Mason Mount and Chelsea – how the perfect marriage fizzled out in divorce

It is the summer sale of 2023 that will most divide opinion among the Chelsea fanbase: Mason Mount is now a Manchester United player.

There have been several departures already since the longed-for end of 2022-23 as Chelsea go about trimming their squad and reducing the wage bill. Champions League 2020-21 winners Kai Havertz, N'Golo Kante, Mateo Kovacic and Edouard Mendy have gone, too, and Kalidou Koulibaly's career with the club has lasted less than 12 months.

More squad members are sure to follow before the window shuts on September 1, but it is Chelsea's decision to sell Mount to United for £55million ($70m), with the potential of another £5million to come in add-ons, which will draw the most scrutiny.

Mount was considered one of the brightest jewels produced by Chelsea's academy, having joined the club at the age of six. He is a two-time Chelsea player of the year — an honour bestowed upon him by fan voting — and the man who provided the perfect pass for Havertz to score the winner in that Champions League final two years ago. He had long been tipped as a future Chelsea captain.

Having turned 24 in January, his best seasons are surely still ahead of him — but those peak years will now largely be watched by those inside Old Trafford, not Stamford Bridge.

Mount will wear No 7 at Manchester United (Photo: Manchester United)

Inevitably, the blame game is underway.

Many supporters are questioning how Chelsea's owners failed to agree a new contract with Mount and ended up selling him to a direct Premier League rival. Others among the fanbase see his exit as an act of betrayal — something that can never be forgiven. The arguments are entrenched on both sides. Yet, inevitably, the reasons behind this parting of ways are far more nuanced.

As United rejoice in getting the midfielder they wanted and Chelsea contemplate a future without their homegrown poster boy, The Athletic attempts to explain how it has come to this…

In July 2019, Chelsea announced that Mount, so impressive during a year-long loan at Derby County of the Championship the previous season, had signed a new five-year contract.

As he posed for a picture alongside the club's then-director Marina Granovskaia, Mount was being rewarded with a salary in the region of £80,000 per week. That is a healthy sum for a 19-year-old yet to make a senior appearance for you in a competitive game, but it was soon made to look like an absolute bargain. Mount became a mainstay of the first team during that season — something which remained the case, fitness permitting, until his sale.

Mount signs his Chelsea contract with Granovskaia (Photo: Clive Howes – Chelsea FC/Chelsea FC via Getty Images)

Despite that fact, he was one of the lower-paid senior players at Stamford Bridge and watched a succession of players sign for the club on significantly higher wages over the next few years but struggle to make an impact on the pitch to justify the club's outlay — not least Romelu Lukaku in the summer of 2021, who was paid £340,000 a week as he scored 15 goals in 44 appearances before returning to Inter Milan on loan 10 months later.

Mount's next contract at Chelsea was always going to have to address this disparity and the prickly issue of a pay rise would inevitably surface.

Yet no new deal was forthcoming under the previous ownership of Roman Abramovich. There was a bit of talk after the Champions League triumph in 2021 about sitting down to discuss the extension Mount's form merited, but nothing formal ever materialised. Nor did the player look to capitalise on his role in that success by demanding talks over a new deal on improved terms. If he had, the ownership might have been more receptive to confronting the issue.

Perhaps Chelsea were more focused at the time on convincing Antonio Rudiger and Andreas Christensen to commit their own long-term futures to the club, given the two centre-backs were entering the final 12 months of their respective deals. Maybe, too, there was an element of complacency from those in power at the club. Mount had such strong emotional ties to Chelsea, after all. Surely he would stay — no matter what?

Rudiger and Christensen battle Aguero (Photo: Shaun Botterill/Getty Images)

By early 2022, Chelsea had other issues with which to contend.

The sanctioning of Abramovich in the March as part of the UK government's response to his Russian homeland's invasion of Ukraine left the club in limbo. They could not do any meaningful business. New contracts could not be discussed with any player until the club was sold.

In other words, the Todd Boehly-Clearlake Capital consortium inherited the Mount issue when they completed their purchase of Chelsea on May 30.

As The Athletic had reported a month before, the uncertainty over Chelsea's future — and whether they would be able to compete for honours as regularly under whoever the new owner(s) turned out to be — had already made Mount a transfer target for three of the Premier League's biggest clubs. They all spotted an opportunity.

And, yes, Manchester United were among that trio.

Yet it was interest that the Boehly-Clearlake consortium was determined to resist.

The incoming owners could not quite compute what had been permitted to happen with Rudiger and Christensen — two current internationals who ended up departing for Real Madrid and Barcelona as free agents. As far as they were concerned, history would not be allowed to repeat itself.

The new regime at Chelsea did not waste any time making it clear how important Mount was to them.

While the takeover was officially completed after the conclusion of that 2021-22 season, most of the consortium attended a few games at Stamford Bridge on the run-in. Boehly had also been to the training ground to talk to the squad and had spoken to Mount.

