2020/21 James Rodriguez

[riddick]

Firstly, personally I think the club should have waited at least 1 year before they started talking about Europe. Precisely because the squad needs to be revitalized. We need to bring in players with speed and who can perform many high intensity sprints.

The club assessed it differently. The owners hired Ancelotti, signing players like Allan, AD and JR. Precisely to speed up the process. Do not think JR or Allan was lured with 8-9 place during the negotiations. So let's agree, if we do not qualify for Europe, the season has failed based on the club's own ambitions. What we mean is irrelevant.

So to the second point, if we had Modric, Casmeiro and Kroos, this would have been easy, but we have not. The club has assessed the squad, and then assessed that the squad is good enough to compete for a European place if we get 2-3 quality signings that can lift the team. In line with the fact that you want to speed up this process, you get well-established players. Ancelotti wants JR and Allan.

At its best, very good players, but the curve has pointed downwards in recent years. Allan was at his best during Sarri in Naples, and JR has lately struggled with playing time and injury problems. None of them will get much better over time, most likely the opposite will happen. They also come to the world's most intense league. Both are generally doing well when they play, and JR has been exceptional in some games. Still, both have only played about 50% of the total playing time in the league.

When you know that these are two of the three that have been bought in for us to qualify for Europe, it is significant. When you know the story of both, I think it's too great a risk. If we do not qualify for Europe, it is not because JR has played poorly, on the contrary, when he has played he has often been one of the better ones, but he and Allan have been too much with the physiotherapist.

Many here call for stability, and say we need continuity. I agree with that, but where it matters most is on the field. Then the strategy is wrong to sign players, who will make the team better, but who at the same time are frequently injured and where the career is heading downwards.

Agree with almost all of this but the last paragraph part. You can do that and accommodate that if the players who ARE available for the majority of matches are of sufficient quality to carry on in the meantime. We, apparently, do not have them.

 

[Egil Olsen]

Agree with almost all of this but the last paragraph part. You can do that and accommodate that if the players who ARE available for the majority of matches are of sufficient quality to carry on in the meantime. We, apparently, do not have them.

Yes, but that is not the case at Everton. If Manchester United lost Harry, Bruno and Rashford in 50 percent of their playing time, they would quickly struggle with the top 4. Your best players can not spend time with the physio, instead of on the pitch. That your second best players get injured is not so much a crisis, they can be replaced.

 

[WA Toffee]

He can correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think that is the point he's making. I think what he's getting at is that it was only worth signing players with the profile of James and Allan if we get a tangible reward from it. Not that they're the ones holding us back, but that it wasn't a good use of resources to bring them in if they don't bring short term success (relatively), and the funds committed to them would have been better used elsewhere. I'd agree with that really, but I like watching James play so...

I don't think I was suggesting that was what he was suggesting.
My understanding was that he disapproved of the strategy of buying players for the short term (James, Allan), but if we end up getting into Europe, then he approves of it.
But if we don't get into Europe, then that is the fault of the strategy of buying James and Allan, and not any other reason.

As I said, I just disagreed with his conclusions

 

[Lanolin]

I don't think I was suggesting that was what he was suggesting.
My understanding was that he disapproved of the strategy of buying players for the short term (James, Allan), but if we end up getting into Europe, then he approves of it.
But if we don't get into Europe, then that is the fault of the strategy of buying James and Allan, and not any other reason.

As I said, I just disagreed with his conclusions

Again, I don't believe he is saying, or even hinting at that.

 

[Charles Hawtrey]

Perhaps another point in this argument is that having a player like James at Everton helps us attract other great players, just like Carlo. Who wouldn't want to play for Carlo alongside James and Allan, Digne, Richy and DCL?

 

[WA Toffee]

If we end up outside the top 6, I would definitely say it was wrong to buy both him and Allan.

I think what he's getting at is that it was only worth signing players with the profile of James and Allan if we get a tangible reward from it.

But if we don't get into Europe, then that is the fault of the strategy of buying James and Allan, and not any other reason.

There may be semantics at play here, or one of us is not expressing ourselves very well, but what I understood him to mean(above), and what you understood him to mean (above)appear to be pretty much the same as what he posted (also above)

 

[Lanolin]

There may be semantics at play here, or one of us is not expressing ourselves very well, but what I understood him to mean(above), and what you understood him to mean (above)appear to be pretty much the same as what he posted (also above)

No, sorry but I think it's just a really basic misunderstanding on your part. You're continually saying that he's saying if we don't get Europe it's BECAUSE we signed Allan and James. He quite clearly isn't saying that. He explicitly says as much in another post, that he didn't believe Europe was a realistic aim this year. His point is a very simple one; he thinks that James and Allan were bought with a view to giving the squad the required boost to get into Europe this season and that if they don't do that then they weren't the right signings. That is absolutely not the same thing.

