General Meeting

[catcherintherye]

How? Given the dreadful winning rate during his 2nd and 3rd season. Has he stayed on there was more chance he would relegate this club. And it seemed he had lost the dressing room when he was sacked. There was no way back.

And Walsh must share the same responsibility.

I suppose by some regrets, I don't mean it was wrong, but parts of the decision haven't really worked out. I'd say he made a bit of a rod for his own back.

 

[hktoffee]

I suppose by some regrets, I don't mean it was wrong, but parts of the decision haven't really worked out. I'd say he made a bit of a rod for his own back.

I would say it’s wrong to have a crap Dof working above a manager. It did not go wrong in the first season under Koeman. It went t up in such a quick fashion last season. Fat Sam had done what he supposed to do. To safe the club from relegation so despite his football was boring I don’t have too much complain about him.

 

[davek]

And if he increases our value as a club, especially with what he's put in, possible new ground and then sells us off to even richer owners, don't you think he'll deserve his money back Dave ?
Because believe it or not, our last owner, the self professed greatest Evertonian on earth, who never put a penny of his own money in and let us stagnate, then went on to make a massive profit when he sold us to the " carpetbagger " as you call him.

Personally, no...not using football for profit...though I wouldn't mind that scenario unfolding.

 

[brieverton]

Barring relegation, and for a club with sights supposedly set as high as they are, I don't think we risk much in the medium and longer term by adapting a policy of buying potential on lower wages first and firemost.

The cash splurge on fees and wages has resulted in no benefit. It is primarily a drain on resources now and nothing else.

We have taken a huge punt on Brands' ability to put in place a process that will uncover a gem or two year-in year-out. That is a big ask. On the other hand, I think there is much scope for improvement in scouting that he brings, primarily as we restricted ourselves far too much to the domestic market even since Moyes' time.

I don't think last summers transfer dealings will be characteristic of times to come. I think time pressures contributed to the way things worked out last year, getting three players from a single club in particular. There was a need to buy some established players to cover up deep holes in the squad. Nor do I think we'll see a repeat of the Richarlison type signing. For a player of his potential, we absolutely need to be the ones bringing them in from Brazil or wherever, not giving Watford a huge profit after a single season.

 

[MikeH72]

But it was ok for Bobby to have a less than perfect grasp of English ???

Wait, are you trying to say that Tim Howard wasn’t part of the Everton badge?

 

[Lanolin]

The question from @mkrudden is a very good one and a worthwhile one. I think he would be a tad stupid not to at least have some regrets about the Martinez sacking. I would say it saw a radical overhaul in terms of the fans perceptions to managers. We had previously been a club who hadn't sacked a manager in the best part of 15 years (and just sacked 1 in the previous 18 years). Attitudes are conditioned to a lesser or greater degree by behaviour. We had been conditioned to give managers and projects time.

We are now onto 4 managers in less than 3 years under Moshiri, and in truth are very little further along the journey than when he first came, apart from him investing large sums of money to initially clear the balance sheet and then to spend money on transfers.

That being said I think the situation became quite untenable for Martinez quite quickly. The level of anger towards the board at him not being sacked after the Liverpool game for example was enormous. I am not sure he could have kept going for much longer and it's clear the dressing room was lost as were people above him.

Moshiri came in though, after a great win against Chelsea in the FA CUP quarter final. He could have decided to back Martinez at that point. Had he have done, and allowed him to spend some of the funds available I do think we'd have been in a better situation than we are now. Alternatively he could have moved him on earlier, perhaps given Unsworth a run at the job and kept him in charge.

For me the big mistake was the identification and subsequent chase of Koeman.

I think the point about the changing perception of managers is a very pertinent one. If you look at the quotes @Efcjake posted, there's one in which Moshiri says that Koeman will have to do better than the 7th and 8th places he achieved with Southampton. There's no caveat given, no timescale or call for patience, he just very clearly indicates that we expect to finish top 6 immediately.

