Everton agree Koeman deal


Status
Not open for further replies.
There are a couple of good articles that have been written about the change in ambition that seems to have begun with having Moshiri leading things rather than Kenwright. This is a good one:

http://www.fourfourtwo.com/features...-mediocrity-too-long-looks-a-new-age-ambition

In my opinion, Everton as a club have changed considerably since February with Moshiri's arrival. Before then, we were on a downward slide with a poor manager and the hopes of a new stadium in the near future were a deluded dream with having an owner like Kenwright who may love the club, but simply doesn't have the money to compete in this league. On top of that, our best players were destined to leave and we'd become a bottom half outfit, undoing all the hard work David Moyes had done in the 11 years previous.

If you are short sighted like the Leicester fan appears to be, and only consider the most recent season as an indicator for what is to come, then it's probably fair to say that moving from Southampton to Everton is a sideways step at best, but more likely a step down. But things change in football and as I said, the current Everton are not what we were before February.

Since the arrival of Moshiri, the mayor of Liverpool - Joe Anderson, has said that he expects Everton to be in a new stadium within 3 years. That's a huge change in stance from him as pre Moshiri he was actually pretty dismissive of our hopes for a Stadium saying we can't afford one. We've now made a big statement in bringing in Koeman who is a huge name in the footballing world and has done well abroad and now in the English league, whilst we now have a sizeable amount of money to spend. I think Lukaku will go and he will be tough to replace, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Stones stay. A lot of Evertonians, myself included, still have very high hopes for him. Who better than to improve him than Koeman? Martinez certainly wasn't the man to do it.

So we have a core of some very good players, with money to spend, a talented manager and a new stadium on the horizon. It's hard to see why people have written us off as being in such trouble to be honest. Personally I am hoping we can get ourselves back in the top 7 next season and repair the damage Martinez did, and then push on from there.

It's just my opinion, not a dig.

I judge the potential future of a club mainly by it's revenue streams. Ancient history is not a factor because it's not tangible, I don't think you can monetise history of 30+ years a go. I seriously doubt that any prospective player gives two hoots that you used to be a big club before he was born.

For example take Everton with their great history and West Ham with a relatively poor one. Two clubs of similar stature and if you both offered a player the same contract he's no more likely to choose Everton than West Ham because of history.

I was amazed how many people thought Everton are a bigger club than Tottenham on a thread here a few months a go. http://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/everton-or-spurs.1191848/

To me that is just ignorance as it's not even debateable, Tottenham generated €92m than Everton, unless Everton can bridge that gap the Tottenham will always be able to pay bigger transfer fees and wages and there is a direct correlation between money and success. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League

I do think Everton are the biggest club outside the top six especially now Newcastle have been relegated but they are closer to the lesser teams than they are to Tottenham, the gap is huge. The big club, small club debate is a particularly tedious one anyway.

FWIW I do think Everton can have a bright future, a new stadium and owner and some brilliant young players that can be added if you can get your house in order.
 
I think you need to look at the reasons they were poor in the last half of the season You sound even more like a mag after this post if we finish above them it would most likely mean a top half finish for us

I just think a lot of the players they have are overrated and we are going places under Sam.

Everton are no great force in the modern day, I think finishing above them is ambitious but not unrealistic.
 
I just think a lot of the players they have are overrated and we are going places under Sam.

Everton are no great force in the modern day, I think finishing above them is ambitious but not unrealistic.
That squad hit 72pts just a couple of seasons back no fluke ... It fell apart when Martinez started f***ing up the defence they're a top of the table (top 8) side on paper easily

I'd give my right nad to finish above them next season as I say it would probably mean a top half finish
 
Everton's new owner is only worth £1.3 Billion, so I certainly don't think their prospects for next season are any brighter than Southampton's on the surface of things. Or even ours.