To use an extreme analogy, as it seems just sticking to the actual point is futile, it's like a doctor telling a terminally ill patient that a homeopathic remedy isn't going to cure them. If it does, they say wow OK i take it back. If it doesn't they're proved right. But whatever happens, there is absolutely no suggestion that they died BECAUSE they took the homeopathic remedy.

 

[BlueToff]

'Our fans' having a reasonable discussion about one of our players? I know it's a bit unusual in here, but I'm pretty sure it's allowed.

Not at all. It's that your comment was pure conjecture, and again just reeks - like we've done with Lukaku, Barkley, anybody with a remote bit of talent before, and we're seeing with Richarlison as well - of this mentality we have of complaining about our best players.

We knew what we got when we signed James. He's not the issue. The issue is building an entire team around him and then having no other options for any creativity or even ability to control the bloody ball beside that.

 

[Jamo Martinez]

I do get the point you are making, but as someone else has said, I think your conclusions are wrong.
Your conclusion appears to be that if we miss out on Europe, the only possible reason is the strategy of signing world class players who may have passed their peak.

What I, and several others, are trying to point out is that if we miss out on Europe this season, it is more likely to be down to the rest of the team not being good enough.

I'm not reading that in his posts tbf. He's not saying that the strategy of signing those players will be the cause of missing out on European footie. More that the gamble of buying them to propel us into Europe this season won't have paid off.

 

[kev101]

Not at all. It's that your comment was pure conjecture, and again just reeks - like we've done with Lukaku, Barkley, anybody with a remote bit of talent before, and we're seeing with Richarlison as well - of this mentality we have of complaining about our best players.

We knew what we got when we signed James. He's not the issue. The issue is building an entire team around him and then having no other options for any creativity or even ability to control the bloody ball beside that.

It wasn't my comment, I was just reading the last few pages and it all seemed decent and well reasoned on both sides, so I didn't see a reason for you to post "Ffs man, our fans", that's all, no worries, no big deal
Edit: Just to say, I like James, love seeing a player like him in Royal Blue, but I can also understand some peoples 'minor' problems with him being here. I don't think anyone (worth listening to) wants him gone, they're just pointing out potential negatives.

 

[BlueToff]

It wasn't my comment, I was just reading the last few pages and it all seemed decent and well reasoned on both sides, so I didn't see a reason for you to post "Ffs man, our fans", that's all, no worries, no big deal
Edit: Just to say, I like James, love seeing a player like him in Royal Blue, but I can also understand some peoples 'minor' problems with him being here. I don't think anyone (worth listening to) wants him gone, they're just pointing out potential negatives.

Sorry for any misunderstanding!

I'm not shooting down anyone with concerns. But I think the real issue is just that we're so reliant on him. He delivers when he plays, more often than not. We just know that he can't stay fit so we need to have another plan for when he's not available, and that plan can't be 5-4-1 at home to Palace clinging on for dear life.

 

[kev101]

Sorry for any misunderstanding!

I'm not shooting down anyone with concerns. But I think the real issue is just that we're so reliant on him. He delivers when he plays, more often than not. We just know that he can't stay fit so we need to have another plan for when he's not available, and that plan can't be 5-4-1 at home to Palace clinging on for dear life.

I couldn't agree more, mate.

 

[Vic Vinegar]

Imagine how good he’ll be with a pre season behind him next season.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

Football sex, nea.

 

[WA Toffee]

No, sorry but I think it's just a really basic misunderstanding on your part. You're continually saying that he's saying if we don't get Europe it's BECAUSE we signed Allan and James. He quite clearly isn't saying that. He explicitly says as much in another post, that he didn't believe Europe was a realistic aim this year. His point is a very simple one; he thinks that James and Allan were bought with a view to giving the squad the required boost to get into Europe this season and that if they don't do that then they weren't the right signings. That is absolutely not the same thing.

To use an extreme analogy, as it seems just sticking to the actual point is futile, it's like a doctor telling a terminally ill patient that a homeopathic remedy isn't going to cure them. If it does, they say wow OK i take it back. If it doesn't they're proved right. But whatever happens, there is absolutely no suggestion that they died BECAUSE they took the homeopathic remedy.

Maybe I have misunderstood him, it's quite possible.
Anyway, it starting to feel a bit weird having a discussion about what someone else actually meant, so I'll just say James is great and move on.