Mason Mount

[FrankLampard8]

1 hour ago, RDCW said:

Well it looks like Mason is on his way out. He is reputed to be demanding £240,000 / week to bring him into line with Lukaku and Sterling, which would triple his wages.

I'm not sure anyone else will pay him that kind of money.

Scary thing is someone will probably pay him close to £200k a week if he goes on a free so I can't blame him.

From his point of view, he's reigning player of the year 2 years on the bounce and a Champion's League winner. He's seen Reece James sign a bumper contract if reports are to be believed. He has been an immaculate servant for the club so far perhaps playing too much football and out of position at potential detriment to himself.

He's well within his rights to ask and maybe even expect that money... just as the club are well within their rights to have a new wage structure in place now or think they can get better value elsewhere. 

Personally, if there are only so many of those bumper contracts to go around i'd much rather have Mason here on that money than Sterling.

Edited February 8, 2023 by FrankLampard8

[thevelourfog]

Always sceptical of rumours about contract negotiations. Today the issue is money, a few months ago the issue was length. I do, though, have a bad feeling that we're going to lose a good player who is of actual use for years to come because we're paying less good, less useful and older players ludicrous wages.

If Mount does want £200k +, I can see why. 

What makes me curious, though, is James. Surely he also wanted big money that reflected his role in the team and fit with what comparable players are earning? And surely we gave it to him? So why the problem here?

[Ham]

50 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Always sceptical of rumours about contract negotiations. Today the issue is money, a few months ago the issue was length. I do, though, have a bad feeling that we're going to lose a good player who is of actual use for years to come because we're paying less good, less useful and older players ludicrous wages.

If Mount does want £200k +, I can see why. 

What makes me curious, though, is James. Surely he also wanted big money that reflected his role in the team and fit with what comparable players are earning? And surely we gave it to him? So why the problem here?

It's a strange one because we apparently gave RJ a monster contact recently because of his importance to the team and his world profile. 

We then gave relatively small contracts (less than £100k a week) to Enzo and Mudryk (although I'd imagine they have massive bonus features. 

Give £200k plus per week and there could be mutiny. Give him less than £100k a week and he's way behind RJ. 

It's a tightrope.

[Mark Kelly]

54 minutes ago, thevelourfog said:

Always sceptical of rumours about contract negotiations. Today the issue is money, a few months ago the issue was length. I do, though, have a bad feeling that we're going to lose a good player who is of actual use for years to come because we're paying less good, less useful and older players ludicrous wages.

If Mount does want £200k +, I can see why. 

What makes me curious, though, is James. Surely he also wanted big money that reflected his role in the team and fit with what comparable players are earning? And surely we gave it to him? So why the problem here?

We have concocted a mess of our own making , authored by the previous regime who gave huge contracts to players who weren't worth it and had made no contribution to our on field successes , James and Mounts reward for winning the Champions League was a fat contract for Lukaku which would have been better value if they'd just burnt the money and used the ashes to fertilise the pitches at Cobham.

James got his renewal just in time before the new regime reigned things in and gave longer but less lucrative contracts to the newer players.

So Mount is caught between the two different philosophies.

However , in my opinion, he should certainly get his dues based on James contract not Mudryks but I'd also try to negotiate it down a bit but give a longer length .

Failing that we can sell him to United when they get the Dubai money before he runs down his contract.

 

[chara]

As usual some serious debate and valid points,

Media mush brain fodder v What is really going on?

I doubt that either Mason and his camp or TB and the "Rulers" have made any comment to the media regarding demands and negotiations allowing the Media to fill in the blanks as they see fit, which means click bait and mischief.

I doubt (hope) Chelsea will be foolish enough to allow a still young talent like Mason to leave over wages.

Moving on deadwood, surplus and failures should free up financial resources. (Again in hope!)

[JaneB]

I shall be furious if Mason is allowed to leave.  Chelsea through and through and a delightful young man.

I know he’s not playing great atm but he’s too valuable to let go.

