Mason Mount | Confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
King7Eric said:
Such a system would make sense if your LAM is Sancho/Mount. Would also explain the links to Rice/Caicedo as we'd need a more defensive minded midfielder next to Casemiro for this system. The only issue is this leaves the 85 million man Antony out in the cold as I don't see how he fits here.
Click to expand...

I don't think we'll sign Mount to start playing 4-2-2-2. Even with a more attacking RB, we'd become very narrow, and it doesn't leave anywhere for Rashford, Antony, Sancho and Garnacho, who are all better out wide.

It feels like it'll be more of a 4-3-3 out of possession, then when attacking against teams that defend deep the fullbacks will invert alongside the 6, similar to how City use them to control possession in the first phase. Mount and Bruno would then push up and occupy the attacking half spaces, or create overloads out wide.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Could you post this year 22-23 stats for reference?
Click to expand...
The entire Chelsea team was written off. Why would that be a more accurate indication of Mount's quality than what has already been provided to you?
 
I remember the Caf back in summer 2006 - Carrick was our only major outfield signing

It was all

"Carrick for 17 million? I give up, we need a Keane type player"

"He's shit. Nothing player. Average at everything great at nothing"

"Buying Spurs players doesn't win you the league back from this Chelsea team"

"Fergie has lost it"
 
GaryLifo said:
I remember the Caf back in summer 2006 - Carrick was our only major outfield signing

It was all

"Carrick for 17 million? I give up, we need a Keane type player"

"He's shit. Nothing player. Average at everything great at nothing"

"Buying Spurs players doesn't win you the league back from this Chelsea team"

"Fergie has lost it"
Click to expand...
He may not have fitted the Keane void fans wanted filled, but Carrick was great for Spurs and Fergie really battled to get him.

Mount is not great and Chelsea seem perfectly happy to sell him to a rival. Reminds me more of Matic than Carrick, which isn't a compliment
.
 
Seriously, why are we signing this guy? It's such an uninspiring transfer. He doesn't improve us at all... so are we just going for squad depth? Happy with a 3rd place finish and not looking to improve?
 
Tiber said:
Carrick was great for Spurs and Fergie really battled to get him.

Mount is not great and Chelsea seem perfectly happy to sell him to a rival. Reminds me more of Matic than Carrick, which isn't a compliment
.
Click to expand...

But the majority of the Caf posted comments like you have just posted about Mount.

Mount is not great, but was player of the season 2 seasons running. I remember when Tuchel came in he benched Mount for the first game - brought him on in the second half where he was excellent and then was first-choice under Tuchel from that point onwards.
 
The position thing really isn't as complicated as some people in this thread are making it sound.

We're effectively talking about a basic 4-3-3 that takes a 3-2-5 shape in possession, the same way Pep, Arteta and ETH teams have variously played in recent years. With the two #8s pushing forward as part of the 5, while one of the back four inverts into the two.

Obviously players can rotate positions within that, with one of the 8s dropping back while the fullback pushes up. But that's the gist of it, and it isn't particularly groundbreaking stuff.
 
This signing does not make sense.

His best position is a 10. Bruno is better.
Out of position as an 8. Eriksen is still better.

Will be too expensive as a squad player.
 
I think people will be pleasantly surprised by him. He has had a stinker of a season in the circus that is Chelsea at the moment. Prior to that he was a decent solid player. If Utd are selling some homegrown players and Kane isn’t signing then there will be a need to fill that quota and I’m not sure what other players that fit the criteria are available. Reports are that Liverpool and Arsenal were interested which if true suggests he can’t be a complete dud. Plus he has pushed for a Utd move.
 
GaryLifo said:
I remember the Caf back in summer 2006 - Carrick was our only major outfield signing

It was all

"Carrick for 17 million? I give up, we need a Keane type player"

"He's shit. Nothing player. Average at everything great at nothing"

"Buying Spurs players doesn't win you the league back from this Chelsea team"

"Fergie has lost it"
Click to expand...

Carrick had just led Spurs almost to top 4. You’re right that he got criticism for costing that much (Daniel Levy) and not being as dynamic as Keane. But he came in after a very good season, whereas Mount hasn’t.
 
VP89 said:
The entire Chelsea team was written off. Why would that be a more accurate indication of Mount's quality than what has already been provided to you?
Click to expand...

