Mason Mount

[Blue Armour 4,436]

2 hours ago, YorkshireBlue said:

Players peak earlier now because they want that massive contract asap, once they get on 200k to 300k a week they no they have that for 5 years normally, the drive goes they get settled, I'm hoping these performance based contracts stop all that.

Only works if all top clubs are prepared to do the same.

Else, we'll just keep losing out in terms of getting top players.

[DDA 9,924]

2 hours ago, Reddish-Blue said:

Remember Carlo Ancelotti blooding in some of the youngsters in that cup game vs Newcastle (think it was Van Aanholt, McEachran, Kakuta and a few others). 

Never really saw the hype around Stoch or Borini, decent players on their day but if you had to compare academy players, the ones with the most potential in the past few years: CHO, RLC, Solanke, Reece, Mount, Livramento and Colwill (i'm sure there are others that i'm forgetting)

I was there at that game.. my word Josh McEachran was superb. Its a real shame how his career ended up going the way it did... he had serious potential.

[Blue Armour 4,436]

10 minutes ago, DDA said:

I was there at that game.. my word Josh McEachran was superb. Its a real shame how his career ended up going the way it did... he had serious potential.

Josh came in as a sub when we were down by a man, and behind by a few goals I think? 

Came in and changed the game (if not the result)

I think loaning a CM player like Josh to lesser sides was a mistake. He is the Fabregas sort of player that links up well with other top class players., to really shine.

And I think we repeated the same mistake by loaning Billy Gilmour out.

These players should have just stayed with our first team and grown as squad players who would eventually break into the first team.

Edited July 1, 2023 by Blue Armour

[Reddish-Blue 2,489]

4 hours ago, Blue Armour said:

Josh came in as a sub when we were down by a man, and behind by a few goals I think? 

Came in and changed the game (if not the result)

I think loaning a CM player like Josh to lesser sides was a mistake. He is the Fabregas sort of player that links up well with other top class players., to really shine.

And I think we repeated the same mistake by loaning Billy Gilmour out.

These players should have just stayed with our first team and grown as squad players who would eventually break into the first team.

Gilmour wanted to be loaned out though, he wanted the game time to develop rather than sit on the bench at Chelsea.  It's just a shame that there wasn't much squad planning going on as Gilmour would have been a handy midfielder to have in the squad heading into next season (with 4 first team midfielders being sold in the last 2 transfer windows). 

[Reddish-Blue 2,489]

7 hours ago, Mário César said:

I was reading the article that matt law wrote about mount and there are two points that I would like to talk about.

a) he compares cole's renewal situation with mount's, in that it is not always right to lower the wage structure, since the best players demand high salaries 

the point is that ashley cole, in 2006, was much more of a player than mount will ever be. He already had a very strong history with Arsenal, he had even won two leagues, being part of that epic 2004 team. 

Cole was world class, Mount is not at that level. 

In relation to it being necessary to have a high salary mass because it attracts the best players, once again, it's subjective, and the perfect example of this is United, which pays very high salaries to mediocre players and keeps them at the club and can't sell them because it's an obstacle, paying too much for what the players produced and deserve. 

Absolutely spot on, Mount's a good player and he'll do well with Ten Hag's system but Ashley Cole was top class, there's no comparison between the two.  Ended up being one of the best signings as he was arguably one of the best LB's in Europe for almost a decade. 

[Blue Armour 4,436]

55 minutes ago, Reddish-Blue said:

Gilmour wanted to be loaned out though, he wanted the game time to develop rather than sit on the bench at Chelsea.  It's just a shame that there wasn't much squad planning going on as Gilmour would have been a handy midfielder to have in the squad heading into next season (with 4 first team midfielders being sold in the last 2 transfer windows). 

Hmm,..I thought it was more to do with Tuchel being pals with Daniel Farke who was coaching Norwich at the time, and Tuchel thinking that he would give him more playing time. 

But I guess you're right in that Billy wanted the move as well.

Either way, it's a shame. That move killed his growth as a player 

[Magic Lamps 11,692]

1 hour ago, Blue Armour said:

Hmm,..I thought it was more to do with Tuchel being pals with Daniel Farke who was coaching Norwich at the time, and Tuchel thinking that he would give him more playing time. 