[Michael Tucker]

2 hours ago, JaneB said:

 Chelsea through and through and a delightful young man.

I doubt that anyone would argue with you about that, Jane.

2 hours ago, JaneB said:

I know he’s not playing great atm but he’s too valuable to let go.

He's playing very ordinary, and has been for a while now. I'm not sure that I can agree with you on the last bit - he needs to start playing well enough, consistently enough, to justify his valuation.

[xceleryx]

4 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

So Mount is caught between the two different philosophies.

However , in my opinion, he should certainly get his dues based on James contract not Mudryks but I'd also try to negotiate it down a bit but give a longer length .

In ways it's also difficult to compare Mount and James. James, when fit, is arguably one of the best players in his position in the entirety of world football. Mount on the other hand, even at his best, wouldn't even be top 10 in his position despite the impact he had for us in his first few seasons. Thus you can kinda understand why handing out a base contract on par to James being possibly bulked at. 

It's a tough situation to be in and we certainly don't want to be seeing Mount run down his deal and leaving on a free. 

I think a contract between James' and what the new guys are getting makes the most sense, with added performance base incentives that can be trigged to increase things further. Either way, needs to really be sorted this season. As does the future of quite a few others in a similar boat.

[ROTG]

5 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

We have concocted a mess of our own making , authored by the previous regime who gave huge contracts to players who weren't worth it and had made no contribution to our on field successes ,

Apart from Lukaku which other over paid players contributed zero to the club recent success. 

I would be more worried about the contracts given to PEA & KK  by the current regime. PEA & KK are within their rights to do a Bogarde for the next couple of years. 

As for Mason. I am sure all parties will come to an agreement in the summer. 

[kev61]

I've been in Mount's corner for a very long time.I said a long time ago Mount is the one of the most gifted players we've ever had imo.

Admittedly he's been quite quiet by his standards lately but in his defence, look at the crap he's been playing with.

He is also being played in the wrong position.He is no way shape or form a wide player,he is a central midfielder like Lampard.The difference is Lampard was nearly always surrounded by good players.

It would seem ridiculous in the  extreme that we could lose a player of his quality just when we look like we are at last signing genuine quality players.

[Michael Tucker]

3 hours ago, kev61 said:

Admittedly he's been quite quiet by his standards lately but in his defence, look at the crap he's been playing with.

His team mates, you mean, Kev?

Despite what some here seem to  think, he's no Frank Lampard. Not even close.

[My Blood Is Blue]

I’ll be gutted if we end up losing Mount due to contract issues. We should not be letting our key players contracts get this close to the final year and yet we seem to have done it again (albeit the ownership change didn’t help).

What gives me hope is that I imagine all sides are keen to get to a resolution, the club will surely be very keen to keep Mount, not just because he’s one of our better players, but he’s also a high profile home grown player, arguably one of the ‘faces’ of the club. From Mounts point of view, it’s his boyhood club, he loves it here, he’s won trophies here and I don’t believe he’ll want to leave. I do think they’ll find a way to get it sorted.

As a few of you have already said, he’s unfortunately fallen between the two wage structures - old and new. He’ll have started negotiations based on the old structure where money was seemingly given out for fun and he’s now  in the middle of the negotiations where the wage structure has changed to a lesser base salary but more incentivised bonuses. Mount will point to Sterling, the club will point to Enzo and Mudryk.

[FrankLampard8]

6 hours ago, kev61 said:

He is also being played in the wrong position.He is no way shape or form a wide player,he is a central midfielder like Lampard.The difference is Lampard was nearly always surrounded by good players.

Everyone, including myself, says this... but playing devils advocate you could argue his best ever Chelsea form came playing as part of the front 3 under Tuchel and often having to drop in to the right channel. I am a huge Mount fan but i'm intrigued to see if he can put it all together in midfield over the long term.