They are one of those clubs who might challenge for Europe, but could just as easily do a Mags/Villa

This is why i think the talk of him investing hundreds of millions of his own money is bollocks. I believe his heart is in the right place but he's not going to be throwing 10, 20% of his net worth away especially when that kind of money will be more likely to solidify a Europa League spot than Champions League or trophies. It's pocket change to the real money men in the PL like the Man City Arabs and Abramovich.
 
This is why i think the talk of him investing hundreds of millions of his own money is bollocks. I believe his heart is in the right place but he's not going to be throwing 10, 20% of his net worth away especially when that kind of money will be more likely to solidify a Europa League spot than Champions League or trophies. It's pocket change to the real money men in the PL like the Man City Arabs and Abramovich.
Maybe they should've just got a washed up old failure as a manager like you's did last summer added with a squad of mainly longball plodders they might've had a chance of winning league this season
 
Maybe they should've just got a washed up old failure as a manager like you's did last summer added with a squad of mainly longball plodders they might've had a chance of winning league this season

You seem like you get an opinion in your head and no matter what evidence you see you refuse to allow your opinion to waiver. It really smacks of ignorance, there are none so blind than those who refuse to see.

Ranieri was the nearly man of football managing a lot of big clubs and finishing second a few times. If that makes him a failure then every manager in the top leagues is a failure outside of Pep, Mourinho, Ferguson, etc.

Would you consider BSA a failure because he's not won a title or a cup in his long career?
 
It's just my opinion, not a dig.

I judge the potential future of a club mainly by it's revenue streams. Ancient history is not a factor because it's not tangible, I don't think you can monetise history of 30+ years a go. I seriously doubt that any prospective player gives two hoots that you used to be a big club before he was born.

For example take Everton with their great history and West Ham with a relatively poor one. Two clubs of similar stature and if you both offered a player the same contract he's no more likely to choose Everton than West Ham because of history.

I was amazed how many people thought Everton are a bigger club than Tottenham on a thread here a few months a go. http://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/everton-or-spurs.1191848/

To me that is just ignorance as it's not even debateable, Tottenham generated €92m than Everton, unless Everton can bridge that gap the Tottenham will always be able to pay bigger transfer fees and wages and there is a direct correlation between money and success. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League

I do think Everton are the biggest club outside the top six especially now Newcastle have been relegated but they are closer to the lesser teams than they are to Tottenham, the gap is huge. The big club, small club debate is a particularly tedious one anyway.

FWIW I do think Everton can have a bright future, a new stadium and owner and some brilliant young players that can be added if you can get your house in order.

Fair enough, but you do seem to be the type of poster that comes out swinging with your own opinion as though it's fact. Just because you believe the most important factor in deciding which club is bigger is related to finances, it doesn't necessarily mean it's a fact, or that other people share the same opinion. I agree it is one of many important things that add up to being a big club. I'd say that at this moment in time, Spurs are comfortably bigger than us. But overall, there is no way they are. Achievements throughout a clubs history, whilst maybe not important to modern players, is still a good way of measuring success and a clubs stature. Maybe you see having millions in the bank and being the third best team in 2016 as a better achievement than being the best team in the country over 9 months a total of 9 times, but I certainly don't. It's also funny how Liverpool still get included in the elite by so many, despite coming 8th last season and having not won a title for 26 years, but other clubs who mention their past achievements like Everton, Sunderland, Villa get laughed at for bringing it up.

Your point about West Ham and Everton is a fair one though, and I agree with your last line.
 
Fair enough, but you do seem to be the type of poster that comes out swinging with your own opinion as though it's fact. Just because you believe the most important factor in deciding which club is bigger is related to finances, it doesn't necessarily mean it's a fact, or that other people share the same opinion. I agree it is one of many important things that add up to being a big club. I'd say that at this moment in time, Spurs are comfortably bigger than us. But overall, there is no way they are. Achievements throughout a clubs history, whilst maybe not important to modern players, is still a good way of measuring success and a clubs stature. Maybe you see having millions in the bank and being the third best team in 2016 as a better achievement than being the best team in the country over 9 months a total of 9 times, but I certainly don't. It's also funny how Liverpool still get included in the elite by so many, despite coming 8th last season and having not won a title for 26 years, but other clubs who mention their past achievements like Everton, Sunderland, Villa get laughed at for bringing it up.