When you look at what we spent that summer though, while it was certainly a lot of money by our usual standards, it was asking an awful lot to actually expect us to make the jump from 11th to 6th. It was a similar amount to established top 6 clubs like Liverpool and Spurs, and dwarfed by the likes of United and City. So while such a move wasn't impossible, we didn't exactly do the sort of transfer business that made it likely. I think he just massively underestimated the financial undertakings necessary to catapult us up the league, he thought he could get a chequebook manager in and bankroll us to the next level, only to find that we weren't really outspending our rivals and were starting from a disadvantage. He's now realised/been told by people with a bit more footballing knowledge that this plan won't work, and so has gone for the more organic approach being talked about at the AGM. Hopefully we can implement this successfully, because it's definitely the way forward.

 

[Neiler]

Barring relegation, and for a club with sights supposedly set as high as they are, I don't think we risk much in the medium and longer term by adapting a policy of buying potential on lower wages first and firemost.

The cash splurge on fees and wages has resulted in no benefit. It is primarily a drain on resources now and nothing else.

We have taken a huge punt on Brands' ability to put in place a process that will uncover a gem or two year-in year-out. That is a big ask. On the other hand, I think there is much scope for improvement in scouting that he brings, primarily as we restricted ourselves far too much to the domestic market even since Moyes' time.

I don't think last summers transfer dealings will be characteristic of times to come. I think time pressures contributed to the way things worked out last year, getting three players from a single club in particular. There was a need to buy some established players to cover up deep holes in the squad. Nor do I think we'll see a repeat of the Richarlison type signing. For a player of his potential, we absolutely need to be the ones bringing them in from Brazil or wherever, not giving Watford a huge profit after a single season.

Its as a fan base holding that tension though and seeing the bigger picture. Its like when you look at the transfer thread, everyone is desperate to sign someone ad venting, when its clearly the wrong thing to do at the moment. For example, Schnderlin, Niasse, Tosun and Walcott are our most prominent recruits in the January window. Yet the majority would vote for a signing.

Most wont want to hear this, but we will be three years running the antivirus wholly on the club and ending the contracts and doing deals that doesn't cost the club to much capital. In that time good players will be sold for capital in the hope that we bring players in a level below with potential. Progress will be incremental if at all, we might visibly stand still. But such is the position we are in and what it takes to build a club.

When you look at the spurs model they have dont essentially very little in the market bar a tweak here and there in the past two years, thats ideally where we need to get to. But its about holding the tension getting there and also holding the tension of doing nothing if its the right thing to do when it happens.

we were without money for o long we had conditioned ourselves into thinking it was the only way to progress, when we had it we abused ourselves to the determinant and impact we see now, its clearly a facet of the overall strategy but no more then about 20% of what is needed to progress.

As a support, we need to learn to be committed to this approach and hold tension and not look for an easy win, that tends to be the wrong option. We also need to tolerate difficult results if the performance is right and temper over lauding good results. We need to be open minded and more tolerant of players like Lookman, Vlasic, Cavies, Dowell, DCL etc - not make a objective binary judgement and saying keep/bin, those players could be anything with nurturing and critical to this type of model.

We need to be committed to building something as opposed to buying something.

 

[Lanolin]

Its as a fan base holding that tension though and seeing the bigger picture. Its like when you look at the transfer thread, everyone is desperate to sign someone ad venting, when its clearly the wrong thing to do at the moment. For example, Schnderlin, Niasse, Tosun and Walcott are our most prominent recruits in the January window. Yet the majority would vote for a signing.

Most wont want to hear this, but we will be three years running the antivirus wholly on the club and ending the contracts and doing deals that doesn't cost the club to much capital. In that time good players will be sold for capital in the hope that we bring players in a level below with potential. Progress will be incremental if at all, we might visibly stand still. But such is the position we are in and what it takes to build a club.

When you look at the spurs model they have dont essentially very little in the market bar a tweak here and there in the past two years, thats ideally where we need to get to. But its about holding the tension getting there and also holding the tension of doing nothing if its the right thing to do when it happens.

we were without money for o long we had conditioned ourselves into thinking it was the only way to progress, when we had it we abused ourselves to the determinant and impact we see now, its clearly a facet of the overall strategy but no more then about 20% of what is needed to progress.

As a support, we need to learn to be committed to this approach and hold tension and not look for an easy win, that tends to be the wrong option. We also need to tolerate difficult results if the performance is right and temper over lauding good results.

We need to be committed to building something as opposed to buying something.

