5th choice striker?

I do wonder what people think happens when we "walk away" though. Teams won't start offering us better deals on their players. Our scouting doesn't improve. We don't suddenly become better at identifying good value deals before other clubs. The way to develop the reputation of being shrewd negotiators is to become shrewd negotiators and in order to do that we are going to need to walk away from a lot of deals and honestly change our entire transfer policy to going after mostly unproven players.
Click to expand...
Mount isn't our highest priority signing by a long way. Ten Hag clearly likes him but how many people would consider him essential to any success we may or may not have next season? A goalkeeper, striker and deeper midfielder are all more important to us.

We don't even know if that extra £5m would be enough to get the deal done for sure. Chelsea are still maintaining they want £65m after add-ons.

Nobody thinks walking away will magically bring Chelsea back to the negotiation table. If the deal breaks down, so be it. The point is Mount isn't worth the amount of money Chelsea are asking and therefore we shouldn't pursue the deal any longer. We've seen the effect overpaying for players can have - Maguire is the most extreme example and relenting to Leicester's demands didn't help the player or us. If we walk away from deals where it's transparent clubs are taking the piss (as Chelsea are here) it will deter other teams from doing the same on future deals. It's a fairly simple concept. As it stands, every club thinks we're a soft touch and they're right to think so - we pretty much ended up paying double what Antony was worth last summer for that precise reason.
 
CM10 said:
Mount isn't our highest priority signing by a long way. Ten Hag clearly likes him but how many people would consider him essential to any success we may or may not have next season? A goalkeeper, striker and deeper midfielder are all more important to us.

We don't even know if that extra £5m would be enough to get the deal done for sure. Chelsea are still maintaining they want £65m after add-ons.

Nobody thinks walking away will magically bring Chelsea back to the negotiation table. If the deal breaks down, so be it. The point is Mount isn't worth the amount of money Chelsea are asking and therefore we shouldn't pursue the deal any longer. We've seen the effect overpaying for players can have - Maguire is the most extreme example and relenting to Leicester's demands didn't help the player or us. If we walk away from deals where it's transparent clubs are taking the piss (as Chelsea are here) it will deter other teams from doing the same on future deals. It's a fairly simple concept. As it stands, every club thinks we're a soft touch and they're right to think so - we pretty much ended up paying double what Antony was worth last summer for that precise reason.
Click to expand...

This is to the fans view on the tactics but not the managers view on tactics.
 
Bebestation said:
This is to the fans view on the tactics but not the managers view on tactics.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but until there comes a time where we stop haemorrhaging chances to opposition teams who bully us in midfield, I'm going to say it's a position of higher priority.
 
I love people posting speculation as if it’s fact. All clubs think we’re a soft touch. Mount isn’t worth the money. Etc etc. okay. In your opinion. But none of that is factual. In my opinion, just opinion…..not a fact…..Mount would be a fantastic signing and is worth every penny we end up spending on him if it’s in that 55-65m range.
 
simonhch said:
I love people posting speculation as if it’s fact. All clubs think we’re a soft touch. Mount isn’t worth the money. Etc etc. okay. In your opinion. But none of that is factual. In my opinion, just opinion…..not a fact…..Mount would be a fantastic signing and is worth every penny we end up spending on him if it’s in that 55-65m range.
Click to expand...
Opinions are allowed on internet forums, right? I think we're all intelligent enough to know when someone is expressing an opinion without having to explicitly declare it.
 
Just offer him that extra £5m as an additional signing on bonus next summer.
 
simonhch said:
I love people posting speculation as if it’s fact. All clubs think we’re a soft touch. Mount isn’t worth the money. Etc etc. okay. In your opinion. But none of that is factual. In my opinion, just opinion…..not a fact…..Mount would be a fantastic signing and is worth every penny we end up spending on him if it’s in that 55-65m range.
Click to expand...
Re a soft touch - I think the fees we've ended up paying for the likes of Antony, Sancho. Mguire er al are evidence enough...
 
simonhch said:
I love people posting speculation as if it’s fact. All clubs think we’re a soft touch. Mount isn’t worth the money. Etc etc. okay. In your opinion. But none of that is factual. In my opinion, just opinion…..not a fact…..Mount would be a fantastic signing and is worth every penny we end up spending on him if it’s in that 55-65m range.
Click to expand...

Not sure how much stock you put in this, but there was a paragraph in one of Matt Law’s articles in the last few weeks that mentioned that Chelsea do actually view United as a club with a history of caving in and overpaying for players.
 
sullydnl said:
I'd be surprised if Caicedo is who we turn to if we don't get Mount. They're wildly different players, would require completely different tactical set ups and if we were that flexible about the type of #8 we wanted it would be odd not to prefer Caicedo from the start given he's a bigger talent.

