Mason Mount

[NikkiCFC 7,899]

4 hours ago, Reddish-Blue said:

Let's put it this way, no other top club would be offering Mount anywhere near 200k a week. 

We really are becoming a mid table side by overpaying average talent...

This is true but I'm afraid we'll give him what he wants - 300k. Which would be suicidal move. Just because we made mistake with Sterling doesn't mean we need to make another one. 

 

2 hours ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

And you've put your finger on our problem. Mase is an important player for us because our squad is what it is. If we ever build a squad capable of challenging for the title again, Mason's role, and importance, will change. I've previously used the phrase that I don't think we can be good without Mase, but that I don't believe we can be great with him. When Mason starts, we see the shortcomings and find them frustrating. When he doesn't, the current squad has no better alternatives and we see why he has to start. 

A better squad won't need Mase to start but, when he does, it will show off what he can do better than the current one does.

This. I said 3 years ago we are not winning title with him in starting 11. This is his 4th season in Chelsea and we are nowhere near. It will be the same in the future. 

He is so criticised by England fans. I checked last night twitter, Daily mail comment section, red cafe...

[robsblubot 3,464]

5 hours ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

My favourite old chestnut again. In terms of their basic talent level, 23-year-olds don't improve. While we remain a side struggling to reach a higher level, Mason will remain an important player for us. If we reach that level Mason will no longer be a key player, but he may find a niche roll in what would then be a much better squad.

I strongly disagree that 23yo don’t improve. Maybe you are referring to skill alone, but don't think I can agree with that either.

to my eyes mount possesses good technique on the ball, quick feet and good control. Therefore a slight improvement in, say decisions, could make him a much more influential player.

Come to think of it, I’ve seen players improve much later than that. Luka Modric being the most obvious example, but there are many others.

regarding fans… lol they also love grealish who is shit. Stick Mount in City's starting XI and they win the league all the same. 😉

Edited November 26, 2022 by robsblubot

[Blue Armour 4,252]

1 hour ago, NikkiCFC said:

He is so criticised by England fans. I checked last night twitter, Daily mail comment section, red cafe...

To be fair, the bias of those places towards Chelsea players in general is pretty much against.

[Fulham Broadway 16,705]

23 minutes ago, Blue Armour said:

To be fair, the bias of those places towards Chelsea players in general is pretty much against.

Ah those bastions of impartiality, Red cafe, Twitter, and the Daily heil ...☺️

[Reddish-Blue 2,324]

5 hours ago, robsblubot said:

I strongly disagree that 23yo don’t improve. Maybe you are referring to skill alone, but don't think I can agree with that either.

to my eyes mount possesses good technique on the ball, quick feet and good control. Therefore a slight improvement in, say decisions, could make him a much more influential player.

Come to think of it, I’ve seen players improve much later than that. Luka Modric being the most obvious example, but there are many others.

regarding fans… lol they also love grealish who is shit. Stick Mount in City's starting XI and they win the league all the same. 😉

I think a significant improvement would be needed to make him an influential player, I don't recall him taking over any games this season (other than the goals he got against Villa). 

To me influence means you're taking over the game like Lampard, Drogba, Hazard and co.  The problem with Mount has always been him drifting out of games, he has flashes of brilliance where you think he's about to turn the corner and take the next step and then he is back to being bang average for the next 4-5 games. 

As for the comment about City, let's be honest, you could stick alot of players into their starting XI and they wouldn't look out of place challenging for the title.  You look at our top 4 rivals and the question becomes, is Mount a guaranteed starter for Conte, Ten Hag or Arteta? 

[robsblubot 3,464]

38 minutes ago, Reddish-Blue said:

I think a significant improvement would be needed to make him an influential player, I don't recall him taking over any games this season (other than the goals he got against Villa). 

To me influence means you're taking over the game like Lampard, Drogba, Hazard and co.  The problem with Mount has always been him drifting out of games, he has flashes of brilliance where you think he's about to turn the corner and take the next step and then he is back to being bang average for the next 4-5 games. 

As for the comment about City, let's be honest, you could stick alot of players into their starting XI and they wouldn't look out of place challenging for the title.  You look at our top 4 rivals and the question becomes, is Mount a guaranteed starter for Conte, Ten Hag or Arteta? 