You're absolutely right, and this is why I've been banging the drum about being more careful about the messages that come out of the club. The quotes that have come from the top have led to impatience, there was undoubtedly a suggestion that this would all happen fairly quickly, and it's now clear that it won't. That's OK, but we need to make sure that our words and actions back this up in future.

 

[mahermi1]

Personally, no...not using football for profit...though I wouldn't mind that scenario unfolding.

Can only think of the Wolves owner who gave his away, did the Villa owner do it as well, not sure, but they are few and far between, billionaires don't usually get rich by being kind. That scenario could well bare fruit, if things go to plan and that will be because of Moshiri not in spite of him.

 

[catcherintherye]

Its as a fan base holding that tension though and seeing the bigger picture. Its like when you look at the transfer thread, everyone is desperate to sign someone ad venting, when its clearly the wrong thing to do at the moment. For example, Schnderlin, Niasse, Tosun and Walcott are our most prominent recruits in the January window. Yet the majority would vote for a signing.

Most wont want to hear this, but we will be three years running the antivirus wholly on the club and ending the contracts and doing deals that doesn't cost the club to much capital. In that time good players will be sold for capital in the hope that we bring players in a level below with potential. Progress will be incremental if at all, we might visibly stand still. But such is the position we are in and what it takes to build a club.

When you look at the spurs model they have dont essentially very little in the market bar a tweak here and there in the past two years, thats ideally where we need to get to. But its about holding the tension getting there and also holding the tension of doing nothing if its the right thing to do when it happens.

we were without money for o long we had conditioned ourselves into thinking it was the only way to progress, when we had it we abused ourselves to the determinant and impact we see now, its clearly a facet of the overall strategy but no more then about 20% of what is needed to progress.

As a support, we need to learn to be committed to this approach and hold tension and not look for an easy win, that tends to be the wrong option. We also need to tolerate difficult results if the performance is right and temper over lauding good results. We need to be open minded and more tolerant of players like Lookman, Vlasic, Cavies, Dowell, DCL etc - not make a objective binary judgement and saying keep/bin, those players could be anything with nurturing and critical to this type of model.

We need to be committed to building something as opposed to buying something.

It amazes me that fans don't see this, particularly fans who have lived through the David Moyes era. We had very little money (i.e. one signing per season without sales) then no money, then we had to sell players to stand still, then finally back to if we sold someone we can buy someone. I remember having seasons where we would sign 1 player, or even no players at all. Yet we remained roughly where we are currently, having had a relative splurge.

Continually signing players isn't the answer. What is very important is to avoid the mistakes we've seen over the last 2 years.

 

[catcherintherye]

I think the point about the changing perception of managers is a very pertinent one. If you look at the quotes @Efcjake posted, there's one in which Moshiri says that Koeman will have to do better than the 7th and 8th places he achieved with Southampton. There's no caveat given, no timescale or call for patience, he just very clearly indicates that we expect to finish top 6 immediately.

When you look at what we spent that summer though, while it was certainly a lot of money by our usual standards, it was asking an awful lot to actually expect us to make the jump from 11th to 6th. It was a similar amount to established top 6 clubs like Liverpool and Spurs, and dwarfed by the likes of United and City. So while such a move wasn't impossible, we didn't exactly do the sort of transfer business that made it likely. I think he just massively underestimated the financial undertakings necessary to catapult us up the league, he thought he could get a chequebook manager in and bankroll us to the next level, only to find that we weren't really outspending our rivals and were starting from a disadvantage. He's now realised/been told by people with a bit more footballing knowledge that this plan won't work, and so has gone for the more organic approach being talked about at the AGM. Hopefully we can implement this successfully, because it's definitely the way forward.

Yes I agree with all of that. I Don't know if he's changed his mind, or whether there was just a lack of clarity in his message to begin with though.

I stand by most post before though, we were closer to what Spurs did 3 years ago, and particularly closer to what Spurs did under Martinez than what we were under Koeman.

One caveat to this, is Walsh has a number of younger players we tried to get, that seemed to not be finalised. Brooks, Bailey, Gray, Zizkee, Adembairo, Sessegnon (both of them), Isak, Haller, Hurst etc. None of them were finalised though, only Bowler, Calvert Lewin, Lookman, Adanarin, Markelo were. For the most part the younger players have been a big plus. I do wonder if the plan was to complete on most of the names above, not really waste money on proven PL players (Bolasie, Williams, Sigurdsson, Rooney) who for the most part have been a drain, but Koeman was too big an obstacle?

