- Joined
- Jun 26, 2014
- Messages
- 166
it’s the weird positive problem of Bruno both being captain and a flawless fitness recordHe's not a bad player, I just don't know where he fits in.
It's the Van De Beek issue all over again.
it’s the weird positive problem of Bruno both being captain and a flawless fitness recordHe's not a bad player, I just don't know where he fits in.
It's the Van De Beek issue all over again.
Erik had a clear (but stupid) vision of playing two 10s in the premier league. It made sense as we bought into that vision.Such a stupid signing. Injury prone, too expensive, and already plays in the position of our captain. The people who authorised it need to be placed on gardening leave.
Declan Rice was £100m rising to £105m. Mount was £55m rising to £60m. Who seems more likely to trigger the clauses?And you said similar player, I was pointing out Rice is significantly superior so not really a similar player. So a much better player with much longer on his contract, Mount really was overpriced by that metric.
You mean like City have done with Bernardo and De Bruyne? Or Gundogan and De Bruyne?Erik had a clear (but stupid) vision of playing two 10s in the premier league. It made sense as we bought into that vision.
I don’t think Rice is significantly better tbh. They play different roles so comparisons are hard to make but one guy has won the Conference League and the other won the Champions League. They’ve both been mainstays for England. Mount won player of the year twice for Chelsea.And you said similar player, I was pointing out Rice is significantly superior so not really a similar player. So a much better player with much longer on his contract, Mount really was overpriced by that metric.
Depth is also a thing. We should want cover for Bruno just as City have spare £50m players.Such a stupid signing. Injury prone, too expensive, and already plays in the position of our captain. The people who authorised it need to be placed on gardening leave.
For 55-60m and one of the highest wages at the club? When available for free a year later?Depth is also a thing. We should want cover for Bruno just as City have spare £50m players.
Why is every player of ours and their dog on £300k a week nowadays?https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/mason-mount-contract-man-utd-transfer-b1091649.html
£60m fee, with £300k a week five year contract
An absolute abomination of a transfer. Can only hope some semblance of normalcy returns under new men because we have been recruiting and spending like lunatics.
Lingard? Yeah right, why not even say Bebe, or Dong?If we paid £55m for Lingard would you consider that an overpay? Because that's the kind of player we got, but more injury prone. And the discussion about fee isn't really relevant anyway because he would have been free this summer.
Inflation mate, can hit individuals hardWhy is every player of ours and their dog on £300k a week nowadays?
Because he’s injuredHow on earth can you spent 60M, give him the 7 shirt number, and dont have a clue where to play him...
Fred’s contract wasn’t up was it? We sold him for a fee. We could have actually let him go for free next summer and got Mount for free. Instead we made a loss of about £50m, for a player on much higher wages, who has barely played a game, and probably isn’t as good a fit for the team as Fred was.It isn't really an "overpay" if he turns out to be a good transfer. We definitely didn't expect him to be out for almost the entire season, so hindsight is 20/20.
We needed him NOW because Fred contract was up. I don't mind this fee really, the main thing is we can easily recoup the money we paid for him (contrary to for example Antony).
Agents. They know we're rich and that the guys running us do not have the sharpest football minds and management skills.Why is every player of ours and their dog on £300k a week nowadays?
They’re almost certainly not, the media just run with it because people accept it as being true.Why is every player of ours and their dog on £300k a week nowadays?
I was quoting you. You said £40 million in your first post.Declan Rice was £100m rising to £105m. Mount was £55m rising to £60m. Who seems more likely to trigger the clauses?
It’s £45m currently and could end up at either 40m or 50m depending on clauses triggered.
This is absolutely wild. One is one of the best all round midfielders in the world, the other is a system player at best. Mount won player of the year at Chelsea because he's a local lad who put in a shift and generally they've been pretty shit outside of one Champions League run. Likewise, Rice is actually an England mainstay, Mount has made 24 starts for England and finished exactly 8 games. Rice has started 44 in that time and actually finished 31 of them.I don’t think Rice is significantly better tbh. They play different roles so comparisons are hard to make but one guy has won the Conference League and the other won the Champions League. They’ve both been mainstays for England. Mount won player of the year twice for Chelsea.
I get that Mount isn’t a flashy player or exciting in the way that some unknown Brazilian wonderkid could be but he seems like the kind of player the Germans would love. He’s hard working, has enough quality on the ball and contributes in both attacking and defensive phases. There is a reason Tuchel liked him and Bayern were linked in the summer.
It hasn’t worked out for him so far but we’ve also barely seen him play.
They'd be top if they bought himBayern were even more interested in McTominay
Yeah, he would have been scoring all kinds of clutch goals, unlike Kane, who is just stat padding against the likes of FC SchwarzburgThey'd be top if they bought him
Right now McTominay is the most dangerous super-sub in the world.Bayern were even more interested in McTominay
Those are possession type of midfielders who are used to involve in a lot of build up play for which Bruno and Mount aren’t.You mean like City have done with Bernardo and De Bruyne? Or Gundogan and De Bruyne?
