Everton Summer transfers 2021

[Harryflashman]

He wouldn't be the first player to make that decision. The reality is, unless we are going to play him, we need to make the best of a bad situation which we have brought on ourselves. Firstly buying him was a mistake, secondly loaning him to PSG was also a mistake. Now we have a player who wants out, only wants to go to one club and we are holding very few cards in that whole dynamic. I don't blame Brands for not being able to tell PSG to do one on the whole loan offer thing, but he has a fairly high degree of accountability for how we ended up in this position in the first place.

Just out of interest if he’s not the first who are the other £40m rated 20 year olds who didn’t play for 3 years ?

 

[AsiaAsia82]

PSG playing the clever business deals, makes you wonder how their owners got so rich.

 

[danny147]

Well if his attitude isn’t right you don’t select him & you make him aware he won’t be loaned so he can spend the next 2 years playing for the u23’s . Effectively ending his career almost like Bentley did at spurs , the lad is a young potential star I cannot believe he’s ready to burn his career and future because one of the richest clubs in the world wants to loan not sign him .

Exactly how it should be. The club has any final say and he should be put in his place and that’s an employee of the club. Club needs someone with balls to start making the decisions rather than having players demanding stuff ie richarlison at the olympics.

 

[Rooney_Tunes]

Hearing that Brands has just seen this post and immediately sprang into action. He was planning on taking his time but now there’s going to be a sextuple transfer announcement at a press conference this afternoon.

Good work mate.

Sauce?

 

[davids]

In hindsight they haven’t worked but I wouldn’t call them mistakes. They seemed like good signings at the time. Personally I think Kean will be a good player in time still only 20 and we will at least get our money back. Doucoure for 20 mil is fine not sure what you think his value should have been?

Delph was a high risk signing and proved to be too high risk.

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

Well if his attitude isn’t right you don’t select him & you make him aware he won’t be loaned so he can spend the next 2 years playing for the u23’s . Effectively ending his career almost like Bentley did at spurs , the lad is a young potential star I cannot believe he’s ready to burn his career and future because one of the richest clubs in the world wants to loan not sign him .

That’s a big assumption though mate. The kind of cash he’s on, and the age he is, he’ll probably be confident of lining his pockets handsomely for a couple of years, getting his free transfer to a middling Ligue Un or Serie A team and working his way back to the top from there.

 

[mightymoyes]

PSG playing the clever business deals, makes you wonder how their owners got so rich.

they'll likely to lose mbappe on a free next summer, not that clever

 

[Harryflashman]

That’s a big assumption though mate. The kind of cash he’s on, and the age he is, he’ll probably be confident of lining his pockets handsomely for a couple of years, getting his free transfer to a middling Ligue Un or Serie A team and working his way back to the top from there.

I get what your saying but at his age it’s a big risk for a club that doesn’t apparently want to pay to sign him . Your saying he’ll risk ruining his career for a club that he won’t even end up at in a couple of years , seems a bit crazy to me

 

[toffeeblue9]

really? which other top level player sat out for 3 years?

When I say "Sit there" I didn't mean he'll refuse to play. You'd assume that would be incredibly unlikely - I meant "sit there" in as much as he won't be playing much at all, so he'll mostly be sat on the bench if he stays here.

Going by that thinking PSG could tell us they’ll not pay a loan fee and only his wages as he won’t play anywhere else then do that the following two seasons and he leaves on a free to them.

no player is going to refuse to play for three seasons plus it’s not allowed. No player is bigger than the club, if the deal PSG offer us isn’t what we want then it’s simple we reject it, tell him he comes back and plays for us or he leaves if we have an acceptable offer come in.

we shouldn’t ever let any player hold us over a barrel, they’re paid to do a job so do it or leave for good.

Not really - it isn't that we have no leverage at all - that would impact us negatively for FFP, so it would be more in our interests to just keep him and let his value depreciate. Again, not saying he would refuse to play, but we all know that he'll be behind DCL here, we aren't in Europe so he'll mostly be sat on the bench, contributing v little and seeing his value drop.

You're right, a loan with an obligation to buy may work but again any deal needs to be on our terms weather that's a loan fee that allows us to dip into the market or a player trade?? We can't simply bend over and take a spanking any time a player wants out or a 'bigger club' comes calling, especially when said bigger club is spending money like the clappers this window but pleading poverty to us.
No doubt Brands and co have it all in hand and you're right it doesn't help us or the kid to have a player who wants to be somewhere else but due to FFP and with Kean being one of the few expendable assets we can actually make money on we have to get this one right.

I don't doubt we can still make money on it. I think the general point I'm trying to make is that there seems to be a feeling here that Brands isn't doing his job properly if he doesn't get £40m plus for him as a permanent transfer, I'm really just saying that it's nowhere near as simple as that - we are weakened from a negotiating position and TBH the reasons for that are all our fault (and largely Brands' fault if this area is indeed his remit)

He's our player, so we have plenty of leverage.