Had we completed on most of the young players identified I did a rough calculation that the value spent would be double to treble what the outlay was. For an investor like Moshiri very smart business. I do wonder how far Koeman was the stumbling block (as well as the weakness/inability to close deals of Walsh).

 

[Neiler]

Yes I agree with all of that. I Don't know if he's changed his mind, or whether there was just a lack of clarity in his message to begin with though.

I stand by most post before though, we were closer to what Spurs did 3 years ago, and particularly closer to what Spurs did under Martinez than what we were under Koeman.

One caveat to this, is Walsh has a number of younger players we tried to get, that seemed to not be finalised. Brooks, Bailey, Gray, Zizkee, Adembairo, Sessegnon (both of them), Isak, Haller, Hurst etc. None of them were finalised though, only Bowler, Calvert Lewin, Lookman, Adanarin, Markelo were. For the most part the younger players have been a big plus. I do wonder if the plan was to complete on most of the names above, not really waste money on proven PL players (Bolasie, Williams, Sigurdsson, Rooney) who for the most part have been a drain, but Koeman was too big an obstacle?

Had we completed on most of the young players identified I did a rough calculation that the value spent would be double to treble what the outlay was. For an investor like Moshiri very smart business. I do wonder how far Koeman was the stumbling block (as well as the weakness/inability to close deals of Walsh).

It is something i have suspected for a while. I think Walsh made mistakes, but i also think he invested in some very good players, who will turn out to be good investments in the main i think he gets a worse press then is justified.

Two problems i think were Koeman, clearly management is a short terms role, you live and die by immediate results, he seemed very pragmatic about this and i think his priorities were on the short terms and results immediately, i think he pushed for most of the players at their appex or on the way down the likes of Klassen, Rooney, Bolaise, Williams etc.

Secondly I also think there were problems at board level, negotiating and closing deals. i heard a whisper one of the first Brands interventions in the summer was after a few weeks of monitoring, benched our usual negotiators and jumped straight into that role as an urgent priority for him after initially taking a wait and see approach to negotiating.

Top to bottom, there was a lack of skill, cohesion and competing agendas and priorties, everyone got a bit of something but there was no over arching complimentary strategy.

 

[davek]

Can only think of the Wolves owner who gave his away, did the Villa owner do it as well, not sure, but they are few and far between, billionaires don't usually get rich by being kind. That scenario could well bare fruit, if things go to plan and that will be because of Moshiri not in spite of him.

Well, we're a long long way off that scenario with Moshiri, so I'll continue to give him what he deserves in terms of credit = f.a.

 

[mahermi1]

Well, we're a long long way off that scenario with Moshiri, so I'll continue to give him what he deserves in terms of credit = f.a.

Haha you are set in stone Dave.

 

[Lanolin]

Yes I agree with all of that. I Don't know if he's changed his mind, or whether there was just a lack of clarity in his message to begin with though.

I stand by most post before though, we were closer to what Spurs did 3 years ago, and particularly closer to what Spurs did under Martinez than what we were under Koeman.

One caveat to this, is Walsh has a number of younger players we tried to get, that seemed to not be finalised. Brooks, Bailey, Gray, Zizkee, Adembairo, Sessegnon (both of them), Isak, Haller, Hurst etc. None of them were finalised though, only Bowler, Calvert Lewin, Lookman, Adanarin, Markelo were. For the most part the younger players have been a big plus. I do wonder if the plan was to complete on most of the names above, not really waste money on proven PL players (Bolasie, Williams, Sigurdsson, Rooney) who for the most part have been a drain, but Koeman was too big an obstacle?

Had we completed on most of the young players identified I did a rough calculation that the value spent would be double to treble what the outlay was. For an investor like Moshiri very smart business. I do wonder how far Koeman was the stumbling block (as well as the weakness/inability to close deals of Walsh).

Definitely. To be fair to koeman though, if moshiri really had told him he expected top 6 almost immediately, as the quotes suggests, I can’t blame him for turning down a load of players who weren’t going to help him get there.