2019/20 Marcel Brands

[Lanolin]

And to me our big issue is we get so little communication from our board about what the plan is (or if that is the plan at all).

So people generally get very frustrated and a storm ends up brewing and can take over the entirety of the club.

Why DBB or Kenwright haven't come out, at any point and say the plan is to target younger players, look to improve them, move certain players on to reinvest wisely I will never know.

I would imagine if you asked your average PSV, Ajax, Dortmund, Leipzig, Monaco etc fan they would be well aware of what the club are trying to do.

Yes, completely agree.

I've said before, Moshiri made a massive error coming in with bullish statements and making out like we were about to make a big push for success. The reality has been different, and truth be told it's difficult to see any real ambition at the moment. Our appointments, signings etc look like we're just aiming to be best of the rest to me. Even the age of players we've signed is a bit muddled, it's not like we're massively targeting the 18-22 bracket, we're signing a load of 25-26 year olds, which to be honest doesn't really fit with the idea of a long term growth plan and an intent to develop players to sell them.

 

[davek]

And to me our big issue is we get so little communication from our board about what the plan is (or if that is the plan at all).

So people generally get very frustrated and a storm ends up brewing and can take over the entirety of the club.

Why DBB or Kenwright haven't come out, at any point and say the plan is to target younger players, look to improve them, move certain players on to reinvest wisely I will never know.

I would imagine if you asked your average PSV, Ajax, Dortmund, Leipzig, Monaco etc fan they would be well aware of what the club are trying to do.

In particular, the DoF needs to be underlining the plan at every turn, not just when the going is good.

He seems to me like he's hiding. He surely knows that he still has enough currency with a lot of Everton supporters to be able to step in and explain the difference between short term form and medium to long term strategy. He just looks unwilling to spend that currency, preferring to wait and wait and see if the corner is turned.

He's right at the heart of this: he buys the players, agrees the overarching football philosophy we're looking to put into practice. It's up to him to get in the media and re-emphasise all that. To me he looks like a fair weather type. Only too happy to expound on the good things but doesn't want to be associated with a team that's struggling for form. No character.

 

[davids]

So we just wait and see like we have for 30 years.

Looking that way,seems we missed the billionaire boat and by the time we got one they're ten a penny.

 

[catcherintherye]

Yes, completely agree.

I've said before, Moshiri made a massive error coming in with bullish statements and making out like we were about to make a big push for success. The reality has been different, and truth be told it's difficult to see any real ambition at the moment. Our appointments, signings etc look like we're just aiming to be best of the rest to me. Even the age of players we've signed is a bit muddled, it's not like we're massively targeting the 18-22 bracket, we're signing a load of 25-26 year olds, which to be honest doesn't really fit with the idea of a long term growth plan and an intent to develop players to sell them.

I'm not sure on the latter point. He has been quite consistent in signing players between the 22-25 bracket (with a couple of younger players) which in truth makes a lot of sense to me. Unless you are going to go the whole hog, and appoint say a Marco Rose it's difficult to me to see signing lots of teenagers at once is going to lead to any game time.

We tried that under Walsh, Vlasic, Lookman, Bowler, Gibson, Adenarin etc have all not seen anywhere near enough game time and will all likely to move on. For reasons you have stated it's very difficult to bed in a whole host of teenagers or players under 21 into the team at once.

I actually think the strategy employed by Brands has been pretty sensible. We are taking players who are either caste out at top teams or those not quite good enough/didn't fit in. There's enough of a turnaround rate to ensure they are decent ability, but we don't have to do enormous amounts of work with them. IWobi has been a very smart signing for example. It's what we did best under Moyes too.

 

[okellypj]

I think there's certainly been ambition from Moshiri - we've spent a lot. Problem is that in his initial few years, there was no strategy to realise that ambition (hence we spent badly). With Brands, you can see a strategy being adopted.

 

[catcherintherye]

In particular, the DoF needs to be underlining the plan at every turn, not just when the going is good.

He seems to me like he's hiding. He surely knows that he still has enough currency with a lot of Everton supporters to be able to step in and explain the difference between short term form and medium to long term strategy. He just looks unwilling to spend that currency, preferring to wait and wait and see if the corner is turned.

He's right at the heart of this: he buys the players, agrees the overarching football philosophy we're looking to put into practice. It's up to him to get in the media and re-emphasise all that. To me he looks like a fair weather type. Only too happy to expound on the good things but doesn't want to be associated with a team that's struggling for form. No character.

