Everton January 2025 Transfer Thread

[chippy1722]

I would questions Friedman’s business sense if they came in and got rid of everyone.
For a club who sail close to the psr to sack Dyche and his team and pay them off when they can replace in the summer do free, would make no business sense at all. Personally I would be happy for them to get rid now but I done see the sense. The money we would save could help Thelwell buy another flop.

 

[yorkiebarkidmark3]

why would they renew thellwell?

surely it will be a total clear

he’s done a decent job with most signings in very difficult circumstances i think personally he deserves a chance to do it under proper owners

 

[Neiler]

Maybe you're correct but there is a fair bit of talk about Paratici who's ban apparently ends next June, he is only on restricted duties now. If it was to be someone like that we don't know that TFG haven't already asked him to give an overview of what he would do with us. We will have to just wait and see on this one I think.

Could be right mate. However I’d suggest again ideally, some continuity would be desired in terms of change, but that’s just ideally how you manage change theoretically ideally - but I’m speculating, I’m presuming we all anticipate Dyche to go.

I find the director of football position curious, say the went for Paratici - do you then give him authority to go out and find a manager that he is compatible with and progress the plan, if so be interesting to see who someone like that would pick and ho2 it would land here.

 

[Neiler]

but we’re a mess mate and it needs to start from the top whole lot

maybe over a period but needs doing

Ideally you want incremental change.

Seems two things are a given, a new board, a new manager, a new ground - ideally you’d like some continuity in there to stabilise and support the transition systemically.

Changing everything top to bottom can seem like a good idea but it’s often not.

 

[Zatara]

Could be right mate. However I’d suggest again ideally, some continuity would be desired in terms of change, but that’s just ideally how you manage change theoretically ideally - but I’m speculating, I’m presuming we all anticipate Dyche to go.

I find the director of football position curious, say the went for Paratici - do you then give him authority to go out and find a manager that he is compatible with and progress the plan, if so be interesting to see who someone like that would pick and ho2 it would land here.

Its well known Paratici and Conte get on very well. With that being the case i think its logical that we could see another top italian manager join.

 

[Aries]

I would questions Friedman’s business sense if they came in and got rid of everyone.
For a club who sail close to the psr to sack Dyche and his team and pay them off when they can replace in the summer do free, would make no business sense at all. Personally I would be happy for them to get rid now but I done see the sense. The money we would save could help Thelwell buy another flop.

That’s completely results oriented. It would make absolutely no business sense to keep him if the club looks in serious danger of dropping over sacking him and paying him off. The financial difference in a pay off compared to the cost of relegation is monumental.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

I would questions Friedman’s business sense if they came in and got rid of everyone.
For a club who sail close to the psr to sack Dyche and his team and pay them off when they can replace in the summer do free, would make no business sense at all. Personally I would be happy for them to get rid now but I done see the sense. The money we would save could help Thelwell buy another flop.

I posted about this in the Dyche thread but IMO it is total false economy to hang onto a manager who isn’t getting performances simply to avoid paying compensation. The amount a poor manager could cost you over two thirds of a season way eclipses that cost.

For context, the amount to sack Dyche would be covered by two additional places in the league. If Dyche had done his job properly and brought on fresh legs to see out the Bournemouth game we’d have three more points and be those two places higher up the table right now. Over the course of the season that sort of managerial incompetence directly costs you way more than the cost of removing the incompetent manager.

 

[Raino85]

he’s done a decent job with most signings in very difficult circumstances i think personally he deserves a chance to do it under proper owners

Maybe if we just got an assistant in so he good get a forward

 

[Raino85]

Could be right mate. However I’d suggest again ideally, some continuity would be desired in terms of change, but that’s just ideally how you manage change theoretically ideally - but I’m speculating, I’m presuming we all anticipate Dyche to go.

I find the director of football position curious, say the went for Paratici - do you then give him authority to go out and find a manager that he is compatible with and progress the plan, if so be interesting to see who someone like that would pick and ho2 it would land here.

The director of football thing?

