Think you might be right, it's a bit of a shame Casemiro's form has dropped off because last season's Casemiro with Mainoo would be pretty good. I think Fernandes's dodgy form has slipped under the radar a bit due to other issues but I think if Mount was fit and in top form that that spot is potentially up for grabs.
Mason Mount's Many Misfortunes
- Thread starter horsechoker
- Start date
Fernandes's has had no real competition for his place in the team, if he has that maybe he'll improve his focus and thought process because that's where the problem really lies
Quickly getting to the point where Mason Mount, if he's ever found alive and well, will look like nothing but surplus to requirements.
He's not suited to playing in the midfield, and anyway it looks like Casemiro and Mainoo are by far the best pair we can use in that regard.
At best he's around for when Bruno needs a rest, but with the reduction in fixtures already and the expected further reduction of that whenever we're knocked out of the FA Cup, will there really be much of a need to rest Bruno?
Best case for everyone might be to move Mount in the summer. He was never the right player to buy in the first place, and Chelsea should be taken to the woodshed for getting away with fleecing us on the fee the way they did.
Alas, I fear ETH will fall victim to the sunk cost fallacy.
He's not suited to playing in the midfield, and anyway it looks like Casemiro and Mainoo are by far the best pair we can use in that regard.
At best he's around for when Bruno needs a rest, but with the reduction in fixtures already and the expected further reduction of that whenever we're knocked out of the FA Cup, will there really be much of a need to rest Bruno?
Best case for everyone might be to move Mount in the summer. He was never the right player to buy in the first place, and Chelsea should be taken to the woodshed for getting away with fleecing us on the fee the way they did.
Alas, I fear ETH will fall victim to the sunk cost fallacy.
I thought the first half last night was easily the best we have played all season, and I found myself wondering where Mount fitted into that team - and I couldn't see it.
Cover for Mainoo/Bruno to be honest. It's good to have options from the bench with different profiles i.e. McT being quite an interesting sub option, Mount can be that for us and covers multiple roles to a good level. He's also only 25 so could still become a starter in time.
Absolutely agree. He will get opportunities in a full season. Just wondering have we brought in a squad player rather than a starter now.
I cannot see how he dislodges anyone in that starting 11 from last night. Has to be one of the most pointless signings we have made in recent years.
Pretend we didn't have Mainoo. He'd have played that role.
It's kind of the realistic outcome given he's learning a new role (and now had injuries). Maybe this was the plan all along but the recruitment team obviously bigged up Mount to get him to come here as he was hardly going to be sold by the idea of 'come and be a sub for a year'. I still think he will get a lot of game time covering for Bruno and also on the flanks - he's a solid player and can be a very good squad player as a minimum. As to why we splashed so much on him, I ask myself that about lamost every transfer we've made in the last 10 years.
Bring him on for Bruno when he needs a rest. That's all I can see.
Said this in the beginning of the season. Mainoo may not be a FDJ clone but he is closer to what ETH needs in his system than Mount.
He's a 10, and Bruno plays in that role. I don't see him as anything other than cover for Bruno. I don't think he can do the role as one of the 2 in deep midfield. Next to Mainoo you need a Casemiro type, or a younger, more dynamic version of Casemiro. But a midfielder who thinks mainly about the defensive covering. To cover for Mainoo we need someone who can look to control games and progress with passing while helping out defensively like Mainoo does... Mount doesn't do either sides of that well enough for that role.
I do like Mount. He's a very good pressing 10. I don't see how he fits into our side at all though. He doesn't demand the ball enough to be a playmaker like Bruno as the 10, using Mount as the 10 we'd want our others around him to be more playmaking types. So even if we move Bruno on, I still don't think Mount is the right fit to be the main 10. It's a signing without a role.
Can Mount supplant Antony in the pecking order? He's the price tag, ha.
I’d actually want to see a midfield with a DM (for now Casemiro but long term someone younger), Mainoo and Mount.
Big +1 that.
It’s tough cause Bruno is a chance creating machine but at times a more simple player could create as many just in a different way so using Mount as Bruno’s understudy I’d be happy with.
Indeed.
I'd say that Antony, Mount, Sancho and Sanchez are probably the worst big money signings we've ever made.
ETH's track record in the transfer market is dire.
While United have 1 game a week, the discussion where he fits in is valid.
But any big team wanting to challenge and win a few things would easily find a place for Mount (if he can get fit and stay fit)
But any big team wanting to challenge and win a few things would easily find a place for Mount (if he can get fit and stay fit)
Like Chelsea? Where he spent a good portion of the latter half of last season coming off the bench?
He's a fecking fraud that masks his ineffectiveness by just looking busy.
And before anyone tries to defend him by quoting his stats, let's see them again with set pieces removed. . .
Mount could offer an alternative to Bruno if we had more productive wingers and fullbacks. It makes sense to eventually have less of a risk taker in that role and shift more of a creative responsibility onto the wingers higher up the pitch. But nobody looks like picking up on the chance creation side.
Yup! his last 2 seasons at Chelsea he had 35 and 53 appearances. So he should be fine once he gets himself back fit.
How did he fare in those appearances? And how many of those did he come off the bench? Don't be disillusioned by isolated stats. He's been shite for 18 months. I saw with my own eyes. I don't need a computer to tell me that.