Yes I was surprised not to hear from Brands as well. I give him a little more leeway on 2 points. Firstly he did come out last season and outline what we were trying to do in more detail than the rest of them. Secondly he's been here 18 months, Kenwright and DBB have been here years and there is not a peep out of them.

But yes, we don't support our managers well enough when times get tough. I know people talk about the dreaded vote of confidence, but I'm not sure it's so dreaded in this climate, it seems a very old fashioned phrase. And you know what, the reason why they don't put any statement out to support managers is because they don't want to take any of the flak or risk being caught in the cross fire. They don't want to risk criticism that is directed narrowly from manager to manager then generalising and starting to be put back onto them. So they use managers as a shield to deflect from themselves.

It's really poor actually. Whatever we all think about the last 4 managers we've had (and in truth there will be nobody who will like all 4 as they all had very different approaches) the way it ended for each, and the way they were all hung out to dry is poor from the board. In each case I suspect it made abad situation worse, and each could have reasonable claim to say with a bit more support they may have been able to turn it around.

 

[davek]

Yes I was surprised not to hear from Brands as well. I give him a little more leeway on 2 points. Firstly he did come out last season and outline what we were trying to do in more detail than the rest of them. Secondly he's been here 18 months, Kenwright and DBB have been here years and there is not a peep out of them.
But yes, we don't support our managers well enough when times get tough. I know people talk about the dreaded vote of confidence, but I'm not sure it's so dreaded in this climate, it seems a very old fashioned phrase. And you know what, the reason why they don't put any statement out to support managers is because they don't want to take any of the flak or risk being caught in the cross fire. They don't want to risk criticism that is directed narrowly from manager to manager then generalising and starting to be put back onto them. So they use managers as a shield to deflect from themselves.

It's really poor actually. Whatever we all think about the last 4 managers we've had (and in truth there will be nobody who will like all 4 as they all had very different approaches) the way it ended for each, and the way they were all hung out to dry is poor from the board. In each case I suspect it made abad situation worse, and each could have reasonable claim to say with a bit more support they may have been able to turn it around.

Yes, defo.

That word 'character' (and lack thereof) is a telling one. The players largely dont have it and we collapse big time in a lot of games, the manager looks a beaten man at times, the DoF goes missing when the going gets tough, the owners retreat behind the facade of a stadium scheme and only act when absolutely compelled to.

It's no good to have the cash to spend that we've had via one revenue source or another if you have an organisation that has no backbone and fibre to it. It's building on quick sand.

 

[Goat]

Yes, defo.

That word 'character' (and lack thereof) is a telling one. The players largely dont have it and we collapse big time in a lot of games, the manager looks a beaten man at times, the DoF goes missing when the going gets tough, the owners retreat behind the facade of a stadium scheme and only act when absolutely compelled to.

It's no good to have the cash to spend that we've had via one revenue source or another if you have an organisation that has no backbone and fibre to it. It's building on quick sand.

LOL

The attitude of the players comes from the manager.

Look at the attitude of the Liverpool players, Klopp gives them that, if our players act like cowards, blame the man who trains them to be cowards.

 

[brieverton]

I'm not sure that the DOF or anyone at the club should be seeking to communicate some high strategy to the supporters and the broader parts of the club.

Although, in tandem with that, Brands has had several praiseworthy articles posted at the start of this season and last and it's hard to think that he was not complicit in at least some of them, as they were to his advantage. You have to take the rough with the smooth, so he can't expect leeway in being public only when times are good and/or when it suits him.

We should by now be able to see enough of the "strategy" taking shape on the pitch. But in terms of signings and way of playing, it's all a bit of a muddle. In that instance the best Brands can do is come out and say "Bear with us, work is is being put in behind the scenes" but that is just a holding line really, like a politician buying time.

To me a good DOF is like a good referee, the less you see and hear from them, the better they are doing their job.

I think occasions like the AGM are a good opportunity for Brands to expand on general strategy and objectives, and where we are (or aren't) in achieving them. Other than that, he should use official channels like Everton TV to communicate with fans. Anything to a wider audience is unnecessary and just self-promotion. A well-placed interview with one of the respected broadsheet journalists might be an alternative way to get a message across, free from the fake news Sky and tabloid media.