Yeah I was about to say, Bruno in particular is not smart enough in possession for that comparison to be a sound one (neither is Casemiro compared to Rodri).Those are possession type of midfielders who are used to involve in a lot of build up play for which Bruno and Mount aren’t.
If we didn't already have Bruno (or had unlimited freedom to spend money however we liked) I'd agree. But Bruno is our captain, is freakishly never, ever absent and plays a similar role to Mount. It was a bit of a headscratcher before he signed and he obviously didn't have much of a chance to prove himself before getting injured. And I know it's an unfair criticism as players can't help getting injured, but we've been down this road before with perennially unavailable players languishing at the club and then subsequently struggling to establish themselves (while making an absolute fortune in the process).£55 was a great deal for a young, English player with international experience, who can play all across the front line and was Chelsea’s POTY.
He’s a lad who actively chose to leave Chelsea as he wanted to play for Manchester United, and he hasn’t had a proper chance to show us what he’s got yet. I think it’s poor form as a supporter to write him off as a bad signing so early. Maybe if we get behind him as a fanbase it will help him find his best form when he returns?
Yes, it does worry me that he could be one of those that never really settles in after an early injury. But equally, he could really crack on when he's back so let's hope for that.If we didn't already have Bruno (or had unlimited freedom to spend money however we liked) I'd agree. But Bruno is our captain, is freakishly never, ever absent and plays a similar role to Mount. It was a bit of a headscratcher before he signed and he obviously didn't have much of a chance to prove himself before getting injured. And I know it's an unfair criticism as players can't help getting injured, but we've been down this road before with perennially unavailable players languishing at the club and then subsequently struggling to establish themselves (while making an absolute fortune in the process).
I'm looking forward to him coming back because he's a different kind of player and he's relatively flexible. It'd be nice if he hits the ground running to give him and the fans a boost.
gundogan has 8 qualities but I see your point.You mean like City have done with Bernardo and De Bruyne? Or Gundogan and De Bruyne?
I would love to see his Chelsea top form in the Utd shirt but after 2 consecutive seasons full of injuries I'm afraid it will never happen.Yes, it does worry me that he could be one of those that never really settles in after an early injury. But equally, he could really crack on when he's back so let's hope for that.
Bruno is never injured, until one day he will be... We don't have anyone else who can play the no10 role (Eriksen is approaching the end and McTominay isn't the man) so we need a quality back-up and successor for our 30 year old captain. If Mason can have a good season next year then the role will be his soon thereafter. If you ask me, this is potentially an incredible piece of succession planning, carried out for a great price. I really hope the boy makes it.
It's not really 2 seasons. It was only towards the the end of last season where he got injured (March 2023), and I think the expectation is that he'll come back in March 2024. So it'll be 12 months. Obviously it's not ideal but it's also not as bad as a lot of people make out.I would love to see his Chelsea top form in the Utd shirt but after 2 consecutive seasons full of injuries I'm afraid it will never happen.
Yes, it does worry me that he could be one of those that never really settles in after an early injury. But equally, he could really crack on when he's back so let's hope for that.
Bruno is never injured, until one day he will be... We don't have anyone else who can play the no10 role (Eriksen is approaching the end and McTominay isn't the man) so we need a quality back-up and successor for our 30 year old captain. If Mason can have a good season next year then the role will be his soon thereafter. If you ask me, this is potentially an incredible piece of succession planning, carried out for a great price. I really hope the boy makes it.
Even if he manages to stay fit and has a massive upturn in form I don't see he will ever be considered as being signed at a great price given there was only a year left on his contractYes, it does worry me that he could be one of those that never really settles in after an early injury. But equally, he could really crack on when he's back so let's hope for that.
Bruno is never injured, until one day he will be... We don't have anyone else who can play the no10 role (Eriksen is approaching the end and McTominay isn't the man) so we need a quality back-up and successor for our 30 year old captain. If Mason can have a good season next year then the role will be his soon thereafter. If you ask me, this is potentially an incredible piece of succession planning, carried out for a great price. I really hope the boy makes it.
While squad depth is absolutely important, it's not a fair comparison. City can easily have the luxury of having expensive players on their bench because they have zero weaknesses in their first eleven. We, on the other hand, went into last summer realistically needing better players at 3 or 4 positions in the first eleven, so blowing a significant portion of our budget on a backup players was incredibly reckless.Depth is also a thing. We should want cover for Bruno just as City have spare £50m players.
Havertz has been fairly brilliant. Quietly settling in, influence growing since the turn of the year. He’s pretty crucial to how Arsenal play now.For 55-60m and one of the highest wages at the club? When available for free a year later?
What absolute turds of signings Mount and Havertz both are for the money.
Really? I can't say I've see tons of him this season but when I have he's looked just as bang-average as he did for Chelsea.Havertz has been fairly brilliant.