Mason Mount: What is he good at, and what does the future beckons?
Why is Mount good?
Mason Mount’s numbers and versatility means he’s equally important in terms of creating chances as he is to progress the ball.
Team mates look for him, and he brings the ball into the box.
The ability to be able to produce fairly good numbers whilst his ultimate best role might yet to be defined can’t be discarded. His versatility (and constant availability) nails him as a starter.
Mount represents the best of what an Academy can engineer, players aren't naturally mastering every possible way to receive the ball, read pressing triggers and understand any tactical role with an athletic engine to repeat high intensity sprints.
There's an environment to develop that; taking it for granted is a welcome invitation to see how many clubs are able to engineer club-trained full internationals maximising every bit of athletic/tactical ability they've got.
Academies don't decide or plan to "produce" a Bellingham, Mbappé.
They knock at the door because they turn out to live next door (otherwise surely Birmingham City would have kept their academy open if these players grow on trees? - yes they reopened it)
Academies can engineer a Mount or Rice, who are top end players.
They are because they're full English Internationals and not Conference League footballers.
Why is Mount valued?
The reason why Mount is a guaranteed starter for club and country so far is that he interprets space like few do thanks to his ability to recognize available space and be complementary to a variety of attackers.
He might merge the best of Oscar and Willian, through their workrate off the ball and ability to help the team retain possession in final third.
Just like very good players such as Paul Pogba or Cesc Fàbregas, Mason Mount might be torn apart at times (not only by the brightest critics) in that he’s both the team’s best creator, and passer in build-up.
Put it simply, as you can’t clone them, it’s not sustainable to expect them to deliver both the ball progression aspect to bring it into final third, and the creating around the box.
First from an athletic point of view (albeit his energy supply is equally impressive as other Cobham Academy players).
And secondly because build up is supposed to inbalance (=find a player facing play before he's closed down) whilst the target attacker finds separation to be found in his preferred situation.
The same guy doing both and carrying the burden alone is just drawing more attention to himself from opposing defences.
What does the future beckons?
Several things are simultaneously true
Academy maximising internal opportunities with scouting, player development to "engineer" a Mason Mount (this is *elite* player development) means he's part of the picture at first team level.
Still questioning if Mount belongs is flat-earth-ism at that point.
At club level, taking external opportunities to sign Jérémie Boga (97), Charlie Musonda (96), trialing Pulisic (98), Lucas Piazon (94), Nathan, Danilo Pantic (96), Kasey Palmer (96), Mukhtar Ali (97), Quintero (97) in the attacking midfield positions means that the club was never centred on itself (just like any succesful business isn't either) and always looked to provide concurrence via emulation.
Years don't quite overlap with Mount (99), but point still stands
That revolving door policy of shiny new attackers is also part of the making of Mason Mount, who's had to continuously prove (and, eventually outperform) to show he still belongs.
Just like "sit down fat boy" Lampard did, coached by his uncle.
There's not enough words to say how the "lottery ticket winner", "homegrown quota" narrative is off the mark so it's hard to reach the top of the pyramid (taking into account everyone who didn't in the process.).
Top clubs also look for elite attackers at first team level, a 60m Pulisic, a 100m Joao Felix, a 89m Kai Havertz.
Theoretically if these were delivering according to their status, Mount would be a rotation attacker (on coherent wages in terms of stucture).
Point is, they're not delivering, and Mount does; hence why he plays.
Liverpool had Salah and Mané, and their rotation attackers were options the likes of Shaqiri, Minamino, Oxlade-Chamberlain, now Fabio Carvalho, Harvey Elliott. Their only "local" option (there's no xenophobism here, simply wage structure pragmatism to be able to offer Salah 300k/week at 30) would be Curtis Jones (who's quite good for that, on a reported 15k/week).
Mount does a bit of what AOC, Elliott, Carvalho, Jones do; at a better level because he's the one on the match (and stats) sheet and in the England NT.
That Mount's contract discussions stalemate for one year is the result of two years that can't be erased, during which he outperformed high(er)-earners under "clueless favouritist" Lampard and "elite mastermind tactician" Tuchel.
Mount is entitled to ask for the same pay as those he outperformed.
Hiring an agent might mean wanting more experience in order to get a stronger leverage in negociations, which doesn’t AUTOMATICALLY mean he wants to leave.
The club is right to ponder what it would mean in terms of wage structure. Plans are plans, but goalposts don't move, player performance still speaks for itself and is ultimately and always going to be the most important factor
Clubs are often seen as the “victim” of “ill-advised” players, but many seem to forget that lowballing contract offers for people to refuse them is common practice in football.
It is very likely that a Liverpool, possibly even Arsenal or City come knocking. It is however not likely that Mount would be offered 300k/week terms like Sterling, Salah earn. He'd still increase his current 80k/week (that's the point of transfers)
That's the perpetual conundrum of talent evaluation; do you prefer the more gifted elite player on paper (who sometimes doesn't adapt), or the local one who doesn't need to?
Granted the question is easier to andwer speaking about a 10-goal 10-assist midfielder who doesn't take pens and delivers to a fairly good standard (and already played in every European final bar the Eurovision, winning 3/4 until he delivers his own version of "In The Way" by The Brothers Johnson.)
"The victim of circumstance" → - not Mason Mount
"In thinking he's found his only chance" → Not Mason Mount
"Something not entirely real" → Not Mason Mount's stats
Yin, Yang, Willian, Oscar and Premier League Titles
Mason Mount’s numbers and versatility means he’s equally important in terms of creating chances as he is to progress the ball.
Oscar and Fàbregas won Chelsea the 2015 title because as the former (10) dropped into midfield, the latter (8) went for a jog, "forget about me". And somehow moments later, Fàbregas found himself facing forward 25 yards from goal. Oscar and Willian's self-less movement to fill space was the yin to the yang that was Hazard and Fàbregas and Hazard getting on the ball repeatedely, off 20-goal Diego Costa.
Attacking sequences don't breed, two attackers don't mean that opportunities multiply.
If you want to maximise one getting the ball a lot, there has to be a counterpart / decoy vacating and occupying key space. Whilst being a sufficient threat himself to put defences into having to answer, "do we track 100-million footballer João Felix, or Chelsea's top scorer/assist provider the past two seasons?"
That split second (that Mount or Felix can actually afford to exploit) is the reason why they do things.
Mount’s role under Tuchel
Mount's role under Tuchel (mostly starting from the right 10 position) leaned more and more towards the right side to create space, and link up with James. More on that later, but it raises questions as to how much it was by design or essence.
In the sense that considering not much happened centrally (Werner still doing a bit of playmaking between two offside runs), going down the "Mount passes wide, drags the double team, James cuts inside" rotation play was quite frequently how attacks unfolded, as his passmaps suggest.
Double figures in 2021-22
In terms of pure numbers however, Mount's 11 goal, 1/2.9 shots on target (p90) and 13% conversion season had him double his tally and conversion ratio from 2020/21 (6 goals 5 assists, 6%)
Getting his first double figures season (10 assists) can only bring more parralels with his illustrious predecessor (and former manager) whose work ethic (and ultimately, numbers) was (already) the answer to a deluge of criticism from sections of fans, some from his own club.
But are "jack of all trades" less useful than "misprofiled talent"?
Shame you can't trade excuses for numbers, because Mount has plenty of them to back him up. Numbers that is.
This is an extract from my big Tuchel dossier
What went wrong for Tuchel at Chelsea