I do get the feeling Brands would like to end up at one of the super-clubs and he would have ingratiated himself with some of them with business done over the 2 summer windows. But he is a long long way from drawing their attention at present, unless things dramatically improve. Although, he does seem to view this as a job of work lasting at least 6-8 years.

 

[Goat]

I'm not sure that the DOF or anyone at the club should be seeking to communicate some high strategy to the supporters and the broader parts of the club.

Although, in tandem with that, Brands has had several praiseworthy articles posted at the start of this season and last and it's hard to think that he was not complicit in at least some of them, as they were to his advantage. You have to take the rough with the smooth, so he can't expect leeway in being public only when times are good and/or when it suits him.

We should by now be able to see enough of the "strategy" taking shape on the pitch. But in terms of signings and way of playing, it's all a bit of a muddle. In that instance the best Brands can do is come out and say "Bear with us, work is is being put in behind the scenes" but that is just a holding line really, like a politician buying time.

To me a good DOF is like a good referee, the less you see and hear from them, the better they are doing their job.

I think occasions like the AGM are a good opportunity for Brands to expand on general strategy and objectives, and where we are (or aren't) in achieving them. Other than that, he should use official channels like Everton TV to communicate with fans. Anything to a wider audience is unnecessary and just self-promotion. A well-placed interview with one of the respected broadsheet journalists might be an alternative way to get a message across, free from the fake news Sky and tabloid media.

I do get the feeling Brands would like to end up at one of the super-clubs and he would have ingratiated himself with some of them with business done over the 2 summer windows. But he is a long long way from drawing their attention at present, unless things dramatically improve. Although, he does seem to view this as a job of work lasting at least 6-8 years.

I find it laughable that people expect hourly updates on what our plan is.

I mean its quite clear what our plan is, to improve.

Moshiri and Brands have both done plenty of interviews, all of them have been met with a negative attitude from certain people.

Its a sense of entitlement I dont understand, we are customers, Everton is a business, nobody tells Nike what to do just cos they bought a pair of trabs.

 

[Lanolin]

I'm not sure on the latter point. He has been quite consistent in signing players between the 22-25 bracket (with a couple of younger players) which in truth makes a lot of sense to me. Unless you are going to go the whole hog, and appoint say a Marco Rose it's difficult to me to see signing lots of teenagers at once is going to lead to any game time.

We tried that under Walsh, Vlasic, Lookman, Bowler, Gibson, Adenarin etc have all not seen anywhere near enough game time and will all likely to move on. For reasons you have stated it's very difficult to bed in a whole host of teenagers or players under 21 into the team at once.

I actually think the strategy employed by Brands has been pretty sensible. We are taking players who are either caste out at top teams or those not quite good enough/didn't fit in. There's enough of a turnaround rate to ensure they are decent ability, but we don't have to do enormous amounts of work with them. IWobi has been a very smart signing for example. It's what we did best under Moyes too.

I don't know. We've permanently signed 10 first teamers under Brands, 5 of them 25 or over, plus 2 players on loan. Admittedly that's one less than I was thinking because I had Mina down as 25 but of course he was younger when we signed him, he just didn't really play. Nonetheless, I'm not sure that tallies up with 'consistently signing 22-25 and some younger'. I'm not trying to say 25 and 26 year olds are old, but that's 7 players brought in for short-medium term gain. We know for sure we tried to sign Zaha, and there are strong rumours we also wanted Doucoure, Rojo and Mandzukic. None of those fit the model of young players who will increase in value, they're either at their peak or past it. So why are we going for that type of player? It's not clear to me.

If anything there was a much clearer emphasis on youth under Walsh, where Lookman, DCL, Vlasic, Sandro etc suggested we were really aiming for a long term vision. Unforunately he was useless at his job and only one of them is still here, but in terms of seeing the logic I think it was more obvious then than it is now. Look at the players Leicester have signed over the past few years and again it's much clearer what they've been trying to do. there's been a clear emphasis on signing young players there. They've signed 5 players first team under 22 in the last 2 seasons, we've signed 2. We can debate who's doing it right, i'm just saying I think everybody knows what Leicester have been aiming to achieve with their signings. I'm not sure you can say the same for us.

