Smack's of another Mata type signing to me, a tidy and neat player but not one who brings the "X" factor.
Mason Mount | Confirmed
- Thread starter UnitedSofa
- Start date
- Status
For sure 85 was crazy, not going to happen at that price anyway.
Considering the overhaul Chelsea had last season and how the rest of the team struggled it’s no wonder Mount didn’t have a stellar showing. I think he will be a great addition, just not sure where he’s going to fit in unless Bruno drops deep.
The equivalent Arsenal signing is Havertz, who seems to be lined up to play the same role we have in mind for Mount. Their purchase of Rice (if it happens) will be the equivalent of the Casemiro signing we made last summer, while we'll be looking to other weaknesses this summer instead.
And across those four transfers, I'd say we'd have come out the better. Particularly as ours would also have cost less.
Mount is a far superior player to Lingard! The good season that you refer to consisted of sixteen games!
Mount was Chelsea player of the season two years in a row. If he can show the form he showed between 2020-2022 he will be a very good signing.
Absolutely agree
Not sure Chelsea fans would agree that he was only "decent at best" and they were the ones watching him every week.
Yeah, Mount transfer solved all their problems financially. I'm sure this transfer also funded Nkunku transfer.
Right it's getting ridiculous now it's one thing to rate or not rate the player , but some of the arguments are real out there bereft of any rationality and critical thinking .
Mount increases our quality and midfield options. Bruno can play off the right or left, play a more strategic role deeper, or play as an attacking midfielder. Mount will compliment all of these options, whilst adding his own personality. I see no issue at all with accomodating him, and his game will develop at United, whilst also making us a better team.
Between this and Arsenal signing Havertz we have effectively funded about 70% of Chelsea's potential spend on Enzo and Caicedo. Technically more since they get the transfer fees up front on the books while Enzo and Caicedo fees get amortised.
Doesn't hurt Arsenal so much if they land Rice and Lavia. But we just look stupid.
Doesn't hurt Arsenal so much if they land Rice and Lavia. But we just look stupid.
It’s really not hard to figure out who watches football and who runs with fanciful narratives on this forum. Where to even begin with this post…
Many of cafe agreed scholes like performers won't come around often. But if you look into the hatred towards mount from some they can't be convinced that easily even he will play as well as scholes for you.
Don't worry mount will enable many of your players to perform top level by creating chances. He himself not bad in scoring goals either. I am resigned to losing him since his last quotes that he wanted to move in this window.
He was outstanding at his best. Way above decent. He’s a player that opposition fans didn‘t really pay attention to because he didn’t have the flashy highlights that midfielders like Foden or Bellingham have had which the media slobber over.
A lot of people have this uninformed idea that Mount is just all energy and is a “try hard” who isn’t particularly great at anything. A “passion merchant” I’ve seen him called. But his touch, dribbling, and general technical ability are excellent.
My entire post history on him before this window was asking what he did
I'm intrigued to watch him more closely every week and see just why you lot all rated him so highly, while most other people were miffed.
For England, he's never looked too great to me? But obviously that's different to when he was playing well for Chelsea.
Some of these “hot takes” from posters and comparisons to Lingard in particular, are embarrassing. Mount will be an excellent signing and it’s only happening because he rejected a new contract. This honestly is a coup and an opportunity to bring in a player who’s played wel in big games.
Last edited:
Fernandes has done feck all for them while they haven’t even signed the Brighton player.
Some blinder
Some blinder
I think a lot of that is because Mount isn't the sort of player who thrives in international settings - he's not really an individualistic player. He's someone who will help a tactically sophisticated team execute better - I'd argue he's a ceiling-raiser and not a floor-raiser (and thus his struggles this year in a dysfunctional team aren't shocking).My entire post history on him before this window was asking what he did
I'm intrigued to watch him more closely every week and see just why you lot all rated him so highly, while most other people were miffed.
For England, he's never looked too great to me? But obviously that's different to when he was playing well for Chelsea.
As someone said in here he‘s just a really dependable player who will give you a baseline 7/10 performance every match at least. He just won’t produce that many super eye catching assists or goals that look amazing on MOTD or Twitter.My entire post history on him before this window was asking what he did
I'm intrigued to watch him more closely every week and see just why you lot all rated him so highly, while most other people were miffed.
For England, he's never looked too great to me? But obviously that's different to when he was playing well for Chelsea.
I think United fans will take to him quickly and question why they slated him for so many years.
What does it matter that the people who actually watch him every week wherever he goes constantly vote him as the best player? Means that maybe your view on the player is a mile away from accurate.