Is there any evidence that it is actual more beneficial than when it was the chainman and manager buying the players?

Could you go back to a similar structure of a manager & chief scout deciding who they want & the chairman and club sectary getting it done?

You could then for your under21 signings have a similar structure?

it just seems to me its been a job or a role that everyone has just accepted is a thing

 

[Neiler]

I posted about this in the Dyche thread but IMO it is total false economy to hang onto a manager who isn’t getting performances simply to avoid paying compensation. The amount a poor manager could cost you over two thirds of a season way eclipses that cost.

For context, the amount to sack Dyche would be covered by two additional places in the league. If Dyche had done his job properly and brought on fresh legs to see out the Bournemouth game we’d have three more points and be those two places higher up the table right now. Over the course of the season that sort of managerial incompetence directly costs you way more than the cost of removing the incompetent manager.

The counter to that though mate, is he earned the club 240 mill baseline keeping it in the division over the last two seasons through pretty hopeless and adverse circumstances and conditions. One thing is done and objective, the other is projected and subjective.

This season is still live, your are making presumptions on a finishing position when we are less then 30 mins into a game.

 

[Paul Rideout]

The director of football thing?

Is there any evidence that it is actual more beneficial than when it was the chainman and manager buying the players?

Could you go back to a similar structure of a manager & chief scout deciding who they want & the chairman and club sectary getting it done?

You could then for your under21 signings have a similar structure?

it just seems to me its been a job or a role that everyone has just accepted is a thing

In my head a DoF is just an old school manager, but doesn't get involved in any training, tactics or matchday prep/games.

In my head, toward the end Alex Ferguson was more a DoF that a modern manager - he delegated a lot to coaches and assistant manager re: the weekday training & tactics, but he oversaw the whole club. When things got stale, instead of a manager change, he changed his assistants and coaching staff.

 

[jazzy]

Ideally you want incremental change.

Seems two things are a given, a new board, a new manager, a new ground - ideally you’d like some continuity in there to stabilise and support the transition systemically.

Changing everything top to bottom can seem like a good idea but it’s often not.

The club needs an enema.

 

[RomanReigns]

I would questions Friedman’s business sense if they came in and got rid of everyone.
For a club who sail close to the psr to sack Dyche and his team and pay them off when they can replace in the summer do free, would make no business sense at all. Personally I would be happy for them to get rid now but I done see the sense. The money we would save could help Thelwell buy another flop.

Dan Friedkin

#156 Dan Friedkin on the 2024 Forbes 400

www.forbes.com

net worth of 8 billion

its 1/800th of their wealth to get rid of dyche and his staff

its the equivalent of like the average layperson who buys chicken thighs from Tesco at £4.50 and doesn't use them by their expiry date and just throws them away in the bin

 

[Tony’s Carp]

The counter to that though mate, is he earned the club 240 mill baseline keeping it in the division over the last two seasons through pretty hopeless and adverse circumstances and conditions. One thing is done and objective, the other is projected and subjective.

This season is still live, your are making presumptions on a finishing position when we are less then 30 mins into a game.

My point is a general one, that with the economics of the PL an underperforming manager will cost you more than it costs to remove them.

I accept that Dyche has done a lot for us. I’ve said before I think if he left today history would show he’s done more for the club than any manager since Moyes, steering us to safety twice in very difficult circumstances.

That doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be let go if he is currently underperforming, which is of course subjective. For me less than 1 ppg from the friendliest set of fixtures in the league is serious underperformance, and I don’t see improvement in anything from last season, a possible sign that his methods have worn off. But that’s of course debatable, my point simply being that if the club believe he is underperforming hanging on to save a few quid will potentially cost a lot more.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

I would questions Friedman’s business sense if they came in and got rid of everyone.
For a club who sail close to the psr to sack Dyche and his team and pay them off when they can replace in the summer do free, would make no business sense at all. Personally I would be happy for them to get rid now but I done see the sense. The money we would save could help Thelwell buy another flop.

Are we really questioning the business sense of a group that turned over 13.3 billion last year