That's exactly my point: blaming Mount for us not being competitive in the league does not make sense to me.

I rate what he does even when he's not influencing games with a pass, or a goal. I do not rate a loved player in this forum, Mata, exactly because he was a zero when not clicking. Personally I think Mount is a typical big game player... My point remains, if the team lacks creativity add that in a different position. Mount if fine and a strong player in his own right and his own characteristics. Some suggested moving to a CM position, perhaps then fans will stop whining? 🤷‍♂️

[NikkiCFC 7,899]

1 hour ago, robsblubot said:

Personally I think Mount is a typical big game player...  

Is this a joke? He has 2 goals in last 2 and a half seasons against teams higher than 12th place on table. It should be actually higher than 15th place but AV improved after manager change and is now 12th. They were 17th when Mount scored brace against them. He costed us big time in both EFL and FA Cup finals last season with missing sitters and penalty. Most criticised England player by fans last EURO and now on WC. How is he big game player? Also he is not playing Kovacic role not to be judged with goals. In two months is going to be 2 years since Tuchel took Chelsea. Since then Mount is exclusively playing in front 3. 

I don't know why some Chelsea fans have so much trouble to put realistic look on him. Fans favourite and deserves 300k? While for example we have Pulisic who is shit and should be sold to mid table team according to many. But what is difference between them when you put numbers on paper? 

Mount 32g 37a for us 13217mins. 

Pulisic 26g 21a 7614mins. 

Add to that Pulisic doesn't take set pieces and penalties for us. If you take that away from Mount, Pulisic actually has more goals and assists in 5600 less minutes which is like 62 games. They are playing same position for us and should be compared. Don't get me wrong I'm not happy with Pulisic either but main point is that we would make tremendous mistake if we extend Mount for 300k. Even 200k is generous. And really curious to see what would happen if we don't give him what he wants. He thinks someone else is going to pay him that much? No chance. 

[robsblubot 3,464]

6 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

Is this a joke? He has 2 goals in last 2 and a half seasons against teams higher than 12th place on table. It should be actually higher than 15th place but AV improved after manager change and is now 12th. They were 17th when Mount scored brace against them. He costed us big time in both EFL and FA Cup finals last season with missing sitters and penalty. Most criticised England player by fans last EURO and now on WC. How is he big game player? Also he is not playing Kovacic role not to be judged with goals. In two months is going to be 2 years since Tuchel took Chelsea. Since then Mount is exclusively playing in front 3. 

I don't know why some Chelsea fans have so much trouble to put realistic look on him. Fans favourite and deserves 300k? While for example we have Pulisic who is shit and should be sold to mid table team according to many. But what is difference between them when you put numbers on paper? 

Mount 32g 37a for us 13217mins. 

Pulisic 26g 21a 7614mins. 

Add to that Pulisic doesn't take set pieces and penalties for us. If you take that away from Mount, Pulisic actually has more goals and assists in 5600 less minutes which is like 62 games. They are playing same position for us and should be compared. Don't get me wrong I'm not happy with Pulisic either but main point is that we would make tremendous mistake if we extend Mount for 300k. Even 200k is generous. And really curious to see what would happen if we don't give him what he wants. He thinks someone else is going to pay him that much? No chance. 

Cry me a river. Lol

He’s a player who does not let the opposition play. Now, you may think that’s not that important that anyone can do that, but I disagree. I think having players who can both 1. Not let the opposition play and 2. Make his team click is a rare thing… but that’s just me. 

I agree that this is definitely something that the numbers you posted don’t show. So, can we agree that you are the oddball here? We are going into the 3rd manager with mount as a key player—no to mention England. So, either you are right and everybody else is wrong or, more likely, most coaches and managers see something you don’t, something your numbers don’t show. Sorry, but I think the latter is far more likely.

Finally, regarding the perceived lack of creativity in the starting XII fiz that in a different position! Plenty of spots to get a creative player for. Really don’t see what mount has to do with building the squad to be honest.

[MoroccanBlue 5,281]

Mount should not be the creative influence of our team. He needs to have a limited role. 
 

Enzo and Nkunku could help with that. 

