catcherintherye
Player Valuation: £80m
It has seemed for a while now that it's Pellegrini or De Boer, with Mourinho as wildcard (some wildcard, though).
Presuming both would accept, it's an intriguing choice.
Pellegrini, the known quantity, high-profile, savvy, experienced. Could he replicate the impact he made at Villarreal and Malaga? Probably a shorter-term appointment to leave better things for a successor? Has he now peaked in terms of career achievement? Certainly the lower risk option.
De Boer, decorated player, outstanding pedigree but untested in an elite league. Higher risk but potentially greater return. Could build a longer-term legacy if successful. Could also prove to be underwhelming, average, or indeed a flop, leaving us looking for another manager in 12-18 months.
I am increasingly seeing Pellegrini as the "steady the ship" option which, whilst not getting my pulse going, appeals nonetheless given the shambles we have had to witness, particularly of late. I have said repeatedly that we could do far, far worse in appointing someone with his CV and credentials.
I can also be vaulted here for expressing my unease about De Boer simply as he is an unknown quantity in an elite league. Mind you, a potential 5 league titles in 6 years is not to be sniffed at. He seems to have at least been considered for jobs at Spurs, Liverpool, and Swansea and wants to take a step up at a time of his own choosing, and in the right environment. Can't do anymore at Ajax.
As with most of us, I'm trying to read the runes of @The Esk postings and wonder now if De Boer is closer to being appointed? Just by virtue of the fact that De Boer seems to place a huge amount of stock in the backroom team he can bring with him and the overall project and that this would lead to potentially longer, but successful negotiations?
It seems we can offer both men most, if not all of the opportunities and challenges they seek in their next job.
At this stage, and I have surprised myself, my head says Pellegrini and heart says De Boer. De Boer offers more in the longer term if he can hit the ground running and we would potentially be back in or around competing with Spurs/Lpool, our closest peers in my eyes. I'm not at all ageist, but I see in Pochettino now a guy that could be at Spurs for years, making them stronger and with multiple CL / title attempts. Wouldn't that be great?
While in theory you might be correct, the more I see of Pellegrini the more fearful I get. You cannot consider League Cups do be a decent barometer to measure a manager of a club of that stature. His league performance this season has been awful given the resources he's had. I know his defenders are saying about Guardiola announcement being the reason. If so it's a very poor excuse that he is unable to motivate players. The reality is though, the rot had set in well before that with them surrendering top spot.
Throughout his time I think it would be hard to argue against the following be key features:
1) Inconsistency
2) Over reliance on Key players (not brought in by him)
3) Defensive frailties/a soft centre (particularly away from home).
When you talk about steadying the ship I have not seen much from him at City that would suggest he will be able to do this. At City the best you can say he did was maintain their performance after being given a huge amount of money, at worst you could say they have gone backwards. A lot of the above problems are the exact problems we have. I think given his age he is after 1 last big payday and worry he will drown in the challenge. The comparison I would make would be Walter who was completely out of his depth with inferior players and was too stuck in his ways.
I have seen a lot of people say he would turn around the ethos of the club. I really don't see that as his style at all. I would say he is a very good tactician who is able to work within a club and organise players in a calm manner. However he hasn't got Toure working any harder or in a more disciplined manner. I see him as more of a tinkerer than someone who is going to uproot us root and branch, especially given his age. At City, for all his successes he also hasn't got a particularly good record in big derby matches, so anyone expected us to start smashing Liverpool I think is a little foolhardy. I think he'd have been perfect to the over from Moyes, but the job is just too big.
If you compare that to De Boer I do see a different picture. I accept that it's only the Dutch league, Mclaren has won one and his record in Europe is hot and cold. However his record in the Dutch league far exceeds anything Mclaren has done. What he has shown over the last 6 years is a remarkable consistency, an ability to handle pressure and to improve a club he went into (they hadn't won the league in the previous 7 years). He has also done this selling his best players and bringing through younger players (which for me is a key skill for an Everton manager still to have).
I do understand people's concerns with him being at one club in a poor league, like what I say above that cannot be disputed. However my gut feeling is De Boer is close to breaking out to be a very good manager for someone, and this is why Liverpool and Spurs identified him. He is too good for Holland and needs an opportunity somewhere else.
You are spot on about steadying the ship, the performances of this team are as disjointed as any Everton team I've ever seen. However I think we should ask two things, what does steadying the ship mean and how can it be done. For me steadying the ship for us means, getting them fitter, working harder, working together as a team and having tactical flexibility. I think De Boer will do this very well (as would Emery, Tuchel etc).
On the second point I think given we have all pre-season we have time to turn things around. It is not mid season when I think the appointment of Pellegrini would make more sense. The new manager will have two months to begin to put their stamp on things and in spite of how poor we are I do think there are the raw materials to turn things around quite quickly.
I understand a lot of this post reflect my gut feelings, or summations of what I would say is the harder evidence. The harder evidence is that Pellegrini has done worse but in a more competitive league, while De Boer has done better in a poorer league. Other people will draw out different conclusions. I'm happy to be vaulted either way, particularly with Pellegrini who I think would have real difficulty.