Come on, last season is relevant. In fact its the most relevant as it gives current form.

If you go to the trouble of posting 3 seasons of data and miss the last season it isn't unreasonable to address the omission is it?
 
So many unfounded assertions are made on this forum.

It's becoming almost as bad as Twitter.

You get people saying things like "Buying Mount instead of buying a striker... FFS" as if buying one player instantly excludes you from buying anyone else.

"Paying 60 million for this guy? WTF?" before any fee has been agreed at all and the journalists are giving a range from 45-70 million. The difference between 50 million and 60 million is paying 10 million a year versus 12 million a year over a likely 5-year contract.

I'm not having any argument which paints this move as a random and badly thought out one. This manager has shown himself to be meticulous when it comes to how he makes decisions. There is absolutely no chance this guy is just randomly saying "sure buy him, I'll figure out if he fits into my plans later on"
 
Raees said:
Click to expand...


Interesting.

Also saw Mount pop up in a chart:

Q3uJpnV.jpg


They were discussing Joe Willock but of course I took note of Mount. The chart appears at 8:52 in this Tifo video:





I think it is clear that Ten Hag wants a progressive ball carrier from a bit deeper on the pitch, similar to De Jong — and since the possibility of him joining is all but over…my guess is that we currently see Mount as the most viable and realistic option.
 
Tiber said:
He may not have fitted the Keane void fans wanted filled, but Carrick was great for Spurs and Fergie really battled to get him.

Mount is not great and Chelsea seem perfectly happy to sell him to a rival. Reminds me more of Matic than Carrick, which isn't a compliment
.
Click to expand...

Evidently nobody is that good for Chelsea by virtue of their abysmal season. It’s difficult to shine or even be consistently average in a team that has had four managers in the past year or so and is complete disarray.

While admittedly not the most exciting signing we badly need depth and it’s nice to see it being wrapped up early (if indeed it does go through). With a full preseason and time to integrate into the squad I have faith he will be a decent option for us come August.
 
Passing accuracy of our midfielders:

Bruno Fernandes : 74.4%
Christian Eriksen: 81.0%
Casemiro: 77.9%

Mason Mount: 76.4%

From this signing, and the way our current midfielders play we can't complain about a lack of control next season because of the players qualities. It's clearly intentional, or control/possession isn't that valuable in our set up.
 
I 100% understand the sentiment of a lot of posters of not really thinking Mount is worth it. I'm not overly enthusiastic about the signing myself.

A couple of things - we don't know how much we will pay for him and Erik has plenty of credit in the bank so if he think he's a good fit and is what we need then I'll back the managers decision.

He isn't going to get all the signing 100% right, but he has made plenty of good calls so far and has a track record of improving players.
 
Blackbeard said:
I think people will be pleasantly surprised by him. He has had a stinker of a season in the circus that is Chelsea at the moment. Prior to that he was a decent solid player. If Utd are selling some homegrown players and Kane isn’t signing then there will be a need to fill that quota and I’m not sure what other players that fit the criteria are available. Reports are that Liverpool and Arsenal were interested which if true suggests he can’t be a complete dud. Plus he has pushed for a Utd move.
Click to expand...

Regarding the bolded part:

He would more than likely be that for United too. But I think it’s fair that some are wondering whether it’s enough for us to be signing decent solid squad players for big money when we should be looking to improve the current starting XI.

So if he’s the only midfield signing, I’d say the concern is justified. If not, then it could be a decent addition. But even then, probably not worth the fee.
 
So excited. 3 top managers want him whilst the fan base are crying, makes me sure he will be quality for us ie. the fanbases opposite reactions to sancho
 
RedRonaldo said:
They are having a proper meltdown there.

But many of them think that they should hold out for 75-80m, because English tax, and because it’s United and we paid 85m for Antony.
Click to expand...

This is one of my favourite quotes from there, the Mudryk comparison is a good one!

Depressing... the only silver lining will be if we using this term lightly but we “fleece” United out of £70/80m or even more but you know what’s wild a player like mount a England starter and a champions league winner is probably gonna cost less than what we paid for mudryk a kid who scored like 8 professional goals in his entire career....
Click to expand...
 