[OhForAGreavsie 5,869]

22 hours ago, robsblubot said:

I strongly disagree that 23yo don’t improve. Maybe you are referring to skill alone, but don't think I can agree with that either.

Forgive me, but I've been having this conversation on various forums for nearly twenty years and I'm not sure I can raise the enthusiasm to rehearse the arguments once again. That's not to say that I would not be interested to read anything you have to say on the subject, I absolutely will be, but I may not reach for the keyboard to reply. Let me just confirm that I said a player cannot improve his basic talent level at twenty-three, although in fact I don't believe a player can do that much past the age of ten or eleven. The way I often illustrate my point is to ask, "If players can improve their talent level, why don't they all practice until they are Lionel Messi?"

Of all my football opinions, this is the one of which I am most certain. I accept that my confidence is not an argument and so can't mean much to you, but I am 100% certain that I am right. Worse, from your point of view, I am 100% certain that you, and everyone else, will eventually agree with me. 🙂 That's if you don't already feel you can agree with me now that I've reemphasised that I'm talking about absolute talent level. Again, I accept that the strength of my conviction does not mean that you or anyone else will agree, but it does mean that my opinion on this is not biddable. I have this point of view and it can never be changed.

It was my firmness of conviction on this which enabled me to predict in autumn 2011 that Romelu Lukaku would never be good enough for Chelsea. It is why, without watching him play a single minute for Inter, I was confidently able to dismiss the claims of those who told me he had improved in Italy. Indeed, when people explained that he had done extra training with Antonio and claimed that this had transformed him, I simply said that the fact he still needed remedial lessons at the age of 28 only proved that I had been right about him all along.

I agree, of course, that players can learn how to make better use of the talent they have but the range of improvement is always linked to, and limited by, the basic level of ability. Modric always had the talent. He, and his coaches, learned how best to deploy it. It's a frequent experience that as children the high-level footballers play in forward positions simply because they are way more talented that the kids around them. As they rise up the ranks however some of them move lower and find their true home on a football pitch. 

Edited November 27, 2022 by OhForAGreavsie

[robsblubot 3,464]

3 hours ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

Forgive me, but I've been having this conversation on various forums for nearly twenty years and I'm not sure I can raise the enthusiasm to rehearse the arguments once again. That's not to say that I would not be interested to read anything you have to say on the subject, I absolutely will be, but I may not reach for the keyboard to reply. Let me just confirm that I said a player cannot improve his basic talent level at twenty-three, although in fact I don't believe a player can do that much past the age of ten or eleven. The way I often illustrate my point is to ask, "If players can improve their talent level, why don't they all practice until they are Lionel Messi?"

Of all my football opinions, this is the one of which I am most certain. I accept that my confidence is not an argument and so can't mean much to you, but I am 100% certain that I am right. Worse, from your point of view, I am 100% certain that you, and everyone else, will eventually agree with me. 🙂 That's if you don't already feel you can agree with me now that I've reemphasised that I'm talking about absolute talent level. Again, I accept that the strength of my conviction does not mean that you or anyone else will agree, but it does mean that my opinion on this is not biddable. I have this point of view and it can never be changed.

It was my firmness of conviction on this which enabled me to predict in autumn 2011 that Romelu Lukaku would never be good enough for Chelsea. It is why, without watching him play a single minute for Inter, I was confidently able to dismiss the claims of those who told me he had improved in Italy. Indeed, when people explained that he had done extra training with Antonio and claimed that this had transformed him, I simply said that the fact he still needed remedial lessons at the age of 28 only proved that I had been right about him all along.

I agree, of course, that players can learn how to make better use of the talent they have but the range of improvement is always linked to, and limited by, the basic level of ability. Modric always had the talent. He, and his coaches, learned how best to deploy it. It's a frequent experience that as children the high-level footballers play in forward positions simply because they are way more talented that the kids around them. As they rise up the ranks however some of them move lower and find their true home on a football pitch. 

it’s extremely difficult to determine ceiling of young players — how much talent they have. If it were easy salah and KDB would be our top players right now. Paid professionals get this wrong all the time!

I’m still not sure what you define as talent. This is odd because ability isn’t even the defining characteristic of player like Messi to me: he just thinks and acts half a second faster than his opponents. I’ve seen very talented young players fail because they were lost in a football pitch—great first touch,  passing ability, dribbling and still no career.