 

[Goat]

I don't know. We've permanently signed 10 first teamers under Brands, 5 of them 25 or over, plus 2 players on loan. Admittedly that's one less than I was thinking because I had Mina down as 25 but of course he was younger when we signed him, he just didn't really play. Nonetheless, I'm not sure that tallies up with 'consistently signing 22-25 and some younger'. I'm not trying to say 25 and 26 year olds are old, but that's 7 players brought in for short-medium term gain. We know for sure we tried to sign Zaha, and there are strong rumours we also wanted Doucoure, Rojo and Mandzukic. None of those fit the model of young players who will increase in value, they're either at their peak or past it. So why are we going for that type of player? It's not clear to me.

If anything there was a much clearer emphasis on youth under Walsh, where Lookman, DCL, Vlasic, Sandro etc suggested we were really aiming for a long term vision. Unforunately he was useless at his job and only one of them is still here, but in terms of seeing the logic I think it was more obvious then than it is now. Look at the players Leicester have signed over the past few years and again it's much clearer what they've been trying to do. there's been a clear emphasis on signing young players there. They've signed 5 players first team under 22 in the last 2 seasons, we've signed 2.

The average age of our squad is 24.

Its 1 of the youngest squads in the league.

 

[Bungle]

Less than 18 months in the job and the majority of players that have been brought in by him should theoretically improve us, sadly we've got a complete moron of a manager that can't mould what should be a half decent team out of the players he's been given.

He clearly has a plan and with a bit of luck Marco Silva isn't part of that in the long term, 18 months is a pretty short space of time to fix the utter mess he was presented with and I think he's done a pretty admirable job so far. He didn't cover himself in glory with the last minute approaches for sub standard CB's at the end of the last window but I still think he's heading in the right direction, we just need someone that can use the players we've got to their full potential.

 

[Goat]

Less than 18 months in the job and the majority of players that have been brought in by him should theoretically improve us, sadly we've got a complete moron of a manager that can't mould what should be a half decent team out of the players he's been given.

He clearly has a plan and with a bit of luck Marco Silva isn't part of that in the long term, 18 months is a pretty short space of time to fix the utter mess he was presented with and I think he's done a pretty admirable job so far. He didn't cover himself in glory with the last minute approaches for sub standard CB's at the end of the last window but I still think he's heading in the right direction, we just need someone that can use the players we've got to their full potential.

Personally I think the Rojo move was to pacify Silva.

From reading between the lines Silva had his heart set on Zouma and wouldnt entertain anybody else, Silva needs a squad for now, Brands wants a season for 2 or 2 seasons in the future.

Its a long slow process, 60 transfers in 3 windows Brands has overseen and we still have bad rubbish clogging up our wage bill.

Niasse 50k, Sandro 105k, Bolaise 75k, Stekkers 30k, Martina 30k almost 300k a week in wasted wages for players that are so crap that nobody will buy them.

 

[Lanolin]

The average age of our squad is 24.

Its 1 of the youngest squads in the league.

That might be true (I haven't checked). It doesn't really address the point though.

The point being made earlier was that our plan was to sign young players who improve and we then sell for a profit. I'm saying the signings we've made don't necessarily back that up, because they're not really at an age where their value is likely to rocket. The age of the squad is brought down by the likes of Davies, Holgate, DCL, plus the 2 players I mentioned that we've brought in. But as I've just said, we've brought in 7 (and tried for more) players who are older than that average, and I don't really know why. Everyone said it was a miracle that we got offered £30m for Gana because he was 29 and nobody pays that for a 29 year old. We then went and spent almost all of that on Gomes, who'll be 27 by the time he next kicks a ball. So how's his value going to go up? It's not is it? So he doesn't fit the model.

I'm not criticising Brands, I'm just saying that if you actually look at what we're doing, it isn't quite as obvious as people often make out. If your plan is to slowly get better over a couple of years by signing young players, why bring a 27 year old full back in on loan and a 29 year old who has experience right at the top of his list of positive attributes. Those signings suggest a desire to improve in the short term, but that's then undermined by the fact the striker everybody knew we needed to get was a 19 year old who doesn't look ready to do the job yet. That's why I used the word muddled, it seems like we can't quite decide whether we're trying to plan for the long term or plug gaps in the short term.

This is why I understand the shouts for better communication. If we all knew that this was a long term thing and we could see that we were putting together a really young side then people (not all of course) would be a bit more patient. Because we're still seeing Schneiderlin, Tosun, Walcott etc in the side, and we're bringing in loans and experienced heads next to them, people don't see it the same way. That type of thing is the DoF's responsibility in my book.