Mason Mount | Confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
amolbhatia50k said:
I asked someone earlier why they rated McAllister higher than Mount and didn’t get a reply. And I think that question would apply to many here who would be much more upbeat about McAllister going by that thread than Mount going by this one.
Click to expand...

It's a good question, I think Mount and Mac Allister are actually quite similar, both can switch between 8 and 10 positions, both progress play quickly with few touches, both press well and both read the game around them well.

The biggest differences are Mac Allister has shown fantastic form this season where as Mount hasn't, but Brighton are a happy team and Chelsea clearly are not. Mount on the other hand has shown he can handle the pressure week in week out at a big premier league club. But Mac Allister is flavour of the week!
 
I keep reading that Chelsea want 80m for him. We have to walk away at that price. Very few players with one year left on their deal is worth that, and Mount is certainly not among them. Might just be a negotiation tactic, but we can’t cave to a crazy asking price like that.
 
Mike Smalling said:
I keep reading that Chelsea want 80m for him. We have to walk away at that price. Very few players with one year left on their deal is worth that, and Mount is certainly not among them. Might just be a negotiation tactic, but we can’t cave to a crazy asking price like that.
Click to expand...
Where are you reading this?
 
SuperiorXI said:
If he was called Masonino Mountininio I reckon people would rate him higher
Click to expand...
Nothing to do with that. Mount is a baller. People are just confused why are we spending shit load of budget (plus huge wage) on a attacking midfielder while we are dying for creative central midfielder. We are buying no10/no8 mix while we need no6/no8 mix.
It just reminds me on our past transfers when we were buying players natural on one position to play them on another.

BUT, our transfer policy is that manager is in charge for transfers so i guess that he has a plan. Case as a lone dmc and two advanced 8s in Bruno and Mount.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
I asked someone earlier why they rated McAllister higher than Mount and didn’t get a reply. And I think that question would apply to many here who would be much more upbeat about McAllister going by that thread than Mount going by this one.
Click to expand...
Mount is better than McAllister.
 
If his price is 80m, we should just walk away, and sign him back for free next summer.
 
JPRouve said:
It's the Daily Mail, they only know one currency.
Click to expand...
mouny.jpg


Is there a smudge on your screen?
 
Siorac said:
I'm not a huge fan of Mount but he's twice the player McTominay is, and he's younger.
Click to expand...

Yes but Chelsea need to sell to balance the books, one year on his contract, Mount wants to leave etc. etc. We wanted to pay 80M for FdJ who had a lengthy contract with Barca and we reached the point where the Fee was actually agreed.

If you were a Chelsea fan and had to decide between something like 40M for Mount vs having him leave on a free next year, what would you take?

The extra assumption I'm making is we'll get atleast 30-40M for McTominay but we can ignore that.
 
Redbandito said:
Agreed. He wouldn’t be my first choice signing, but I think he improves United in the midfield next season. I think he is a more athletic, active, pacey version of Eriksen. He also holds the ball well under pressure and gives us work on the defensive end. He is more purposeful in his work than Fred with more pace. Definite upgrade for me.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. A quicker and more tenacious Eriksen is probably the best comparison I've heard.

I don't think he's as intelligent in his tight space passing and movement as Eriksen though (Not many are).

The closest I can think of for comparison is maybe Wijnaldum??

Anyway, he will surprise a few and I think he will be an ETH favourite (Even if not a fan fave initially).
 
Hughes35 said:
Agree with this. A quicker and more tenacious Eriksen is probably the best comparison I've heard.

I don't think he's as intelligent in his tight space passing and movement as Eriksen though (Not many are).

The closest I can think of for comparison is maybe Wijnaldum??

Anyway, he will surprise a few and I think he will be an ETH favourite (Even if not a fan fave initially).
Click to expand...

Wijnaldum is a decent comparison. Eriksen is certainly not, as he’s a much better passer than Mount has ever been.

I still don’t see any sort of cohesive plan with this one though, especially since we aren’t signing a right back now either. Mount and Bruno is just asking to be a chaotic overrun midfield together, and people will call Casemiro washed as he’s doing the defensive duties of two players
 
Not everything ETH thinks or says must be 100% right.
He also thought it was a good idea to play WW that much, even more baffling accommodating him while playing our two best attacking players out of position. And before someone asks the old boring question who should have played instead: Pellistri, Sancho, Elanga or even someone promoted from the academy would have been a miles better option.
So “if ETH wants Mount then all is good” cannot be the justification to buy someone like Mount.
 