It's more likely that we'd move on to some other player in the same attacking #8 mold as Mount, I would think.
Click to expand...
Not sure who is next choice on the list but I totally agree.
 
MonkeysMagic said:
This transfer deal just highlights the utter incompetence of our scouting department where they are not in a position to offer ETH with alternatives. ETH knows it, we know it and most importantly, Chelsea know it! Teams can always have us over the barrel as they know we'll keep coming back! Just look at the transfer over the last few years. I would love to think that ETH can draw a line in the sand and tell Chavs to sod off with their demands, and if Mount himself is intent on coming, they'll return themselves cap in hand!
Click to expand...

In the past 2 years our scouts wanted us to sign Caicedo and Enzo before their moves to Europe. They can't help it if the club don't act.
 
Superden said:
Re a soft touch - I think the fees we've ended up paying for the likes of Antony, Sancho. Mguire er al are evidence enough...
Click to expand...
Sancho was a great hit of business from us. First time we showed restraint for a long time
 
Just move on and walk away, get him next summer for free, nobody's paying that amount for him with an expiring contract this summer. £60m is outrageous.

We should continue our search for a #9 striker, our main priority.
 
flappyjay said:
In the past 2 years our scouts wanted us to sign Caicedo and Enzo before their moves to Europe. They can't help it if the club don't act.
Click to expand...
Haaland and Bellingham.

I think this has more to do with young players "wrongly" worrying about a quick pathway to the first team.
 
Big deals are generally brinkmanship. Chelsea wants to sell and United are keen buyers. It looks like a deal is already cooked.
 
thegregster said:
Click to expand...


This is insane. Not because I disagree with it. But because Caicedo and Mount are two completely different profiles of player.

It shows, again, that our recruitment is more based on who's available than what we need. If we genuinely need a player like Mount, how TF can Caicedo be seen as a logical alternative?

It's the same old s-t we've been doing since Sir Alex retired. Just bring in the best players we can and let the manager figure out how it'll work in practice.

Hopefully, like last summer when we went from Rabiot to Casemiro, we'll end up with the midfielder we actually need: Caicedo. But nobody is convincing me it'll be down to anything other than luck. Clearly there's no actual plan or type of player we're after. It's just supermarket sweep.
 
#07 said:
This is insane. Not because I disagree with it. But because Caicedo and Mount are two completely different profiles of player.

It shows, again, that our recruitment is more based on who's available than what we need. If we genuinely need a player like Mount, how TF can Caicedo be seen as a logical alternative?

It's the same old s-t we've been doing since Sir Alex retired. Just bring in the best players we can and let the manager figure out how it'll work in practice.

Hopefully, like last summer when we went from Rabiot to Casemiro, we'll end up with the midfielder we actually need: Caicedo. But nobody is convincing me it'll be down to anything other than luck. Clearly there's no actual plan or type of player we're after. It's just supermarket sweep.
Click to expand...
I agree with you… if we want a specific type of player then at least get an alternative with the same traits. But I wouldn’t read much into this… could just be us leaking to get Chelsea worried.
 
#07 said:
This is insane. Not because I disagree with it. But because Caicedo and Mount are two completely different profiles of player.

It shows, again, that our recruitment is more based on who's available than what we need. If we genuinely need a player like Mount, how TF Caicedo be seen as a logical alternative?

It's the same old s-t we've been doing since Sir Alex retired. Just bring in the best players we can and let the manager figure out how it'll work in practice.

Hopefully, like last summer when we went from Rabiot to Casemiro, we'll end up with the midfielder we actually need: Caicedo. But nobody is convincing me it'll be down to anything other than luck. Clearly there's no actual plan or type of player we're after. It's just supermarket sweep.
Click to expand...
Or hear me out. Our manager have several ways of playing and can devise tactics that suited the players he will have available
 
Could be that EtH preferred a 6 and two 8s, but sees two 6s and an 8, and allowing Case to get forward more, as an acceptable alternative.

Could also be a tactic to put pressure on Chelsea by going after their target.

Or it could be bollocks.
 
I'm rooting for us to buy Caicedo, who's much better for our midfield than Mount, and stick it to that idiot Boehly. Genuinely hate that clown.
 
It's possible we wanted both Caicedo and Mount and decided to try and finish up the Mount deal first.
 
It’s all one big PR game. No idea if it is Chelsea or Mounts camp briefing this. Or if it’s made up by the journo but this is hilarious :lol:

 
Personally I’d be very unhappy to not get Mount. But we can’t overpay for every player we want.
 
Would be interesting if we really do that. Sign Caicedo and bid 20-30 mil for Mount in January or offer sign him on free next summer

Acquire Me said:
Personally I’d be very unhappy to not get Mount. But we can’t overpay for every player we want.
Click to expand...

Yeah, time to send a message to other teams that we are not a money cow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.