I have argued with many on here over the years that Mount is usually one of our top performers in almost any given game until the season that just ended. But people have always just responded with 'I just don't see it with him'.
For me the best outcome for me would be that this deal fall through. A lot of you will probably be happy with that but I would be elated if we keep him and perhaps give ourselves 12 months to convince him to stay. I get the risk here is that he walks for free but so be it.
If he stays here where does he play, though? That’s the problem. If we buy 2 new midfielders as expected and with Nkunku coming in there really isn’t a place in the XI for Mase. And trying to convince him to sign a new contract when he’s on the bench all the time isn’t gonna happen.
Forget (prime) Scholes. I will celebrate no end if/once we sign someone like Scholes.
With Mount dream outcome would be if he performs like prime Carrick. But he is a different type of player, let’s see.
Poor for a while? What last season?
He was Chelsea's player of the year twice in the last 3 seasons. So clearly he was not just decent at best when you are voted fans player of the year in a year you win the CL.
Fans are not always right though are they? We had fans saying they would let Rashford go for free last summer...
Lingard has had spells, Mount has been a regular for Chelsea. I dont see the similarities at all, Lingard is a player that drives with the ball, Mount is more a player that links players. Its two different players.
Would you be happy to spend £107m on Enzo Fernandez?
Don't understand why £55m for Mount gets criticised, but signing Fernandes for £107m seems fine.
One more rejection and… we walk away? 
Same here. I always thought he was a Lampard lite type player. I am still not convinced obviously but it's at least reassuring to see Chelsea fans vouch for him, despite the fact he is leaving them.My entire post history on him before this window was asking what he did
I'm intrigued to watch him more closely every week and see just why you lot all rated him so highly, while most other people were miffed.
For England, he's never looked too great to me? But obviously that's different to when he was playing well for Chelsea.
If you’ve decided he’s been “poor for a while” based on watching a handful or so of his matches you might have a future in scouting
People's opinions change... weren't you the one saying Rashford needs to go 2 seasons ago? To we cant go a game without Rashford scoring or Rashford would give Kounde a hard time?
It's generally only children and people of low intelligence that are so stubborn to admit opinions can't change. Imagine a world where you had to stick with your initial thought about things
If we're spending 60m on mount, I think it's fair to say the stories that we have a budget of 100m plus player sales is bullshit. There's no way we're spending 60% of our budget on a midfielder when GK and striker are far more pressing, and we have no one that we can say we're guaranteed to sell
Or it could mean we’re sticking with DDG and signing Weghorst for £40m and that’ll be our transfer window done and within budget….
Nobody know whether he rejected anyone. However it's pretty evident that Liverpool got a top player probably even a better player for far less.
Yeah. If the rumours were true and that is our budget, I'd be asking serious questions of the club (and tbh ten hag as well. Great manager as well, but if it is 60% of the budget on a midOr it could mean we’re sticking with DDG and signing Weghorst for £40m and that’ll be our transfer window done and within budget….
There are addons in the MacAllister deal that could take it to £55m. Also there's almost no basis whatsoever for saying MacAllister is better than Mount given the latter is younger, has a longer track record, and has hit comfortably better heights.
Could and will take it, are two different things. Mount is like 10 days younger than MacAllister and what better heights are those exactly? IMO I think MacAllister would have fitted us even better but I am not saying that Mount is a bad player neither. Just not worth the asked fee with a year left on his contract.
I’ve got nothing against this signing, but I am really confused about
1- the fee when he’s only got one year left on his contract and they just sold kova to city for what, £30m who also has one year left. Chelsea signed sterling, also one year, for 47.
2- his position is far from where we should strengthen first (keeper / striker / Casemiro understudy eg caicedo) and if ffp is to be believed we don’t have much more than £100m to work with right now
1- the fee when he’s only got one year left on his contract and they just sold kova to city for what, £30m who also has one year left. Chelsea signed sterling, also one year, for 47.
2- his position is far from where we should strengthen first (keeper / striker / Casemiro understudy eg caicedo) and if ffp is to be believed we don’t have much more than £100m to work with right now
Mount is the better player than Kovacic and City wanted to get rid of Sterling. Chelsea do not want to sell Mount, it's the player pushing for the move.
Absolutely opposite players. Mata in his prime was a flair player with sensuous touches but very little running; Mount in his prime was hardworking, with brilliant runs but very little flair.
It may be a little harsh to use the past tense with Mount's prime, but judging by last season's exploits, that may very well be the case.
Uh, being the best player in a team that won the CL at a canter? 11 goals and 10 assists in the league in 21/22?
- Status