The player will want to play and they will want him. We probably won't get as much money as we'd like but there's a big difference between only getting 30m instead of 40m, or letting him go on loan for a minimal fee.

It's brinksmanship, like most transfers. They start from a lowball position, we start from a higher one. They want him, we know they want him and the player wants to go there and only there. That doesn't help us because we don't have the option of another club to compete with. The other problem is that I expect we don't actually want him to stay (unless Benitez has a completely different outlook on it) - we won't want an unhappy player, with no pathway to the first team who is young and saleable, we probably want to sell him and realise a profit. I'd be slightly surprised if we ended up doing a loan with no obligation to buy in there, but at the same time not totally surprised. The most likely compromise I would guess would be a loan with an obligation to buy, we will do well to get them to buy him outright at £30m plus

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

Just a thought, PSG is not the only team looking for goalscoring talent. We should give them a firm but clear rebuttal and bring him home. There will be other clubs such as Juve who will be interested and if Brands/Benitez are looking for players at such sides there is no reason why a swap/player plus cash arrangement can't be made. That said Benitez might fancy having him in the squad in which case PSG will have to forget him.

 

[Kev50]

I suspect the main problem is that PSG just aren't that bothered. Cos he's just not that good.

 

[milks]

I suspect the main problem is that PSG just aren't that bothered. Cos he's just not that good.

Kev with the hot take

 

[allen]

I suspect the main problem is that PSG just aren't that bothered. Cos he's just not that good.

Scored more than Neymar for them this season. Higher goals per game, too. Second only to Mbappe.

 

[Dixieslaces]

PSG - "We want Moise Kean on loan, we will pay a loan fee and his wages"
Everton - "Nope, permanent deal or nothing"
PSG - "loan or nothing. You can't sell him to anyone else as we know he only wants to come here"
Everton - "Ok, we'll keep him then"
Kean - "Sound, I'll sit here, not play, collect my wages and run my contract down"

Not a very smart business decision.

PSG know they have us over a barrel unless we keep him and play him, which with DCL around is incredibly unlikely. The best we can hope for here is that we get PSG to agree to an obligation to buy him as part of the loan deal.

the problem with that logic and not a dig just an observation is that while the money is lovely and all that He wants to play footie, I'm not sure his desire to play would be helped by the cash 100%, sportsmen and women are motivated also motivated by doing what they love

 

[Stuartisitc1878]

When I say "Sit there" I didn't mean he'll refuse to play. You'd assume that would be incredibly unlikely - I meant "sit there" in as much as he won't be playing much at all, so he'll mostly be sat on the bench if he stays here.


Not really - it isn't that we have no leverage at all - that would impact us negatively for FFP, so it would be more in our interests to just keep him and let his value depreciate. Again, not saying he would refuse to play, but we all know that he'll be behind DCL here, we aren't in Europe so he'll mostly be sat on the bench, contributing v little and seeing his value drop.


I don't doubt we can still make money on it. I think the general point I'm trying to make is that there seems to be a feeling here that Brands isn't doing his job properly if he doesn't get £40m plus for him as a permanent transfer, I'm really just saying that it's nowhere near as simple as that - we are weakened from a negotiating position and TBH the reasons for that are all our fault (and largely Brands' fault if this area is indeed his remit)


It's brinksmanship, like most transfers. They start from a lowball position, we start from a higher one. They want him, we know they want him and the player wants to go there and only there. That doesn't help us because we don't have the option of another club to compete with. The other problem is that I expect we don't actually want him to stay (unless Benitez has a completely different outlook on it) - we won't want an unhappy player, with no pathway to the first team who is young and saleable, we probably want to sell him and realise a profit. I'd be slightly surprised if we ended up doing a loan with no obligation to buy in there, but at the same time not totally surprised. The most likely compromise I would guess would be a loan with an obligation to buy, we will do well to get them to buy him outright at £30m plus

Out of curiosity why is it Brands fault? I'm yet to be convinced by Brands so i am by no means 'Team Marcel' like some but i'm not sure what he's done wrong here.
Ancelotti chose not to play him and was happy to let him leave to go on loan and based on Kean's first season we weren't missing out on much letting him go. He never did enough that first season to suggest he should start ahead of Dom. Fair play to the lad though, he had a great season and going through reports at the time it sounds like PSG were happy to make the transfer permanent in the winter but then changed managers and negotiations got delayed. They're now splashing their cash on massive names and hope to pinch Kean on a sly loan again but we (and by that i guess Brands) is saying no, we want to sell so Marcel Brands is quite rightly putting Everton's interest first.
We are weakened i guess in that the player wants to return there and there isn't a number of clubs bidding for him for us to use as a bargaining tool but i still think we hold the cards at the moment. He's 21, an Italian international and has 2-3years left on his contract. If PSG don't pay what we deem acceptable then he'll stay and probably play but if PSG choose not to pay i don't see how that's Brands fault.
Letting him go for on loan again with no real benefit for Everton? now that would be failure on Brands part in my opinion.