We’re gonna pay more for Mount than we did for Casemiro aren’t me? At least Casemiro was a proven CL winner. Wait…
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I'm not convinced he'd be signed as an 8..

In his best season for Chelsea (when he got like 30 goal contributions and they won the CL, if I'm not mistaken?) I thought he played to the left, just off the striker (with Havertz the other side of the striker)

I could be wrong about all that FYI, but I always assumed that's his best position. Which won't work when it's also the spaces where Rashford is most lethal
Click to expand...

Maybe but theres no chance he plays on the left here with Rashford and Garnacho and arguably Sancho's best position

Its not sustainable either for Bruno to be playing 60 games a season he can play across a number of position I think
 
MadMike said:
Why? Because Chelsea are a mess, with an overbloated squad that finished 12th in the league, owned by a meddling idiotic Yank who didn't offer him a good enough contract.

Why the feck would any self respecting player with a year or less left on the contract and good options in the market, renew for them now. Jorginho, Pulisic, Kovacic etc. all seem to think it's a bad idea staying.
Click to expand...

Pulisic, really? Apart from a couple months purple patch years ago he's been shite for us ever since signing and it's the club who've been trying to push him out the door for a while now, not the other way around.

Club had no real interest in renewing Jorginho either or else he would have signed. Some preliminary talks were held and even his agent came out saying his client's priority was to stay at Chelsea but it very quickly became clear there was a huge gap between what Jorginho's camp wanted, both in salary as well as contract length, and what the club were willing to offer him. And once the club really went after Enzo Fernandez it meant Jorginho's days were numbered so he left straight away.

With Mount it's obvious Chelsea would prefer to keep rather than sell him though and it's the player who's been instigating talks for a move. But I would point out that even with him his early priority was to extend the contract but the parties were just too far away with their demands to reach a conclusion to the negotiations. Some months back it was widely reported Mount was asking for £250K/wk and the club weren't willing to offer him anywhere near that which he seems to have taken rather personally.
 
tombombadil said:
Be prepared to be dragged all the way to 31 Aug, lads. This is gonna be a saga. It always is with us.:wenger::wenger::wenger::wenger:
Click to expand...

Would not mind missing out on him at all, but Chelsea need to sell before July. If United play their cards right they can get him for much, much less than the quoted 80 million euros. Offer 50 million euros and wait it out.
 
united_99 said:
Not everything ETH thinks or says must be 100% right.
He also thought it was a good idea to play WW that much, even more baffling accommodating him while playing our two best attacking players out of position. And before someone asks the old boring question who should have played instead: Pellistri, Sancho, Elanga or even someone promoted from the academy would have been a miles better option.
So “if ETH wants Mount then all is good” cannot be the justification to buy someone like Mount.
Click to expand...

Mount being a very good player several top teams are interested in is the justification for buying Mount.

But "ETH wants Mount" is justifcation for believing the buy does in fact fit into ETH's structural/tactical plans for the team next season.

And however much we should trust ETH more than ourselves when it comes to judging a player, we should certainly trust him more when it comes to understanding how the tactical plan that's in his head for next season is supposed to function. Especially given we don't actually know what other pieces of the jigsaw he's planning to buy this summer.
 
united_99 said:
Not everything ETH thinks or says must be 100% right.
He also thought it was a good idea to play WW that much, even more baffling accommodating him while playing our two best attacking players out of position. And before someone asks the old boring question who should have played instead: Pellistri, Sancho, Elanga or even someone promoted from the academy would have been a miles better option.
So “if ETH wants Mount then all is good” cannot be the justification to buy someone like Mount.
Click to expand...
No manager gets everything right but ETH has been successful with the majority of big calls he's made this season. Personally I'm not a massive fan of Mount but I trust the manager knows what the team needs, so I'm happy for us to back him.
 
united_99 said:
Not everything ETH thinks or says must be 100% right.
He also thought it was a good idea to play WW that much, even more baffling accommodating him while playing our two best attacking players out of position. And before someone asks the old boring question who should have played instead: Pellistri, Sancho, Elanga or even someone promoted from the academy would have been a miles better option.
So “if ETH wants Mount then all is good” cannot be the justification to buy someone like Mount.
Click to expand...
Those simply are not options for the 9 position. You can’t have a go at Ten Hag then come out with this
 
I'm quite confident we'll get him for a good price. He wants to leave for sure, and no other club is willing to stump up that much, let alone show interest at this stage. And we have all the time in the world with the takeover still in the dark.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.