Before contract talks had even officially begun, the England midfielder was being told how he was regarded as the face of the club, as someone who could be marketed heavily by the owners back home in the United States. His image would help promote Chelsea even more in the future than it already was — club sponsors regularly asked for him to be involved in promotions. He was comfortable with that aspect of his job. In-house media often made the most of him, too.

Mount's thinking was clear during Chelsea's pre-season tour in the U.S. that summer. Yes, there had been interest expressed by rival clubs, but he was not contemplating anything other than extending his stay at Chelsea. As he told The Athletic: “I have two years left on my contract and I'm very, very happy here. Those (contract) talks will hopefully be starting soon.”

Chelsea's new owners address the squad (Photo: Darren Walsh/Chelsea FC via Getty Images)

Those negotiations duly began. Mount was now being represented by his father, Tony, having separated from long-standing agent David Manasseh. However, the same lawyer who helped Kevin De Bruyne negotiate a very lucrative contract extension with Manchester City in 2021 was hired to help the family during discussions.

This was a frantic time for Chelsea's new ownership. They were confronting their first transfer window while being footballing novices after Granovskaia and the technical director, Petr Cech, left the club. Boehly made himself interim sporting director to help negotiate deals. Fellow co-owners Behdad Eghbali and Jose E Feliciano were heavily involved, too.

Raheem Sterling arrived from Manchester City in the July and was put on a salary of over £300,000 per week. Koulibaly joined from Napoli the same month and was making more than £200,000 per week. Neither of the contracts they signed included clauses that would see them take a percentage pay cut should Chelsea fail to qualify for the Champions League.

After signing Sterling and Koulibaly, the ownership's stance on contracts changed as they sought to control a spiralling annual wage bill. From now on in, it was determined, every contract for a new signing or extension for an existing squad member would include such a Champions League clause — as well as others related to playing time, starts made and the like.

This applied to Mount's fellow academy graduate Reece James, who was made the highest-paid defender in the club's history last September when he agreed a six-year deal.

Chelsea's subsequent failure to qualify for any form of European football, let alone the Champions League — they traipsed in 12th in the 20-club Premier League, their lowest finish since coming 14th in 1993-94 — means James' salary will drop in the coming season.

James and Mount (Photo: Tim Goode/EMPICS/PA Images via Getty Images)

James' decision to agree to those terms is a key moment in this saga.

Firstly, the club saw it as a sign of the commitment to the cause they later expected of Mount. Secondly, they were prepared to offer Mount a similar salary to James', but not more. They considered the duo to be at the same level and were ready to reward them accordingly.

Talks with the Mounts had begun in the July, at around the same time James and his representatives had started their negotiations. There were suggestions Mount was asking for around £300,000 per week — claims that have always been denied by his camp. But, while they may not have issued specific salary demands, the Mounts were looking for wages closer to the higher earners at the club.

Knowing newcomers Sterling and Koulibaly plus other team-mates signed by the previous regime did not have the Champions League clause in their deals was an early bone of contention. The length of any new contract was another. With Chelsea wanting to ensure players committed for more than five years, Mount was left contemplating a deal that might take him into his 30s. This could very well be the last big contract of his career.

Inevitably, both sides have different accounts of what happened during this period.

Mount's camp claim the first official offer from Chelsea came in August and represented a £30,000 per week increase on his base salary. Sources at Chelsea who, like all those contacted by The Athletic for this article were granted anonymity to protect relationships, deny this and insist four or five offers were made between then and November, all of a similar length and financial package to that signed by James in the September. Mount's side argue this was not the case and only two were proposed during this period.

Whoever you believe regarding this negotiation back and forth, what is not in doubt is how close it came to ending with a positive outcome. In November, as The Athletic reported at the time, a breakthrough of sorts was made — with many of the factors being verbally settled.

Such was the confidence something would soon be formalised, Boehly contemplated travelling out to Qatar, where Mount was training with England ahead of the World Cup, to get the contract signed. Instead, Mount made it clear he wanted to focus on the tournament.

It is also doubtful England manager Gareth Southgate would have wanted club matters encroaching on his team's preparations for the finals, so the idea was quickly shelved.

Mount has earned 36 caps under Southgate (Photo: Eddie Keogh – The FA/The FA via Getty Images)

As far as Mount's team were concerned, there were a few issues still unresolved anyway; not least the issue of image rights. They argue that requests were made to see a copy of the agreement, but it was never received. This was one of the issues that held things up.

Sources at Chelsea deny image rights were a problem and question whether the delay was actually born of the hope Mount might enjoy an excellent World Cup and return with his reputation enhanced, strengthening his hand when it came to negotiating an even better contract.

Whether that was part of the family's plan or not, the World Cup did not go as well as wished. Mount lost his place in the starting line-up after a goalless draw with the United States in the second group game and played only 25 minutes in the subsequent three matches as Southgate's team were knocked out at the quarter-final stage.

Still, the intention was to resume talks in January and Mount's camp were optimistic a deal would be struck that month.

But, rather than reaching a speedy resolution, that was actually when things went truly awry…

There was surprise when, instead of meeting with the co-owners to resume negotiations, Tony Mount found himself asked to attend one with Paul Winstanley, Chelsea's new co-sporting director, instead. That felt like a return to square one — a suspicion which became reality when the family discovered the contract offer which had been so close to being agreed upon had now been withdrawn.

