Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

2022/23 Dwight McNeil

Status
Not open for further replies.

The lack of top end speed on the right flank is not an issue if you have an athletic Fullback (Patterson) and athletic number 9 (peak Dom) and a quick play on the opposite flank (Gordon/Gray). However, not only is we slow he is also not agile. We have had slow wide players before who have been successful because they are strong technically, high IQ and agile. Examples would be Peanuts and Arteta when he joined and he played wide. Both were nimble and could create space and link up well. Hamez was slower than McNeil and also one footed but he had top level technique and intelligence. We need to be patience but this one is a little worrying. The positive thing is even if he flops there is a market with Dwight where we get back a large portion of what we paid and the wages will be pretty modest so it was fairly low risk
 
The lack of top end speed on the right flank is not an issue if you have an athletic Fullback (Patterson) and athletic number 9 (peak Dom) and a quick play on the opposite flank (Gordon/Gray). However, not only is we slow he is also not agile. We have had slow wide players before who have been successful because they are strong technically, high IQ and agile. Examples would be Peanuts and Arteta when he joined and he played wide. Both were nimble and could create space and link up well. Hamez was slower than McNeil and also one footed but he had top level technique and intelligence. We need to be patience but this one is a little worrying. The positive thing is even if he flops there is a market with Dwight where we get back a large portion of what we paid and the wages will be pretty modest so it was fairly low risk
Low risk is signing Haaland for £50 million and £300k a week.
High risk is signing a player for your front 3 that has scored about 5 goals in 3 years.
 
Low risk is signing Haaland for £50 million and £300k a week.
High risk is signing a player for your front 3 that has scored about 5 goals in 3 years.
Yes but to put into context Bolasie had comparable stats and we paid significantly more and fees have inflated since. Bolasie was also 27 so no resale
 
For every Iwobi… there’s a dozen like Tosun, Klaasen, Sandro, et al who start crap and remain crap.

Maybe we can work on his defensive side even more, and turn him into a left back. At the moment I’d have Andros Townsend, when he returns on one leg, in place of him.
 
It's not his fault, as he didn't ask to be bought, but when I see him I see one of the main reasons we're completely 'kin gummy in attack. Spending £20M on a player who's very limited - to put it politely - which was cash that could have been used to bring a goal scorer in.

How in earth did someone think that he was a priority?

We'll now hope that the club can rectify that catastrophic error by getting lucky in January with a striker who can put the ball away.
 

Still more Simon Davies than Andre Kanchelskis. Does he suffer with shin splints etc? Trying to figure out why he appears so lightweight and easily removed of possession of the ball. Doesn't seem tricky either, I acknowledge its been a lone furrow to trudge up front with little to hit.
 
It's not his fault, as he didn't ask to be bought, but when I see him I see one of the main reasons we're completely 'kin gummy in attack. Spending £20M on a player who's very limited - to put it politely - which was cash that could have been used to bring a goal scorer in.

How in earth did someone think that he was a priority?

We'll now hope that the club can rectify that catastrophic error by getting lucky in January with a striker who can put the ball away.

….its a point I made at the time; with limited spend it was really important and a prioritisation we brought in an effective striker option.

It was a huge error not spending monies on an effective striker before the season started & when we eventually did bring one in he didn’t fit the system we play.
 
….its a point I made at the time; with limited spend it was really important and a prioritisation we brought in an effective striker option.

It was a huge error not spending monies on an effective striker before the season started & when we eventually did bring one in he didn’t fit the system we play.
The most appalling thing for me was the last week of that summer window: the BS stories that Everton were looking to bring in another striker. A complete fabrication. Now we pay for it.
 
It's not his fault, as he didn't ask to be bought, but when I see him I see one of the main reasons we're completely 'kin gummy in attack. Spending £20M on a player who's very limited - to put it politely - which was cash that could have been used to bring a goal scorer in.

How in earth did someone think that he was a priority?

We'll now hope that the club can rectify that catastrophic error by getting lucky in January with a striker who can put the ball away.
And who is going to supply this Striker?

You keep crying for a Striker, yet we dont create chances.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Back
Top