2019/20 Marcel Brands

[davek]

What is your definition of "take control of football side of things" though Dave?

Within his remit will be the buying and selling of players, and hopefully the hiring and firing of managers. What you are describing above would only be possible if he was the one bankrolling the club which he obviously isn't.

We will not know this, but I think he was very central to the Silva appointment and also a key figure in us not sacking him when things got a bit tough around January. Moshiri has been rather trigger happy and in truth has never really gone for a manager in the style of Silva. I sense Brands has outlined to him the style that's needed and he has listened. That is being very effective in managing the football side of the club.

There is a limited amount he can do to shift players. He's done ok so far. He hasn't budged as easily on price on some key players which is good. However it's very hard to shift poor players from the PL- as you know the PL pays higher wages than anyone else in Europe so selling abroad is very difficult and to date why would anyone take the rubbish bought by Walsh/Koeman in England from a team who gets around 50 points and for players who can't get into their team? They too will be seeking better value from abroad and it will not be hard to find!

What he has done well though, is pick a coach who can improve players and stuck with him during a challenging moment. Within his control these are two things he can and thus far has done, and they will have an indirect effect in helping us shift players. Silva has improved the majority of the players at his disposal.

However for the reasons outlined above, our selling strategy is really going to have to be heavily based on selling our better players to teams above us. Until we are a regular top 6 team, scoring high 60's (at least) in terms of points people will not come in with any serious money for the rest. People may not like that, but that will be (or ought to be) the strategy.

He and Silva seem to work well together though and unlike many DOF who seem to want to make it all about themselves he seems to both want and value Silva's input which is a commendable side to him. He seems to recognise his job is to support Silva (not the other way as with many DOF out there).

Well I doubt very much the remit he agreed with Moshiri when joing Everton was to be straitjacketed into a balancing the books, hand to mouth existence where he has to sell every player not in the manager's plans in order to get fionances into the club for rebuilding. He was coming from a paupers league in Holland to the money doped PL. I'm pretty sure he didn't think he was going to be underfunded.

Yes, he no doubt has signed up to shift players out, but he must be experienced enough to know that cant be the only means to finance a restructuring of the squad. I dont think it's unreasonable to expect him to be looking to the owner to release more funds if the fees aren't forthcoming for unwanted players.

 

[Goat]

Well I doubt very much the remit he agreed with Moshiri when joing Everton was to be straitjacketed into a balancing the books, hand to mouth existence where he has to sell every player not in the manager's plans in order to get fionances into the club for rebuilding. He was coming from a paupers league in Holland to the money doped PL. I'm pretty sure he didn't think he was going to be underfunded.

Yes, he no doubt has signed up to shift players out, but he must be experienced enough to know that cant be the only means to finance a restructuring of the squad. I dont think it's unreasonable to expect him to be looking to the owner to release more funds if the fees aren't forthcoming for unwanted players.

Brands is and has been fully aware that this "project" isnt a 1 season job, so im sure hes very aware of the level of funding he would get.

He said: “When I spoke with him (Moshiri) before I came in, I told him that if you want success next year don’t look for me because I cannot bring that."

“You saw in the past in the Premier League that if you only spend money, that is not the guarantee for success.

“You see the clubs with the long-term strategy. They are in a stable situation. Look at Tottenham, look at Manchester City.

“I think that it is important for Everton to get to a stable situation. With all the changes, it is always difficult for everyone.”

 

[Simon (brum)]

How about selling the players we dont need/won't for a nominal fee and allow the buying club to use the cash they'll save from said low fee to pay the higher wage the player will demand and get the buying club to pay the agent.
Win win.
We get rid of player who will never get game time here off the books and buying club will get a massive discount on a player.

 

[Goat]

How about selling the players we dont need/won't for a nominal fee and allow the buying club to use the cash they'll save from said low fee to pay the higher wage the player will demand and get the buying club to pay the agent.
Win win.
We get rid of player who will never get game time here off the books and buying club will get a massive discount on a player.

The problem with this is if we start making accounting loses we will get pumped up the bum by STCC/FFP rules.

 

[Simon (brum)]

The problem with this is if we start making accounting loses we will get pumped up the bum by STCC/FFP rules.

But surely getting a player on £100k per week off the books would balance out the lack of transfer fee. I'm not an accountant but if we got rid of 5 players that way £25 million a year less in wages must be better than keeping dead wood?

 

[Simon (brum)]

Also we bought most of the fringe players nearly 2 yrs ago, would that have a bearing with ffp on this yrs accounts if they went for next to nothing in the summer?

