Surprised at the reaction here. Classic case of the English media talking up one of their players beyond their capabilities, engineering a backlash against them when they inevitably don’t meet the hype. Mount’s a decent player and isn’t deserving of ridicule.
Mason Mount | Confirmed
- Thread starter UnitedSofa
- Start date
- Status
No way, he sucks 
It's a no brainer to go in for him in my opinion.
He might not be I the best form at the moment but he has been in the past so you know what he's capable of. Just needs the right coach and surroundings to get back to that.
On a free and fills the English quota too? I'd be on the phone to his agent.
He might not be I the best form at the moment but he has been in the past so you know what he's capable of. Just needs the right coach and surroundings to get back to that.
On a free and fills the English quota too? I'd be on the phone to his agent.
I still don’t know what the point of him is.
Shit, and a twat too.
Nah.
Nah.
God, no. Average
Maddison would be cheaper in both fee and wages with only 1 year on his contract, is a Utd fan, would be just as good as Mount as a backup, and wouldn't be helping Chelsea fund their rebuild.
If Chelsea sold Mount they'd use the money to buy Joao Felix. I'd also rather just buy Joao Felix.
If Chelsea sold Mount they'd use the money to buy Joao Felix. I'd also rather just buy Joao Felix.
Is he even trying at this point?
He's absolutely shite. Honestly, another player raved about because he runs. Brutal footballer.
Anyone who wants him, please tell me what position you'd like him to play
could easily see him in the Henderson role for Klopp
Probably where Eriksen plays? A sort of centre mid that relies on Casemiro to do most of the midfield stuff, offers good set pieces, can pick out creative passes sometimes, has a decent strike, decent ball carrier, works hard. He’s not a perfect fit but then neither is Eriksen, and it’s not like prior to Eriksen we had anyone better. I’d much rather him than McTominay.
How about we get an actual upgrade on Eriksen and keep Eriksen as the rotational player? Eriksen is also miles better as a passer both through the lines and creatively than Mount. Neither are great defensively.
Yeah definitely, an upgrade on Eriksen would be good. But if that’s not possible I’d be pretty happy to have Mount to rotate with him.
No fecking thank you.
I still don't think I've ever seen him play well, and I've watched him a fair bit.
I still don't think I've ever seen him play well, and I've watched him a fair bit.
Oh please god no. Bang average Mctominay class player.
One of my pet hates, for some reason. Maybe because I have a few Chelsea mates that rave about him, yet I've never seen him do anything really good.
Overrated garbage, like most of this so called "new golden" generation of British players.
Very. Berghuis is technically better and was a natural winger in his younger days, plus was consistently productive too. Both in terms of goals and creativity. Mason is neither.
James Maddison is a much better footballer in the kind of positions that Mount could fill. If we really want to fill out the English quota this badly, he would be a better place to start. I think it's only Southgate who thinks otherwise.
Agree, Maddison would actually provide nice Bruno cover.
Mounts problem (aside from not having a true strength) is that he's sort of positionless. At his most productive under Tuchel he was sort of a hybrid AM/forward in that 3/5 atb system, but in any conventional setup he doesn't really work. He's not creative enough on his own to play as a 10, and he's certainly not a CM in any sort of way. But he's also not a threat as a true forward running at defenders either if you were to play him in a front 3.
Honestly he reminds me of a rich mans version of Lingard. Both at their best were energetic and can be productive with some goals and assists, but struggle to actually fit into sides in a consistent position and don't have a standout skill. Obviously Mount is the better/more accomplished player but I think the comparison is apt.
Absolute nothing player, up there with the likes of Lingard. There’s a weird generation of footballers at the moment who offer nothing most games but play in dangerous positions. People say bollocks like “they’d be appreciated in Spain”, no they fecking wouldn’t, they wouldn’t even get anywhere near the national team or any of the big clubs.
Ratcliffes first signing
This is a very decent summary
Hahahahahaahaha
A nothing player that belongs in a relegation scrapping team
He’s got a decent alliterative Noun + Verb name combo going for him, like his parents were playing a game of Mad Libs when they named him. He could easily have been named Carpenter Clamber instead. Luck of the draw.
Good player and he won't be leaving London
As others have said, the Lingard comparisons are very apt. You want Mount to play in the 8 position, where he will be basically masquerading as a no 10/false 9 and popping up on the wings? We barely have enough control in midfield already with Bruno. Most of Mount's best qualities are off the ball and making runs or getting onto the end of moves i.e he will be of little use or having the ability to control and dictate games in the middle of the pitch. He's closer to a forward positionally and tactically; our current options, although not firing on all cylinders are levels above him in talent and potential.
Absolutely terrible transfer for us considering the priorities we have in the squad. That's not even mentioning his wages and the inevitable English media baggage that would come with his profile.
Rather JWP once Southampton get relegated.
Played well under Tuchel. If ETH wants him and not our scouting department. I’m all for it.
We don't need him. Think he's a good player but useless in our system.
I'd rather guide my dad into my mum
I'd take him as a replacement for vdb on the bench.
He isn’t a bad player, I’m just yet to see anything to make me think he’s a particularly good one.
The Lingard comparisons make a lot of sense, although it’s fair to say that Mount is quite a bit better, and seemingly much less of a wanker. He’s also good for seven to ten league goals a season, which is more that can be said for some of the lads already on our books.
On a free to supplement Bruno and Eriksen, then sure. He’d probably be a good fit for Ten Hag. But we don’t need him, especially on the wages he’d be looking at.
The Lingard comparisons make a lot of sense, although it’s fair to say that Mount is quite a bit better, and seemingly much less of a wanker. He’s also good for seven to ten league goals a season, which is more that can be said for some of the lads already on our books.
On a free to supplement Bruno and Eriksen, then sure. He’d probably be a good fit for Ten Hag. But we don’t need him, especially on the wages he’d be looking at.
Don't particularly rate him, but have a feeling he'd thrive under Ten Hag.
One of the most overrated players in the league, never been a fan of him. I just simply can't see in which ability he excels or is significantly better than others and how he would improve our squad. Don't want him anywhere near our team.
Mason has a better record at 24 than Berghuis had at 24, in tougher leagues.
Berghuis is a bit more agile, which has helped him in midfield (like it did Giggs when he got older), but Mount isn't stiff. I think he should probably be at like Spurs where they just have so little going forward centrally in midfield if they ever want to play with a high line.
I could see him at Liverpool as a #10 on a free might appeal to them. Milan make some sense too if Diaz goes back to Madrid. De Kaetelaere hasn't hit the ground running and Mount would probably look alright behind a #9 with Leao to his left and Tonali and Bennacer behind him.
He'll probably have a better career than Berghuis overall, even though Berghuis has done really well in the 2nd half of his 20s.
I'm not a huge fan or anything, I wouldn't pick him for England, but I wouldn't pick Berghuis either, if he was English.
- Status