Three times Manchester United have tried to buy Mason Mount. Three times they have failed. Now, they really must walk away.
Their latest offer, worth a guaranteed £50million with a further £5million in add-ons, was rejected by Chelsea on Friday night. The Blues countered once more by telling United that £58million, and the possibility of another £7million in add-ons, would buy them the England midfielder. They also offered to meet in person to thrash out the details. That’s nice, isn’t it?
United, though, really must decline the invite to sit down with their Chelsea counterparts and indulge them any further. For the sake of this deal, and others to come.
Primarily because United have made a very reasonable offer. Three, in fact. Mount is a year from the end of his contract and signalled that he has no intention of renewing his deal, certainly not at the terms on offer. Even if Chelsea were to come up – way up – it seems Mount has had enough and he wants to move on.
Mateo Kovacic was in a similar position and Chelsea have accepted £30million from Manchester City for the Croatia midfielder. Granted, Kovacic is five years Mount’s senior, but that does not justify valuing the latter at twice the price of the former. There is no precedent for Chelsea’s demand with Mount in the position he currently is.
But this is a face-saving mission almost as much as it is about the money for the Blues. Todd Boehly doesn’t want to be seen to be the man who lost Mount, an academy graduate and one of the Shed End’s favourites in recent years. He and the Chelsea hierarchy need to be able to show the supporters that, for ‘one of their own’, they got a great deal.
That’s not United’s concern and the Red Devils must recognise that they have offered more than one. Given their record with transfers, there is little faith outside Old Trafford that those inside inside fully understand their place in the market and how they are perceived.
Many view them as a soft touch and Chelsea certainly seem to have them down as a patsy. The cap fits. When was the last time United got a really good deal, either for a purchase or a sale?
With Mount, they started too big, knowing that any opening offer was sure to be rejected by Chelsea for a figure many fans are loathe to lose. For this player, in these circumstances, £40million was a quite reasonable offer. United should have worked up to there rather than from there.
Then, having fallen for Chelsea’s spiel, they chucked in £10million on top of that. Then another £5million more. No wonder Chelsea are so keen to meet United. It’s would be hard to properly pull their pants down via fax.
We asked why Arsenal don’t just pay £10million more for Declan Rice and some impatient United fans, safe in the knowledge that it’s not their money, would urge the Red Devils to do the same. But there are key differences. Arsenal are in a bidding war; United seem to be bidding against themselves. Rice would be a transformative signing for Arsenal. Mount, useful though he would be to Erik ten Hag, is unlikely to be a Casemiro.
Arsenal keep repeating their same mistake, and so too do United. Arsenal are forever missing out on their top targets; United keep overpaying for theirs.
If United go back with a fourth offer, any club who receives a call about their goalkeeper or centre-forward, like Atalanta might regarding Rasmus Hojlund, will be licking their lips. Hard. Even more so than they already are in anticipation of hearing from United once more. The last time Atlanta heard from United, they sold them a barely-tested rookie for £40million.
Serious people might approach Chelsea on Thursday, a day before their financial end-of-year, and repeat their second offer. If Chelsea have shifted enough deadwood to make the arrival of July 1 any less of an FFP cluster-f*ck, fine. Leave it until the end of August. By which time the offer ought to have fallen by the £10million they added between bids one and two. Even then, Chelsea would be getting a damn good deal.
Read next: Havertz (+£40.2m), Koulibaly (-£7m): Chelsea profit/loss and book values ahead of June 30 deadline