[ROTG]

2 hours ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

I’ll be gutted if we end up losing Mount due to contract issues. We should not be letting our key players contracts get this close to the final year and yet we seem to have done it again (albeit the ownership change didn’t help).

What gives me hope is that I imagine all sides are keen to get to a resolution, the club will surely be very keen to keep Mount, not just because he’s one of our better players, but he’s also a high profile home grown player, arguably one of the ‘faces’ of the club. From Mounts point of view, it’s his boyhood club, he loves it here, he’s won trophies here and I don’t believe he’ll want to leave. I do think they’ll find a way to get it sorted.

As a few of you have already said, he’s unfortunately fallen between the two wage structures - old and new. He’ll have started negotiations based on the old structure where money was seemingly given out for fun and he’s now  in the middle of the negotiations where the wage structure has changed to a lesser base salary but more incentivised bonuses. Mount will point to Sterling, the club will point to Enzo and Mudryk.

The continual harping about the new wage structure seems to be designed for recruits with zero PL experience. 
 

let’s put it like this, would Declan Rice a forum favourite join the club on the new wage structure?  I doubt it.

top class players want top class money. 

[xceleryx]

52 minutes ago, ROTG said:

The continual harping about the new wage structure seems to be designed for recruits with zero PL experience. 
 

let’s put it like this, would Declan Rice a forum favourite join the club on the new wage structure?  I doubt it.

top class players want top class money. 

It's creative accounting more than anything else.

We're handing out lower base salaries with very obtainable incentives to trigger bonuses which end up bumping up a players earnings, the benefit of this is that the base wage is the number often used when looking at wages structures and less so potential bonuses. 

It would be quite native for anyone to think players like Enzo or Mudryk joined for merely 90k (or whatever) in wages, with little ability to dramatically expand on that. 

[martin1905]

2 minutes ago, xceleryx said:

It's creative accounting more than anything else.

We're handing out lower base salaries with very obtainable incentives to trigger bonuses which end up bumping up a players earnings, the benefit of this is that the base wage is the number often used when looking at wages structures and less so potential bonuses. 

It would be quite native for anyone to think players like Enzo or Mudryk joined for merely 90k (or whatever) in wages, with little ability to dramatically expand on that. 

I never believe anything when it comes to wages, maybe that information is genuinely and accurately available somewhere, I don't know but I have always found it hard to believe that during negotiations the amount offered is leaked to the press. Just makes no sense to me. 

Anyway, no way those two haven't come for big money, one way or another. You don't sign for £100m+ and become one of the worlds most expensive signings without being on a huge salary.

[martin1905]

As for Mount, I don't personally think it's about money, I've said for a long, long time he doesn't look happy being the utility man and he has said numerous times he wants to play as a number 8.

I think at 24, that will be more important to him than money, he's going to earn big money whatever he does. 

[xceleryx]

47 minutes ago, martin1905 said:

I never believe anything when it comes to wages, maybe that information is genuinely and accurately available somewhere, I don't know but I have always found it hard to believe that during negotiations the amount offered is leaked to the press. Just makes no sense to me. 

Anyway, no way those two haven't come for big money, one way or another. You don't sign for £100m+ and become one of the worlds most expensive signings without being on a huge salary.

One always has to take numbers with a pinch of salt, with some figures going to be reported more accurately than others. 

Agree though with the fact a side doesn't spend the sort of money we did on certain individuals without them earning a wage that's somewhat reflective of that. And while I do think these guys are likely on lower base wages compared to what is generally seen, they are both still going to be taking home a pretty penny when it's all said and done. As I said originally, what we're doing is a more creative way of going about it opposed to the traditional method of just paying a player a massive guaranteed base salary. 

[ROTG]

1 hour ago, xceleryx said:

It would be quite native for anyone to think players like Enzo or Mudryk joined for merely 90k (or whatever) in wages, with little ability to dramatically expand on that. 

Why. 
these guys were being paid peanuts at there previous club. 90k is a huge uplift. Also, 90k per week is not such a bad hit if they turn out to be duds. Unlike the monstrous contracts given to PEA & KK.