 

[Goat]

But surely getting a player on £100k per week off the books would balance out the lack of transfer fee. I'm not an accountant but if we got rid of 5 players that way £25 million a year less in wages must be better than keeping dead wood?

Its the getting a club to pay the player 100k, regardless of the "cheap" transfer fee.

 

[Goat]

Also we bought most of the fringe players nearly 2 yrs ago, would that have a bearing with ffp on this yrs accounts if they went for next to nothing in the summer?

A few of the players were bought a few windows ago, so they might be easier to sell with them owning us less on the books and they also might be more willing to take a pay cut to get footy every week elsewhere.

But no matter how attractive we make some players, they wont be shifted.

 

[Simon (brum)]

Its the getting a club to pay the player 100k, regardless of the "cheap" transfer fee.

Fair question but they'll get a play who 'if' playing regularly and to a standard we should have expected (and there is nothing to say once away from us they'll improve) who should cost, say £20m-£25m for nothing and then pay him £15m over a 3 year contract and a couple of million to the agent. So really they'll save £3m- £8m on the player.
Yes I know, we need a mug, sorry club to have them first.

 

[davek]

Brands is and has been fully aware that this "project" isnt a 1 season job, so im sure hes very aware of the level of funding he would get.

He said: “When I spoke with him (Moshiri) before I came in, I told him that if you want success next year don’t look for me because I cannot bring that."

“You saw in the past in the Premier League that if you only spend money, that is not the guarantee for success.

“You see the clubs with the long-term strategy. They are in a stable situation. Look at Tottenham, look at Manchester City.

“I think that it is important for Everton to get to a stable situation. With all the changes, it is always difficult for everyone.”

That's not the same thing as accepting a sell-to-buy only transfer strategy.

If there are players on massive wages who cant be forced out and have to be practically paid off without a fee, then how does that help Silva if the owner isn't there to release funds (generated by the club, btw)?

This is where a DoF presumably makes a difference: as the football overlord who IMPRESSES on the owner that, whatever the agreed plan is, it cant be done if they just have to rely on shifting players out, and that investment has to be made to give it a reasonable chance to take hold.

That's all part of a long term strategy too: having the flexibility to bend to all eventualities.

 

[Goat]

That's not the same thing as accepting a sell-to-buy only transfer strategy.

If there are players on massive wages who cant be forced out and have to be practically paid off without a fee, then how does that help Silva if the owner isn't there to release funds (generated by the club, btw)?

This is where a DoF presumably makes a difference: as the football overlord who IMPRESSES on the owner that, whatever the agreed plan is, it cant be done if they just have to rely on shifting players out, and that investment has to be made to give it a reasonable chance to take hold.

That's all part of a long term strategy too: having the flexibility to bend to all eventualities.

We have seen ZERO evidence of a sell to buy only strategy under Moshiri.

ZERO evidence, in fact since he took us over only the Manchester Clubs and Chelsea have spent more on players.

 

[blulouie]

We have seen ZERO evidence of a sell to buy only strategy under Moshiri.

ZERO evidence, in fact since he took us over only the Manchester Clubs and Chelsea have spent more on players.

And the Shoite ....i think.

 

[fandjango]

We have seen ZERO evidence of a sell to buy only strategy under Moshiri.

ZERO evidence, in fact since he took us over only the Manchester Clubs and Chelsea have spent more on players.

There appears to be a belief that because Brands said we are a club that sells players he meant we can’t buy unless we sell.
I do not believe that’s is what he was implying at all
He is implying that developing young players and bringing them on to the market is a useful revenue stream

 

[evertonarntwe]

There appears to be a belief that because Brands said we are a club that sells players he meant we can’t buy unless we sell.
I do not believe that’s is what he was implying at all
He is implying that developing young players and bringing them on to the market is a useful revenue stream

exactly, there is a difference between sell to buy and selling the players you don't want and buying younger less shabite versions to replace them

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

We have seen ZERO evidence of a sell to buy only strategy under Moshiri.

ZERO evidence, in fact since he took us over only the Manchester Clubs and Chelsea have spent more on players.

The mistake people are making is thinking that we need to sell players to have money to buy others

That isn't the case

The issue is that our wage bill is ridiculous, which in turn has a big effect on us keeping within FFP regulations

Paying transfer fees isn't the problem, it's managing all the money going out to pay salaries that's the issue (And why Brands needs to get so many players off the books who aren't playing)

We need players off the wage bill, that's the issue (Hence why we'll be selling players on the cheap and probably even just buying some of them out of their contracts)