But I guess you're right in that Billy wanted the move as well.

Either way, it's a shame. That move killed his growth as a player 

Always thought Gilmour was McEachran 2.0. Living off 3 decent games his entire career despite being out of his depth in every other appearance.

As with McEachran there was some potential but clearly they themselves had not idea how to realise it so it is no wonder their careers trailed off when they were mismanaged.  If they really were that talented and ready mentally they would have made it anyway.

[DDA 9,924]

8 hours ago, Blue Armour said:

Josh came in as a sub when we were down by a man, and behind by a few goals I think? 

Came in and changed the game (if not the result)

I think loaning a CM player like Josh to lesser sides was a mistake. He is the Fabregas sort of player that links up well with other top class players., to really shine.

And I think we repeated the same mistake by loaning Billy Gilmour out.

These players should have just stayed with our first team and grown as squad players who would eventually break into the first team.

He did indeed come on as a sub in that game. He had everyone of their seats... the buzz in the stadium during that time was incredible... The Carlo days... it just isn't the same at The Bridge now. Soo sad and most probably why I don't bother going much anymore along with the ticket prices.

17 minutes ago, Magic Lamps said:

Always thought Gilmour was McEachran 2.0. Living off 3 decent games his entire career despite being out of his depth in every other appearance.

As with McEachran there was some potential but clearly they themselves had not idea how to realise it so it is no wonder their careers trailed off when they were mismanaged.  If they really were that talented and ready mentally they would have made it anyway.

McEachran had far more ability than Gilmour in my opinion. He was technically astute with great vision. As you have alluded to though, he just didn't have what it takes mentally to succeed at the very highest of levels. Thought he was a superstar before actually putting in the work to become a superstar. Similar to Sturridge.

[Blue Colored Sky 1,807]

8 hours ago, Blue Armour said:

Josh came in as a sub when we were down by a man, and behind by a few goals I think? 

Came in and changed the game (if not the result)

I think loaning a CM player like Josh to lesser sides was a mistake. He is the Fabregas sort of player that links up well with other top class players., to really shine.

And I think we repeated the same mistake by loaning Billy Gilmour out.

These players should have just stayed with our first team and grown as squad players who would eventually break into the first team.

Josh McEachran was loaned to Swansea City which at the time was the best ball-playing footballl team in England. On top of that he was reunited with Brendan Rodgers who was previously his coach in Chelsea Academy. So on paper everything was lined-up great.

I remember Juan Mata said that he is one of the most technical and skillful players at Chelsea.

I think Josh McEachran later hooked up with TV star while his career was dwindling down. I just don't think he had the mentality to play at the high level. Plus he was build like a boy. Maybe if he was sold to Spain or Germany his career would take different trajectory.

 

[Reddish-Blue 2,489]

1 hour ago, DDA said:

He did indeed come on as a sub in that game. He had everyone of their seats... the buzz in the stadium during that time was incredible... The Carlo days... it just isn't the same at The Bridge now. Soo sad and most probably why I don't bother going much anymore along with the ticket prices.

McEachran had far more ability than Gilmour in my opinion. He was technically astute with great vision. As you have alluded to though, he just didn't have what it takes mentally to succeed at the very highest of levels. Thought he was a superstar before actually putting in the work to become a superstar. Similar to Sturridge.

Sturridge at least got to a good level, was selected as part of the PFA team of the year in 13/14 for Liverpool, had a solid strike rate in PL football and even got 20+ caps for England which is pretty good for someone with niggling injury issues. 

McEachran just didn't have the work ethic to go with his talent. 

[DDA 9,924]

4 hours ago, Blue Colored Sky said:

Plus he was build like a boy. Maybe if he was sold to Spain or Germany his career would take different trajectory

He turned down Real Madrid. What may have been eh.

[Blue Colored Sky 1,807]

1 hour ago, DDA said:

He turned down Real Madrid. What may have been eh.

I didn't know that ! That's a news for me.

[ZAPHOD2319 4,801]

 

[Johnnyeye 7,501]

just leave ffs, im tired of this wanker.

[NikkiCFC 8,286]

Has bigger salary than Mac Allister and Szoboszlai combined. And both are better players. Liverpool is smarter.