Your point about West Ham and Everton is a fair one though, and I agree with your last line.

As I said the big club/small club is a tedious one and can't be quantified as everyone has a different view point to what stats are relevant or not. My own perception is how well a club can generate revenue long term because of the direct correlation between money and success.

Liverpool are still a huge club in my eyes because they generate £200m+ more than a club like Everton every year despite their relative little success over the last couple of decades.

When I was growing up Everton were in the "big five" but these things aren't static and evolve over time and I just think Everton's rivals nowadays are the likes of Newcastle & West Ham and not the big six upwards. Just my opinion, nothing else.
 
As I said the big club/small club is a tedious one and can't be quantified as everyone has a different view point to what stats are relevant or not. My own perception is how well a club can generate revenue long term because of the direct correlation between money and success.

Liverpool are still a huge club in my eyes because they generate £200m+ more than a club like Everton every year despite their relative little success over the last couple of decades.

When I was growing up Everton were in the "big five" but these things aren't static and evolve over time and I just think Everton's rivals nowadays are the likes of Newcastle & West Ham and not the big six upwards. Just my opinion, nothing else.

Leicester will generate more money than Liverpool this season but Liverpool are a bigger club so your talking shite.

Spurs will generate more money than AC milan but milan are bigger. Its a poor argument
 
Leicester will generate more money than Liverpool this season but Liverpool are a bigger club so your talking shite.

Spurs will generate more money than AC milan but milan are bigger. Its a poor argument

Everton and Newcastle bigger than Inter Milan :D. Forget European Cups etc, revenue is the only thing that counts. It's a ridiculous argument. It's one of many things that contributes to the stature of a club but not the sole one.

I'm happy with what we've achieved in our history anyway, and what we can hopefully achieve in the future now we have a man with a bit of money behind us.
 
Leicester will generate more money than Liverpool this season but Liverpool are a bigger club so your talking shite.

Spurs will generate more money than AC milan but milan are bigger. Its a poor argument

Leicester won't generate more than Liverpool this year.

Leicester will be the 13th biggest income club in the world this season but I don't think we're now the 13th biggest club in the world, far from it.

If we could generate that kind of money year in year out then I would say we've become a huge club but the likelihood that this is a one off season for us and our income projection for the foreseeable future will be about 10th in the PL making us a mid table level club.

I just think history is a poor argument for the size of a club, Huddersfield have won three titles in their history but is their stature in the game any better than Barnsley or a club like that?

Everton and Newcastle bigger than Inter Milan :D. Forget European Cups etc, revenue is the only thing that counts. It's a ridiculous argument. It's one of many things that contributes to the stature of a club but not the sole one.

I'm happy with what we've achieved in our history anyway, and what we can hopefully achieve in the future now we have a man with a bit of money behind us.

It doesn't work so well when you cross it over countries but is an excellent indicator in the same country IMO.

By that logic Bournemouth are bigger than Celtic, Ajax & Lazio but that's obviously not the case.
 
I just think history is a poor argument for the size of a club, Huddersfield have won three titles in their history but is their stature in the game any better than Barnsley or a club like that?

Huddersfield's stature reflects their history in that apart from a few years in the 20s they've done nothing noteworthy to keep that profile high.

Everton were founder members of both the FL and PL and were the first to take the title from Preston in the 1890s. The teams of the late 20s and 30s coined the phrase 'the school of science', the 60s teams were revered culminating in the epitomes of pure football in 1970. The mid 80s side swept all away. 3 times EFC sides have been cut in their prime by 2 world wars and the Heysel ban, without which maybe we wouldn't just be the 4th most successful side.

All that is without factoring in the impact of Goodison on football, the great players we've been littered with and have been lucky to have had play for us and a city that lives and breathes football.

