Mount won't be going to Man U to be Fernandes' back up
"Mason, Bruno will play against City, Liverpool and Barcelona, but don't worry as you'll be in the side when we play Luton and Sheffield United."
I did say "mainly" to play in those less important matches. It depends what system is adopted too and whether Fernandes is injured. But the point it that they cannot depend on Fernandes playing 214 games in the next three years and by definition they haven't had a viable alternative in the last three years. The fact is that Mount has gone down the pecking order at Chelsea and would probably play as more at United than he has this season at Chelsea and more than he would next season had he stayed by virtue of the fact that Chelsea won't be in Europe. And probably on more money too which always helps.
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Kalvin Phillips?
Did they sign him as a back or as a replacement for Gundogan, give him a year to get up to speed etc? Grealish was often not first choice last season.
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Possibly not as backups but alternatives. One exception would be someone like Kalvin Phillips who, despite the £42m paid by City, has only started one PL match. There is, as you suggest, a pecking order though. Equally, what is this season's "go to" player isn't necessarily going to be the same next season. For example, typically last season Foden was first choice for the bigger matches and Grealish would come on as sub. This season has been the opposite. It's a good position to be in.
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Kalvin Phillips?
Did they sign him as a back or as a replacement for Gundogan, give him a year to get up to speed etc? Grealish was often not first choice last season.
Phillips was very open last week in his interview post celebrations that it has been a nightmare season for him. Guardiola has always, as you say, used a season to bed players into his ways but it's clear that he has had struggles adapting because usually players get far more playing time than Phillips has done. Perhaps it was partly that realisation the led Guardiola to shift Stones to midfield?
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Kalvin Phillips?
Did they sign him as a back or as a replacement for Gundogan, give him a year to get up to speed etc? Grealish was often not first choice last season.
Phillips was very open last week in his interview post celebrations that it has been a nightmare season for him. Guardiola has always, as you say, used a season to bed players into his ways but it's clear that he has had struggles adapting because usually players get far more playing time than Phillips has done. Perhaps it was partly that realisation the led Guardiola to shift Stones to midfield?
Leaving out the bed in season he has had an horrific season with injuries/illness as well. The world cup timing probably didn't help either. Surprised that one of the poster boys for Belisaball wasn't fit enough, I think there is probably more to the Philips situation than meets the eye. If Pepe had totally written him off he wouldn't be bringing him on for cameos here and there.
The Phillips situation feels more like Drinkwater or Barkley at Chelsea, or even Scott Parker at Chelsea 20 years ago, than Grealish last season. English players whose careers stalled after a move to a big club, and not getting game time.
Do big clubs actually sign "back ups", apart from Keepers?
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Kalvin Phillips?
Did they sign him as a back or as a replacement for Gundogan, give him a year to get up to speed etc? Grealish was often not first choice last season.
Phillips was very open last week in his interview post celebrations that it has been a nightmare season for him. Guardiola has always, as you say, used a season to bed players into his ways but it's clear that he has had struggles adapting because usually players get far more playing time than Phillips has done. Perhaps it was partly that realisation the led Guardiola to shift Stones to midfield?
Leaving out the bed in season he has had an horrific season with injuries/illness as well. The world cup timing probably didn't help either. Surprised that one of the poster boys for Belisaball wasn't fit enough, I think there is probably more to the Philips situation than meets the eye. If Pepe had totally written him off he wouldn't be bringing him on for cameos here and there.
There may well be other issues and I too don't think Guardiola has written him off but he only really trusted him for any meaningful game time when there was nothing at stake. He has had 200 minutes in 11 appearances in the PL with the score at the time for the games he featured in, in chronological order, 1-0 (4 mins), 3-0 (13 mins), 3-1 (3 mins), 4-0 (35 mins), 4-1 (9 mins), 3-0 (37 mins), 3-0 (1 min), 3-0 (2 mins) and then in the final two matches, once the PL had been won, 0-0 (90) and 1-1 (6).
The Phillips situation feels more like Drinkwater or Barkley at Chelsea, or even Scott Parker at Chelsea 20 years ago, than Grealish last season. English players whose careers stalled after a move to a big club, and not getting game time.
I think City's recruitment is more focused than Chelsea's.
The Phillips situation feels more like Drinkwater or Barkley at Chelsea, or even Scott Parker at Chelsea 20 years ago, than Grealish last season. English players whose careers stalled after a move to a big club, and not getting game time.
I think City's recruitment is more focused than Chelsea's.
I think even Charlton's is more focused than Chelsea's.
The scoreline was flattering, both teams were so open but Chelsea players couldn't hit a barn door. Even the first half they had 2 chances within 6 yards and missed the target on both (Havertz, Mudryk), also looked like Connor Gallagher was everywhere for the first half. Another day you could easy argue they should have been in front, but they have a real fear of scoring these days so didn't really challenge united even though had more possession, chances etc. funny old game, i mean they were bad but specifically defence, they actually played some good football at times just without getting the goal.
Proper coach and get rid of some of the players and get a different mood in the camp they could be dangerous next year and still might challenge top 4 if Poch gets it right.
I just wished the season had another 10 games as watching the Chelsea meltdown is the most enjoyable thing I've seen in football for years. Just a shame it won't be repeated next season.
Just the £283m spent in January, to produce a team that might have been in relegation trouble if they'd started the season under Tuchel worse
The odd thing is, you could argue some of them looked like good signings. Enzo for one, was really touted and also looking at his maps for Argentina and previous club and his passing ranges you thought he would fit in. Mudryk again looked like he was going to be a good one, Madueke was always a bit hit or miss for me has the pace but doesn't really know what to do with it. I am not going to go through all of the above, a couple i haven't seen and / or haven't even heard off, but initially it looked like some good business.
I would like to add, i have loved every minute of them struggling and long may it continue... although i do think there will be a drastic improvement next season.
Comments
I mean City didn't even sign Alverz just as Haaland's back up, did they. Its competition and sometimes they both start. Even in the situation where one of them is clearly the best player in the world in his position.
At the moment United's first 11 is very good but it falls off a cliff when they make 3 or 4 changes. Champions league football, they tale the cups seriously they would play about 60 odd games a season.
Signing Mount would allow them to rest Bruno and play them both together. We are talking about a champions league winning England international. Even if he wouldn't get in there Champions League final preferred 11 he would still probably play 50 times, injury permitting.
Huge summer ahead for Pochettino. They need him in rapidly so he can get to work on who he wants to get rid of.
Proper coach and get rid of some of the players and get a different mood in the camp they could be dangerous next year and still might challenge top 4 if Poch gets it right.
I would like to add, i have loved every minute of them struggling and long may it continue... although i do think there will be a drastic improvement next season.
Man City: LLLLLL
Liverpool: DDLLDD
Man U: DDDDDL
Arsenal: LLWLLL
Makes some interesting reading that
From the big guns, they’re by far my two least favourite teams.
Too depressing for words.