2022/23 Anthony Gordon

[Baggzio]

There is no guarantee that selling him suddenly makes us stop being a shambles though. This isn't a straightforward decision for me.

There is a point where we probably have no choice but to accept the offer, say if they go above £50m. But we then need to reinvest the money very smartly to have a good chance of staying in the premier league. There is risks with that approach too.

I can't say that I trust Moshiri not to ruin things again but I am hoping he got a bit of a scare last season with his meddling. Since they've come in Thelwell and Lampard have done nothing but good business in my opinion, they've earned my trust to be able to reinvest any money into players that improve us, they've done that multiple times already this summer despite us being in money troubles.

 

[Neiler]

Honestly, I don't believe the Echo on this one. Bobble, Romano and Joyce all said there was a bid.

The echo will post what the club wants them to post mate, they are only useful in working out the clubs position.

 

[COYBL25]

You've been waiting for an opportunity to turn on Lampard. It's sad to see.

I`m glad this has been noticed by others, as there`s been a not so subtle shift in his narrative towards Lampard.

Every post, just takes it up a notch, that tiny bit more.

Although I mostly agree with him on his stance on selling Gordon, I`d wager that he`ll use it, as a catalyst to show his true colours over Lampard.

Sadly, this is still all about making a fool of himself over Bentez.

 

[jonnyboy316]

Yeah the only ones reporting that there's been no bid are the "bad" sources and people with connection to the club in terms of fan wise like Myers or the Echo but no real actual news sources. Actual journalists like Romano and Joyce who couldn't care less about saving face for the club are reporting there's been at least one bid. He'll go and it'll be for probably around that £50m that Chelsea are said to be preparing, the club want to get ahead of it though and present it as if they wish to keep him no matter what, when in all honesty they're probably happy to see him go at that sort of price.

I really do think the club would be insane to reject it out of hand, THEN offer him a new deal. We'd be further adding a limit to ourselves for no reason when if anything this could be the single moment in the past 2 and next 2 years that could set the club in motion for success and being run properly. This lad simply is not worth keeping if it means the club is still in shambles.

I think the demise of DCL actually forces us to selling Gordon. I think the plan was to sell DCL next summer to satisfy FFP but he is starting to look like a busted flush. If Gordon has a bad season and we get relegated this £50m becomes £25m next summer. If they think they can replace Gordon with two more productive players that will keep us in the league they have to do it. Sorry but this is where we are.

 

[Marius57]

The question Thelwell and Lampard really need to be asking themselves is:

If you took our current attack, minus Gordon, and had 50m to improve it, would they improve it by spending all 50m on Anthony Gordon?

Hang on, the decision is all on lampard and lampard alone isn't it @davek ?

 

[Martin Alvito]

50m up front should be the stance honestly. I mean, maybe not a lump of 50m but not "could reach". 50m and "could reach" 55.

It's debatably better to collect it over three years rather than one, from the perspective of compliance purposes. OTOH, inflation is a thing. Agreed that most prospective add-ons aren't likely to be worth the paper they're printed on, if their plan is to use him to push James.

 

[ForeverBlue92]

It's hilarious, isn't it? "We can't afford to lose him". Ha ha. We can't afford to keep him! If there is a bid in excess of 40m - and if we can drive it closer to 50m - then it's a no-brainer to cash in and reinvest. We are, basically, wondering whether or not we should accept a fee in the same ballpark as was received for Richarlison for a player with a negligible end product. It's incredible that people think we have a choice here.

The club would be very brave to reject such business because if we continue our poor run of form and there are not some serious attacking incomings between now and the close of the window, the manager, director of football, and the board will all be in the crosshairs of an irate fanbase.

If Lampard wants to keep Gordon, that's his call. But he will be judged on that. If results continue to fall off a cliff, well, the Super Frank stuff won't be long for this world.

This really - Moyes would have worked with what he had and if needed push come to shove would sacrifice a player and bring 3-4 in to make us overall stronger.

I dont want no excuses of "he's got no options" if Chelsea increase their bid and we turn it down.

 

[coollino]

It seems that some Everton fans are becoming nothing more than accountants with flares.

explains the fri-sunday cocaine influenced threads then

 

[N.S.N.O.]

Had the Board been prepared for the Richarlison sale, and lined up a Striker before the season started, then 40-50m for Gordon would be great business now.....as it stands, we cant afford to lose any decent forward player

 

[boris]

Then that's fine.

We aren't under pressure to sell.

It would be gross mismanagement to refuse £50 million for Gordon. Refusing the alleged £42 million is bad enough.

He’s not that good and our team would look no different at the moment with him in it or not.

A lot of fans didn’t want him in our current best 11 this week as it is.

 

[DanEFC92]

It would be gross mismanagement to refuse £50 million for Gordon. Refusing the alleged £42 million is bad enough.

He’s not that good and our team would look no different at the moment with him in it or not.

A lot of fans didn’t want him in our current best 11 this week as it is.

Wrong.

 

[catcherintherye]

….fascinating. I wondered if Gordon might be too much of a hometown boy to push for this at this stage of his career, be interesting how it develops.

I think players will go given the opportunity mate.

 

[andy4efc]

To what end though mate, bring in two good players lose a player who has the potential to be better than either and is likely younger and a million percent more passionate about the club.

If the lad your selling is broken like Rodwell was or an utter idiot like both Jeffers (coke head) and Barkley (nobhead) then yeah you can take it easily.

This is more like West Ham when they sold Rio, Lampard and Cole, I can't think of a situation where selling like this benefits a team ever.

We aren't broke, we are in a financial restrictions because of poor spending, you do t give this board the excuse of selling off the only positive things at the club to obfuscate their incompetence.

Same way we allowed Rooney to go all those years ago to paper over the fact it was Kenwrights mismanagement which meant we had to sell.

I’m not saying we are broke but yes we are restricted. For Me, as I said keeping or selling are both gambles. If we had a strong recruitment record I’d say yep take the money and reinvest. So that’s where the gamble comes because we definately have no idea what will happen with replacements.

It’s not like Gordon was bagging left right and centre, or even creating goals. He is a raw talent. Will he hit his peak with us? I don’t know. Will he with Chelsea? I don’t know.

50m is a lot of money for someone of his record.

I can see pros and cons with keeping and selling. There isn’t a definitive correct answer.

 

[catcherintherye]

Here's the thing though for me mate, my 7yo loves it when Gordon gets the ball, he's nit thinking how much he's worth or if he has a good season we can sell him for more etc. He just gets excited/happy watching him playing for us and the passion he shows.

If you remove that from football imo the games not worth bothering with

I think thats gone from football though mate, and has gone for a long time.

 

[wainy]

With fans like these..

Sorry I insulted his hair mate