All the above are factors in the stature of football clubs. As is the flip side, the negative dumbing down of expectations over the last 16 years or so led by Kenwright and Moyes, 21 years without a trophy (worst run in history) and letting GP stagnate. All this culminates in people laughably comparing a move from Southampton as sideways or backwards.

Each club has their own circumstances, it isn't right to simply state revenues without context.
 
Size of the club. what is it. Income generated through the turnstiles &/or the brand name (should bring in more commercial revenue from sponsorship, wealthy supporters etc.). Brand name improves by winning trophies, being on TV and paying attractive football.

Everton get more fans but the amount of dosh through the turnstiles is about the same and there might be scope for improvement for both clubs.

Brand name commercial income: Southampton 12.7 m Everton 11.3 m Sunderland 21.2 m Leeds 14.5 m (iffy accounts?) Norwich 14.6 m Bournemouth unspecified probably less than £4 m Wigan 1.5 m Wednesday 3.9 m (effect of a Championship team) Newcastle 24.9 m Boro 4.7 m Man United 264 m Brighton 8.9 m (most of the time in Div 3) Spurs 59.4 m Forest 3.3 m (slipping since their heydeys) Real Madrid 247 m Leicester 20.2 m (not that small a club at all) West Ham 31 m Chelsea 149 M Liverpool 153 m Derby 7.5 (cheap) Hull 4.5 m (small time) Celtic 35 m (top haf of the Premier League standard) Rangers N/K Burnley 6.2 m (not bad at all) Huddersfield N/K. .

Summary: once upon a time Everton got the highest crowds in the land. But that was the distant past. No more chance than Southampton of joining the elite. Watch the ambitions of West Ham and Spurs.

PS: Correction. Other accounts show Everton with a brand name revenue of £26 m which puts them in a League above Southampton. This might be a more relaiostic figure.

That mucks up the original argument. They have been so ordinary for so long!

Inter are £45 million.

NB: Leeds and Everton have entries for unspecified commercial activities which makes comparison possibly misleading ??? Bolton had the same thing and it caused them problems. Not entirely football related? Still the commerical income generated is much greater for the so called prestige bigger clubs. A sign of how big a club is ???

When teams get relegated and lost their parachute payments, the size of the club really kicks in through the reduction in commercial income and then gate receipts can mean 40% of the annual income. Villa, Newcastle and Norwich should be able to sustain the fall. Villa are a big club (not internationally) with commercial income of £27m which is actually above the total revenue of almost all the Championship clubs (w/o parachute payments). This is as important as gate receipts whihc is below £10m for all Championship clubs. Sunderland £10.8 compare the highest in the Championship Brighton at £9.8 million (small fall because of no Cup games.)
 
Last edited:
Everton have been a fuckin shambles since they stupidly decided it was acceptable to allow Kendall to go to Real Sociedad back in 1987(?).
At the time they were the second most successful club in English football history behind Liverpool and as good as any team in Europe. They had more title wins than Arsenal & Utd at the time. I think theyve still more title wins than Chelsea & City combined. Anyone who thinks Southampton are in any shape or form a "bigger" club than Everton wants their skyboy head looking at.
 
Ronald Koeman hasn't come to Everton because they are a bigger club than Southampton. Koeman has probably never dreamt of being Involved at Everton in a way he might of with Man United or Barcelona for instance, so the size of the club is an irrelevance.

It all comes down to ambition. Koeman is clearly convinced that there's a brighter future at Everton than there is at Southampton. Moshiri is set to invest heavily as shown by the (lucrative) efforts it has taken to get Koeman to Everton.

Southampton have sold their best players without any resistance in the last couple of seasons and that makes it difficult for a manager to build a team, even though Koeman has done a decent job under those circumstances. Everton aren't really a selling club and showed that by rejecting a £40m bid for Stones last summer (rightly or wrongly) and with money to spend, I think that's what makes Everton a far more attractive proposition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top