They now questioned how much Mount was still wanted at Chelsea. Those doubts were exacerbated when they were made aware that the club had adopted a “sign, or we will sell you in the summer” policy. That had the whiff of an ultimatum.

Chelsea, for their part, felt like they had to take a strong stance. They had been burned before, with memories of the departures of Rudiger and Christensen still raw. They could not risk Mount following suit and leaving for nothing next summer.

Then there was the reality that Mount was having his worst season since breaking into the first team. The club maintained that his displays on the pitch did not justify him being paid higher wages than, for example, James.

(Photo: Mateo Villalba/Quality Sport Images/Getty Images)

Mount's lack of form was not disputed on his side. Though, in truth, no one at Chelsea was performing well at the time.

The player could argue there were mitigating circumstances over his lack of impact. He had thrived under Thomas Tuchel, the coach who had been fired abruptly in early September. The uncertainty over his future was a distraction, but Mount Snr could still approach any meeting with the hierarchy armed with data compiled from the previous three seasons, which demonstrated the level of impact his son had made on the team.

That was a more accurate gauge of his qualities than the blip he and the entire team were enduring under Graham Potter.

With negotiations stalling, Mount's father turned to agent Neil Fewings to offer a different voice in the talks. Chelsea saw this change as a sign of Mount preparing for an exit, especially as Fewings had good relations with Liverpool, one of the clubs keen on signing him.

There was one more offer made — in February.

That was worth around £200,000 per week, but it was effectively only for an additional 12 months. Mount's team saw this as a cynical ploy to ensure Chelsea could ask for a bigger fee this summer and rejected it out of hand.

As you would expect, Chelsea argue their motives were very different.

With Mount admitting he was finding things difficult on the pitch amid the uncertainty over his future, the short-term deal was offered to relieve some of the pressure with a view to revisiting discussions over a longer agreement later in the year. Chelsea sources have told The Athletic that contract also came with a release clause worth £70million, which would have allowed him to leave this summer if he so wished. Significantly, though, that sum is £10million more than Manchester United agreed to pay (including the £5million in add-ons).

Looking back now, that was the line in the sand moment.

With Mount starting to explore his options, Chelsea were left with the impression he had already decided to leave, so did not see any point in making any more contract offers. Conversely, Mount regarded the club's actions as a sign they had no great desire to retain him.

Boehly had a conversation with Mount in April as part of one last charm offensive, although his camp argue nothing of substance was discussed in it, so the scenario remained unchanged.

Perhaps it is no surprise that, of all his suitors, Manchester United were the ones to prise Mount away.

Their manager, Erik ten Hag, had sought to sign Mount on loan with an option to buy while in charge of Ajax in 2018 — a request which was given short shrift. But the fact the Dutchman has been an admirer for so long would have helped convince the player to choose a move to Old Trafford.

The financial terms he's accepted in Manchester are thought to be better than those offered by Chelsea, but he would still have earned more had he seen his contract out in the coming season and then been reunited with Tuchel at Bayern Munich instead.

And so we arrive at the point where Mount is paraded at United, wearing the red shirt.

Despite everything that has happened, attempts have been made on both sides to separate on respectful terms. Mount Snr and the co-owners spoke last week, a conversation which played a role in shifting the impasse over the bidding process and ensuring an acceptable deal for all was struck with United.

(Photo: Manchester United/Manchester United via Getty Images)

The social media posts from Mount, regardless of how long ago the video was recorded and the colour of his hair in it, and those from Chelsea were full of appreciation. “I know some of you won't be happy with my decision,” said Mount, “but it's what's right for me at this moment in my career.”

Mount is of the opinion United are in a better position to challenge for major honours now. Unlike Chelsea, Ten Hag's side will compete in the Champions League in the coming season and a potential takeover remains on the cards at Old Trafford, too.

In contrast, Chelsea have a lot more rebuilding to do. Mount has seen that victorious 2020-21 team ripped up, with only Thiago Silva, Ben Chilwell and James left from the starting XI that night against Manchester City in Porto (Cesar Azpilicueta's departure to Atletico Madrid is imminent).

Contrary to suggestions Chelsea needed to get the transfer done by June 30 to count towards the next financial accounts, the club understood Mount's desire to be at United for the start of their pre-season this week. This did not mean they were prepared to sell him on the cheap, as their rejection of three prior bids demonstrated, but there was little to gain from having Mount report for pre-season with them when his mind was clearly elsewhere.

As part of a farewell statement on Mount's departure, Boehly, Eghbali and Feliciano said: “Mason is a consummate professional and a popular figure at the club. We want to thank him for all his efforts on and off the pitch throughout his time at Chelsea.”

There had been very little accord over the past 12 months as a partnership that once thrived became strained.

In the end, the only thing all sides ended up agreeing on was that the time was right for a parting of ways.

(Top photo: Darren Walsh/Chelsea FC via Getty Images)