Very young players like you said, don’t even have their physique developed yet. Sometimes that final change makes or breaks a player alexandre pato had all the talent in the world and diminished as a player once he grew older. Happens with many players.

Also, physique definitely has an affect on players technique: it can affect response time which in turn can be the difference between skipping past a player versus losing the ball to that same player.

suppose we can agree to disagree here, even if we are talking about slightly different things eh.

Edited November 27, 2022 by robsblubot

[Blue Armour 4,252]

17 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

Is this a joke? He has 2 goals in last 2 and a half seasons against teams higher than 12th place on table. It should be actually higher than 15th place but AV improved after manager change and is now 12th. They were 17th when Mount scored brace against them. He costed us big time in both EFL and FA Cup finals last season with missing sitters and penalty. Most criticised England player by fans last EURO and now on WC. How is he big game player? Also he is not playing Kovacic role not to be judged with goals. In two months is going to be 2 years since Tuchel took Chelsea. Since then Mount is exclusively playing in front 3. 

I don't know why some Chelsea fans have so much trouble to put realistic look on him. Fans favourite and deserves 300k? While for example we have Pulisic who is shit and should be sold to mid table team according to many. But what is difference between them when you put numbers on paper? 

Mount 32g 37a for us 13217mins. 

Pulisic 26g 21a 7614mins. 

Add to that Pulisic doesn't take set pieces and penalties for us. If you take that away from Mount, Pulisic actually has more goals and assists in 5600 less minutes which is like 62 games. They are playing same position for us and should be compared. Don't get me wrong I'm not happy with Pulisic either but main point is that we would make tremendous mistake if we extend Mount for 300k. Even 200k is generous. And really curious to see what would happen if we don't give him what he wants. He thinks someone else is going to pay him that much? No chance. 

Slightly off-topic, but what is your current opinion on Connor Gallagher?

How would you rate him compared to Mount? I recall that you seemed to rate him higher, with him being a year younger than Mason.

[NikkiCFC 7,899]

52 minutes ago, Blue Armour said:

Slightly off-topic, but what is your current opinion on Connor Gallagher?

How would you rate him compared to Mount? I recall that you seemed to rate him higher, with him being a year younger than Mason.

He is not performing at last season level. But not sure how much is his fault. There is a position issue and would definitely give him more time. But he is like for like replacement for Mount and another reason not to give 300k to Mason. 

[Tomo 21,730]

1 hour ago, NikkiCFC said:

He is not performing at last season level. But not sure how much is his fault. There is a position issue and would definitely give him more time. But he is like for like replacement for Mount and another reason not to give 300k to Mason. 

And they don't work together so one way or another a decision needs to be made between both.

[Reddish-Blue 2,324]

12 hours ago, robsblubot said:

it’s extremely difficult to determine ceiling of young players — how much talent they have. If it were easy salah and KDB would be our top players right now. Paid professionals get this wrong all the time!

I’m still not sure what you define as talent. This is odd because ability isn’t even the defining characteristic of player like Messi to me: he just thinks and acts half a second faster than his opponents. I’ve seen very talented young players fail because they were lost in a football pitch—great first touch,  passing ability, dribbling and still no career.

Very young players like you said, don’t even have their physique developed yet. Sometimes that final change makes or breaks a player alexandre pato had all the talent in the world and diminished as a player once he grew older. Happens with many players.

Also, physique definitely has an affect on players technique: it can affect response time which in turn can be the difference between skipping past a player versus losing the ball to that same player.

suppose we can agree to disagree here, even if we are talking about slightly different things eh.

You do realize that one of the best talent scouts in world football (Piet de vissier) who was a consultant for Roman for many years basically said "don't sell KDB" as this kid will one day go to the very top...and that was after watching him for half a season at the Belgian club he was playing for...

It just wasn't meant to be as KDB had ambitions to be a first team player and he asked Mourinho about his prospects and Mourinho said he preferred to develop Oscar as he was more well rounded to the tactical system at the time. 

As for your example on Pato, it was just injuries and getting too much acclaim at the young age which destroyed his career.  People forget that a very young Pato went to Camp Nou with AC Milan in those days and he was destroying one of the better Barcelona teams of that era, then came the pressure, then came all the injuries. 