My post was referring to him getting games. I mentioned any big club going for multiple competitions would easily find a place for Mount.
If you don’t rate him as a player then cool. It’s not really the point I was making. My mind isn’t made up on him yet.
In the 53 game seasonhe played the equivalent of 43 x 90 mins (or about 71 mins/game), scored 13, assisted 16 (vast majority in PL). Very good season for an attacking mid.
The 35 game season, equivalent of 24 full games (63 mins average), 3 goals, 2 assists. Much poorer season
Before that, 54 games, average 79 mins, 9 goals, 9 assists. Decent season.
Mixed bag.
Now filter out the assists from set pieces from the 53 game season...
Why, set pieces are part of the game and in all honesty we're pretty shit at them
A 60m sub at this point. We could have used him like that big time. But, totally agree, we looked good and he would not have been the 11.
He was a terrible waste of money for a squad player. As someone mentioned earlier - if the plan was to switch styles and replace Bruno, then sure, he works. I don't like the idea at all personally but you could see some managers preferring him.
But as a replacement he doesn't make a huge amount of sense given the different style of play, and he needs to roam far too much to work as a disciplined #8, which I think will be where Mainoo really shines.
It looks like he was a failed experiment at ETH's double 8/10 gambit and perhaps would be best moved on in the summer. He's a square peg faced with numerous round holes for me.
But as a replacement he doesn't make a huge amount of sense given the different style of play, and he needs to roam far too much to work as a disciplined #8, which I think will be where Mainoo really shines.
It looks like he was a failed experiment at ETH's double 8/10 gambit and perhaps would be best moved on in the summer. He's a square peg faced with numerous round holes for me.
I think Erik is starting to realise this wasn't a good signing and that £55m needed utilising better
He’s gotta be the Bruno option that doesn’t give away the ball so much. I truly believe that
selling a player after a season of not playing is a terrible idea.
You surely can’t claim it to be a failed experiment when he never got a run of games
I just don't see where he ever fitted in
We had a lot of other holes to fill, so it wasn’t the right signing to make at that time. At all. But I do reject the notion that is implied here, that a player has to be signed for where they “fit in” to the first xi. A top club is playing 55-65 games a season. It’s a squad game. Having a quality homegrown player like Mount in the squad is not something that I call a problem. When fit, he doesn’t have to always start. And when he does, he can play several positions. City have players like Grealish and Foden on the bench half the time, and we can’t have Mount? These days you really need two quality players in every position and Mount covers AM, LF and potentially even RW. He’s yet to really prove himself as a viable 8, but in reality he only played a handful of games. So it’s too early to judge. So I don’t really agree with this “where does he fit in?” Sentiment, because the answer is….a lot of places.
Imagine for example that Bruno goes down for a couple of months. Mount is a ready made replacement, and good enough that if he hits his top form, could make the position his own. That’s the sort of competition for places a good squad needs.
Reality is that we should’ve signed a 6/8 before we signed Mount, but we didn’t; and now he’s here, there are plenty of ways he can be a valuable squad member. It’s almost quaint these days to think of teams having a first xi. The really good teams have about 15-16 players who are all good enough to be considered starters. And another 6-8 who are good enough to push for contention.
There’s no doubting in my mind that if we’d signed Rice and Olise instead of Mount and Antony, we’d have spent about the same, and be much much better off; but the past is the past. We have a new regime coming in now, so hopefully the decision making will improve.
People forget that Mount just turned 25 a couple of weeks ago. He should have his best years ahead of him.
^ Sensible post!
Still think he is a good player and will eventually be impactful for us when he gets on the pitch under the right manager. But it was the absolute wrong profile of player to sign at the time because of the other holes in the squad we had to fill and the limited funds at our disposal and that is why Ten Hag cannot be trusted with even one pence of additional funds to spend. He has no clue what he is doing.
He started far more games than he was on the bench.
He did come off the bench for three games in April in his unsuccessful return from injury (he then had to go off and have surgery on it), but other than that he was on the bench only 5 times in the entire season while starting 26. If we look at the two months before getting the injury, he started 7 and was on the bench for 3.
Needs to be fully recovered from his injuries. I hope he doesn't become VDB Mk II
He’s a typical signing for us. Money wasted. Always injured. Imagine if we spent that money on a stronger midfielder.
Does feel like a VDB signing. Barely playing and when he does, he’s been bad. Not even an assist yet if I’m not mistaken?
Like VDB too, not many people saw the rationale behind the signing either
But if he is going to end up a good signing they’re doing the right thing by giving him as much time as possible to return and not risking another spell out by rushing him back
According to Ten Hag yesterday, he has been troublimg with the same injury he got in his second game for us. That would really mean we have never seen him play for us in normal form. So I’d say it’s too early to haveany relevant hunches as to how it’s gonna pan out, unless it’s based on seeing him for Chelsea.
I think many had hopes for Van de Beek when he came. He looked like a player who could help us transition into a more proactive team, which we know Solskjær was aiming to do at the time. Ungortunately for him, Solskjær never got that going, and he turned out to lose hisconfidence when his play didn’t pan out and he was struck by injuries.