Skills said:
Passing accuracy of our midfielders:

Bruno Fernandes : 74.4%
Christian Eriksen: 81.0%
Casemiro: 77.9%

Mason Mount: 76.4%

From this signing, and the way our current midfielders play we can't complain about a lack of control next season because of the players qualities. It's clearly intentional, or control/possession isn't that valuable in our set up.
Click to expand...
I actually am of the hope that Mount will rotate with Casemiro and we buy someone better that can retain possession deeper. Casemiro hasn't really played as a true 6 all season and is contributing offensively. I don't trust Casemiro in the single pivot to be honest.
 
Funny enough, Chelsea fans say he's a natural 8 and not a 10.
 
Skills said:
Passing accuracy of our midfielders:

Bruno Fernandes : 74.4%
Christian Eriksen: 81.0%
Casemiro: 77.9%

Mason Mount: 76.4%

From this signing, and the way our current midfielders play we can't complain about a lack of control next season because of the players qualities. It's clearly intentional, or control/possession isn't that valuable in our set up.
Click to expand...

That's not really the way it works. In previous seasons/positions/roles Casemiro and Mount have hit as high as 87.7% and 85.1% pass completions respectively. What players are asked to do matters.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
Come on, last season is relevant. In fact its the most relevant as it gives current form.

If you go to the trouble of posting 3 seasons of data and miss the last season it isn't unreasonable to address the omission is it?
Click to expand...
I think its a *lot* less relevant when the entire club is in free fall
 
I really really hope that next winter, we won't have the situation of regretting the signings of Rabiot and Mount, while Rice is thriving for Bayern, Caicedo for Arsenal, Kovacic for City, MacAllister and Kone/Thuram for Liverpool, Kokcu for Spurs, Enzo and Ugarte for Chelsea and Bellingham for Real. If those two are regarded as affordable squad options and upgrades to McFred, I'd be glad to take them, but we can't be seriously count on them as starters to challenge for titles, do we? 70m on Mount would be insane. I hope he proves me wrong.
 
GaryLifo said:
So many unfounded assertions are made on this forum.

It's becoming almost as bad as Twitter.

You get people saying things like "Buying Mount instead of buying a striker... FFS" as if buying one player instantly excludes you from buying anyone else.

"Paying 60 million for this guy? WTF?" before any fee has been agreed at all and the journalists are giving a range from 45-70 million. The difference between 50 million and 60 million is paying 10 million a year versus 12 million a year over a likely 5-year contract.

I'm not having any argument which paints this move as a random and badly thought out one. This manager has shown himself to be meticulous when it comes to how he makes decisions. There is absolutely no chance this guy is just randomly saying "sure buy him, I'll figure out if he fits into my plans later on"
Click to expand...
Agree with most of this, but I have yet to see any evidence that ETH is “demanding” Mount.

It’s equally likely that we are signing him because Chelsea have offered him to us as surplus to their requirements, ETH hasn’t been given any alternatives and reckons he’s the best he’s going to get.

Edit: I do believe Mount is a much better player than lots of people in here seem to think.
 
I don't think we'll regret Mount. I think he'll be great for us, and I'm pleased to see us moving so quickly, it almost looks as though we're organised!
 
aeh1991 said:
I really really hope that next winter, we won't have the situation of regretting the signings of Rabiot and Mount, while Rice is thriving for Bayern, Caicedo for Arsenal, Kovacic for City, MacAllister and Kone/Thuram for Liverpool, Kokcu for Spurs, Enzo and Ugarte for Chelsea and Bellingham for Real. If those two are regarded as affordable squad options and upgrades to McFred, I'd be glad to take them, but we can't be seriously count on them as starters to challenge for titles, do we? 70m on Mount would be insane. I hope he proves me wrong.
Click to expand...

You basically created a scenario were every single other option is a success while United's signing aren't. You could reverse all of them and it would be as realistic.
 
Revaulx said:
Agree with most of this, but I have yet to see any evidence that ETH is “demanding” Mount.

It’s equally likely that we are signing him because Chelsea have offered him to us as surplus to their requirements, ETH hasn’t been given any alternatives and reckons he’s the best he’s going to get.

Edit: I do believe Mount is a much better player than lots of people in here seem to think.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense considering all the briefs from both sides are that they want to keep him? It's quite clear ETH wants him
 
Status
Not open for further replies.