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.

 

John Stones transfer saga

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's an interesting thought but it's not going to happen for the following reasons:

(i) the increase in broadcasting revenues widens the disparity in payments made to clubs, for example the gap between 1st and 10th in order of broadcasting revenue grows from £22 million last year to £35 million next year.
(ii) the wealthier clubs already have the infrastructure, stadia and long term commercial deals which clubs like Everton are frankly unlikely ever to enjoy (without the biggest of all sugar daddies buying our club)
(iii) FFP will not allow the clubs with smaller revenues to compete on salaries (let alone transfer fees)

If it was a rising tide that floated all boats equally then it's plausible, but this tide floats the wealthier clubs higher than the less wealthy.

Yes but what about wages?

Wage increase limitations
 
“What’s clear now is that the chairman was really strong and has put things really clear. John knows where he is and the fans are going to play an incredible role in settling in and getting his focus on winning football games for Everton.

“We are the perfect environment and the perfect place, as we have in the last two seasons for John. We need to be a winning team and be delighted that we have John with us.

“John will be an incredible part of that process and we are all excited. John is looking forward to the next game now.”




What I take from this is that, his name... his name is definitely John.


 
The Euros will definitely concentrate minds. If this Mori deal goes through and he fits in the defence nicely, Stones might have a problem actually retaining his place. Which is what we want all over the pitch.

Not sure that Mori will hit the ground running that quickly Dave but I agree with the sentiment. If Mori adapts to the English game, Galloway fulfils the potential that many see and Browning makes a mark as well then in twelve months time we could have four relative youngsters competing for places, along with Jagielka. I know you don't rate Jags but he's probably got a couple of seasons left in him at this standard.

Anyway, there may come a time in the next 12 to 18 months time that we have an overabundance of defenders on our books. That would be the time to consider selling one of them.
 

To be honest and it was a thought that had already crossed my mind, and there was a comment on that Chelsea forum that might be worth taking into consideration.
If we play hardball with these youngsters and refuse to let them move onto what they may consider a "better" club ( and please don't lets get involved in, we are a big club etc please) how would that affect us recruiting youngsters, would it be perceived as a limiting factor and reduce the possibility of having long term contracts accepted?
The thing that's going to make us attractive to youngsters is us building a team that can challenge by allowing young players to develop and fulfill their potential. If we are successful, they won't want to leave.

The only way we can break the status quo is by trying something different. Selling your star players to fund your squad has left us in an endless cycle of being part of the 2nd tier.
 

It's an interesting thought but it's not going to happen for the following reasons:

(i) the increase in broadcasting revenues widens the disparity in payments made to clubs, for example the gap between 1st and 10th in order of broadcasting revenue grows from £22 million last year to £35 million next year.
(ii) the wealthier clubs already have the infrastructure, stadia and long term commercial deals which clubs like Everton are frankly unlikely ever to enjoy (without the biggest of all sugar daddies buying our club)
(iii) FFP will not allow the clubs with smaller revenues to compete on salaries (let alone transfer fees)

If it was a rising tide that floated all boats equally then it's plausible, but this tide floats the wealthier clubs higher than the less wealthy.
I don't think point 1 applies to my concept, really. This is because of an assumption (which could be very incorrect I admit) that there will be an eventual 'natural cap' in which clubs won't go beyond for transfers due to value for money. I.E. Buy Stones for £150 million, or buy Mori for £5 million...I think even Abramovich will flinch at some point and just stop trying to buy the best players from within the Prem - he'll go outside of it for a facsimile...again I could be wrong.

Point 2 is EXTREMELY valid and something that we need to address, however due to the limitations stated by FFP, if the Sky money continues to grow - Sky becomes our sugar daddy that can clear our debts and allow us to build infrastructure/spend on marketing and commercial dealings.

Point 3 is linked to Point 2. FFP will not allows us to compete on salaries and transfer funds - but the Sky money will prevent us from needing to sell. The salary issue only comes in when a player nears the end of their contract or we're in a bidding war with the wealthy elite. Ideally, that Sky money will be reinvested in infrastructure and marketing to establish other revenue streams that allow us to compete more completely.

As I stated, it's very much a could. And it should not be what we bank on, we should be working all day and night on getting investment NOW, but it does seem to be a scenario that could play out. Assuming City, Chelsea, and United eventually hit a level of spending that even they're uncomfortable with.

The key isn't who has the most money in this scenario - it's that everyone has so much money that they no longer need to sell their best players.
 

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