People compare Havertz and Mount, Arteta at least knows what he’s doing with Havertz whether you agree or disagree with him. He’s trying to get the best out of his signing whereas bald fraud has no idea why he signed the likes of Mount, Antony, Malacia, etc etc

  • Regular-Weird-0991@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    besides the English media that loves spinning stories, who says this narrative is true?? They even gave him the number 7 shirt. Seems like a very pre-Ten Hag United transfer. I believe there’s more to this story because based on what we saw last season, it doesn’t make any sense!

  • jasveron@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    Obviously he saw Mount as Eriksen’s replacement. A more energetic and young version to play the deeper role. But it didn’t work as expected.

    I now appreciate that Eriksen actually did a great job last season, all things considered.

    As for Mount, he took’s Eriksen’s place earlier in the season but the injuries didn’t help. I assume when our back four got more stable ETH will try again.

  • RedKingDre@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    I had to remove all of Ten Hag’s signings at the start of my FM24 Mobile (as I don’t have any other device to play, yeah I’m poor). Man… United career with In-Game Editor. That’s how fearful I am with the prospect of working with the overpriced and unsuitable signings. Even Onana was no exception.

  • Federal_Natural_2755@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    Probably part of the agent fees went to his pockets. All his transfers are very expensive for either mediocre or finished football wise players.

  • Cautious_Homework_10@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    I think the idea was to play him alongside Bruno, press really high up and overwhelm the defence. However Wolves showed in the first game of the season that if you just chip it past the first line then you’re running directly at an isolated, aging Casemiro. The Spurs game it worked a bit better, then Mount got injured, and the idea was scrapped. Now Mount is kind of a spare part with no defined role other than play back up to Bruno, who rarely misses a game. I’m baffled by the whole situation really. I can see the merit and realising something isn’t working and changing it but spending a lot of money on a player that you’ve got a very specific plan for, and then giving up on it after two games? Madness.

  • ozairh18@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    I don’t know if this is true or not but apparently Mount’s father pushed for him to be sold to Manchester United more than him

  • NotAnotherBadTake@alien.topBEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    Optimistic/sensible answer: ETH needed depth in that bench too. Man U subs were lacking and if they really wanted to get on City’s level they needed a bench as efficient as the first team.

    Realistic answer: Man U has had a pretty lacking transfer/scouting strategy and they felt the pressure to sign a big name before the window closed. Also, Chelsea just knows how to market their players and sell them.