I'm not saying that Mount is a bad player, I just think he's not worth the reported figures of 300k a week as he doesn't have a skill that stands out on a consistent basis.  With Lampard, you knew you were getting goals, with Hazard, you knew he would embarrass the opposition fullback, with Fabregas you knew he had that killer pass in him.  When I think of Mount, nothing really comes to mind...but I guess you could say pressing? 

 

[chelsea_4_eva 1,157]

Tbh I'd even be hesitant to offer him 250k, to me 250k is pushing it.

[robsblubot 3,464]

12 hours ago, Reddish-Blue said:

You do realize that one of the best talent scouts in world football (Piet de vissier) who was a consultant for Roman for many years basically said "don't sell KDB" as this kid will one day go to the very top...and that was after watching him for half a season at the Belgian club he was playing for...

It just wasn't meant to be as KDB had ambitions to be a first team player and he asked Mourinho about his prospects and Mourinho said he preferred to develop Oscar as he was more well rounded to the tactical system at the time. 

As for your example on Pato, it was just injuries and getting too much acclaim at the young age which destroyed his career.  People forget that a very young Pato went to Camp Nou with AC Milan in those days and he was destroying one of the better Barcelona teams of that era, then came the pressure, then came all the injuries. 

I'm not saying that Mount is a bad player, I just think he's not worth the reported figures of 300k a week as he doesn't have a skill that stands out on a consistent basis.  With Lampard, you knew you were getting goals, with Hazard, you knew he would embarrass the opposition fullback, with Fabregas you knew he had that killer pass in him.  When I think of Mount, nothing really comes to mind...but I guess you could say pressing? 

 

Fair enough, but that was meant as a general comment esp when you go into younger (than 20) and youth systems. It gets progressively more difficult to assess "talent."

I was one of the few people here who thought Salah was a top player -- wrote here too, but in the end it's all opinions and guesswork.

Regarding Pato, precisely, it show how much physique affects "talent" (skill, technique) esp in the footballing elite. Some of the players who we deem not good enough at Chelsea would absolute dominate a tier lower. It's that split second decision and time on the ball that you don't get at this level.

And that's why I think Mount can indeed improve: a slight improvement in that split-second decision making could make him a much more influential player. I do see plenty of skill in his game too: good first touch, passing, very quick feet. He has good technique striking the football, and for that reason I think he can do better than he does atm.

Salary discussion is more about the market than a perceived quality. Wages in football are crazy these days... City one of the worst offenders, so it's hard to criticize players/agents and clubs with so much investment in the sport.

[Superblue 6,370]

On 27/11/2022 at 16:02, OhForAGreavsie said:

I agree, of course, that players can learn how to make better use of the talent they have but the range of improvement is always linked to, and limited by, the basic level of ability. Modric always had the talent. He, and his coaches, learned how best to deploy it. It's a frequent experience that as children the high-level footballers play in forward positions simply because they are way more talented that the kids around them. As they rise up the ranks however some of them move lower and find their true home on a football pitch. 

For me, I think Mount is best suited as a midfielder in a 3, in a number 8 style role.

I think, like you mentioned on a previous post, too many things that Mount tries don't quite come off and there are definitely situations where this hinders our attack. Having him as part of an attacking three doesn't benefit him or Chelsea. But he's also had the misfortune of playing in a team set up that doesn't really have his best role available for him.

A lot will depend on Potter and what his longer-term plans are for the team and whether he looks to move away from the back 3 and instead use a back 4 regularly. This might unlock Mount and answer a lot of questions with him. I wouldn't actually be too surprised if part of his contract talks centred around his role long term in the team.

I'm not comparing Mount and Modric, but Modric played predominantly on the wing when he was younger and initially for Spurs. We only really saw just how good he truly was, like you said, when he was deployed correctly for his abilities and skillset. I believe Mount is more of a 'connector' than a 'creator', and needs to play that bit deeper.

Can he kick on alongside the club if we can start challenging again over the next couple of years? I guess that's something we'll see if, hopefully, we do start progressing well but I would definitely like to see him operating in a different role in the team first before making that judgement.