Edited February 9, 2023 by ROTG
Not even Del Trotter could shift PEA & KK

[xceleryx]

12 minutes ago, ROTG said:

Why. 
these guys were being paid peanuts at there previous club. 90k is a huge uplift. Also, 90k per week is not such a bad hit if they turn out to be duds. Unlike the monstrous contracts given to PEA & KK.

Because wages are generally reported pre-tax, so in reality that reported 90k figure ends up being a lot less after tax. There's also little chance we've spent £100m+ on Enzo for example and paying him the same pre tax salary as what Palace pay Edouard and nothing more. 

As I said originally, these contracts are going to have many obtainable incentives that can be triggered to earn bonuses, therefore further financially rewarding these players beyond the base salary given. However, from a wage structure perspective its great because the base salary is low, and as you eluded towards it's going to be much easier to sell those that may not pan out. 

It's creative and forward thinking. 

[My Blood Is Blue]

4 hours ago, ROTG said:

The continual harping about the new wage structure seems to be designed for recruits with zero PL experience. 
 

let’s put it like this, would Declan Rice a forum favourite join the club on the new wage structure?  I doubt it.

top class players want top class money. 

Are you suggesting the club are going to have one wage structure for players coming from abroad and one wage structure for players already in the PL?

Im not sure if you are, but if so then I can’t see that being the case and if it is, I imagine the manager may have a few knocks on his door soon.

[ROTG]

45 minutes ago, My Blood Is Blue said:

Are you suggesting the club are going to have one wage structure for players coming from abroad and one wage structure for players already in the PL?

Im not sure if you are, but if so then I can’t see that being the case and if it is, I imagine the manager may have a few knocks on his door soon.

No my suggestion was the new recruits are on a different wage structure because they are untried in the PL and there is a possibility they could be a dud, and that type of structure will not be offered to MM in my opinion.

[thevelourfog]

9 hours ago, martin1905 said:

Anyway, no way those two haven't come for big money, one way or another. You don't sign for £100m+ and become one of the worlds most expensive signings without being on a huge salary.

Idk about this, I think clubs look at these deals as all-in packages, and that larger upfront costs are likely often paired with lower ongoing costs. Particularly with younger players who haven't yet signed many pro contracts and so haven't incrementally built up a high starting wage. That will be a big part of why a club can drop £60m, £100m on players. What do we think Mudryk and Fernández were on at their previous clubs? Chelsea could likely have doubled, even tripled their wages without getting to six figures. I think there's next to no chance they're within £150k a week of our top earners.

Which, along with James getting a reported £240k a week, inclines me to agree with you that money probably isn't the problem here. A few months ago, the rumours were Mount didn't want to sign for 7 years and was looking for 4 or 5 instead. I'd guess something else is at play.

[boratsbrother]

No question that on top form Mason is worth a place in a title challenging level team!

However, he has become a very inconsistent player. His short passing has become sloppy, either under or over hitting them. His touch is erratic too as is shooting. 

To get back to being contenders again we need players who are very consistently at a 7-8 out of 10 level and sometimes hitting 9 or 10. All too often these days Mason is a 6 and sometimes a 7 or 8 which isn't really good enough. 

[JaneB]

Here's the thing for me.

Mason Mount is one of the very few players I feel an emotional connection to these days.  He's been our POTY two years running which must mean something, although I appreciate that his form has dipped.

The last player to win POTY two years running was Eden Hazard but it probably was time to let him go after that, as has been sadly proved.  The two years before that it was Juan Mata, after which Jose 'dumped' him which I never understood at the time and still regret.  Another terrific role model for the club and exciting player to watch.

You can argue that he didn't exactly set Man U on fire, but be that as it may, I would love to have continued seeing him play for us.

Cesc was another one but that's my hobbyhorse.  Everyone concentrating on what he could no longer do rather than what he could still produce.  

I just hope we don't make the same mistake with Mason.