December 19, 2018, 06:58:54 AM

Author Topic: Should we sack Steve Walsh?  (Read 54055 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

October 02, 2017, 07:29:07 PM
Read 54055 times
Offline

van der Meyde


How the fuck anyone on here can answer this I don't know.

Walsh didn't make the decisions at Chelsea. Allardyce made them at Newcastle. At Hull, Pearson was the one deciding. At Leicester it was Pearson and then Ranieri.

Our recruitment structure is so opaque that assessing anything like that is difficult. He's getting a lot of stick for not bringing in a target man to replace Lukaku, but he tried to bring in one in January and one of the reasons Belfodil didn't come through was because Koeman wouldn't sign off on it without meeting the player.

Honestly, who is in a position to know?
...


October 03, 2017, 04:12:01 AM
Reply #1
Offline

van der Meyde


This is my point too.
Not getting a centre forward is obviously a major failing, but there are just too many plausible explanations.

Why didn't we bring one in?

Could we not convince players to join? Did our valuation not meet the selling club/player's wage demands? Our search seemed to focus on target men, was Koeman unwilling to compromise on that? Did Walsh suggest a number of players but couldn't convince Koeman of their worth? Did we ultimately decide that a strike force of Rooney, Sandro, Calvert-Lewin (and Niasse?) was enough to see us okay? Did we decide that developing Calvert-Lewin was a better option than signing the target man 8th down our list? Could we not afford one? Did we dwell too long on our number one choice when it might have been more prudent to wrap up a young potential target man early on as a back up just in case?

We can probably answer a couple of those from interviews and journalist mutterings, but most of them haven't been addressed at all.
...

October 27, 2017, 05:55:19 PM
Reply #2
Offline

van der Meyde


The fact they both joined the club at the same time led to the strange dynamic.
I think there are probably parallels to when Ferguson and Gill both left Man Utd at the same time too.

In hindsight, having both a new manager and a Director of Football, both with little experience of conducting transfers, was a disaster waiting to happen. As @Rhys suggested the other day, with a more experienced DoF the dynamic might have been a lot more successful.
...


November 25, 2017, 05:13:21 PM
Reply #3
Offline

van der Meyde


Empathetic to the idea that Koeman was knocking back some of Walsh's suggestions.

A first recommendation of Allardyce is probably grounds for sacking alone though.
...

November 25, 2017, 05:51:42 PM
Reply #4
Offline

van der Meyde


We don’t know who or what Walsh was responsible for though. Seemingly almost everyone loves Vlasic and Sandro and rates them, do you think Koeman knew about them and requested them? Or even that lad we’ve parked in Belgium? Same with Lookman as well.

We do know Koeman wanted Rooney and Sigurdsson (and most likely Klaassen given his connections) as he was very vocal about it, previously Schneiderlin and Bolasie, players Walsh or anybody in his position wouldn’t have to scout. We also know Koeman wanted more “productivity” from the team, ie Goalscores and to be less reliant on a forward, hence the recruitment of multiple players who perform the same attacking role, and we know Koeman wanted Giroud and only Giroud (no point in options 2,3 or 4 etc etc).

Walsh could be a goldmine of knowledge given the freedom to operate properly, only time will tell, but he’s clearly been handicapped by Koemans influence over Moshiri in the past and the squad imbalance isnt down to him.

The whole Walsh witchhunt is odd given nobody actually knows his role, responsibilities or remit are.
All that could be true, but his first suggestion for the most important job at the club was his old mate Sam Allardyce.
...

November 25, 2017, 06:02:53 PM
Reply #5
Offline

van der Meyde


Well for a start that’s only a rumour. But if it’s true maybe he was asked who he thought could come in now right away and steady the ship until the end of the season, and he’d probably be right wouldnt he.
Well it's not only a rumour is it? Allardyce has said himself that Everton didn't show the commitment he would like. There's fairly substantive reports that Moshiri met with Allardyce which hasn't been refuted in the slightest.

We don't shy away from offering managers over £100k p/w and we're one of the few clubs willing to pay hefty compensation for them. I like Allardyce. I'm one of the bigger fans of him. Having Allardyce as your first port of call though is nothing short of negligent.
...


February 08, 2018, 03:10:04 PM
Reply #6
Offline

van der Meyde


Thank you, but sponsorship & advertising =/= commercial performance. And that was the year we signed our new shirt sponsors and introduced a sleeve sponsor, so you would expect a big jump in spon. Would be interested to see other clubs % growth for each new sponsor.

For commercial to have grown 66% last year would represent a stunning turnaround, as since 2013 commercial has grown by just £8m (as of 2016 accounts), and by those accounts profit from commercial had dropped between 15-16.

In fact, if you look at our EBITDA for that account period, the only clubs worse than Everton at proftiable revenue generation are Swansea, Sunderland, Stoke, and Villa.
Relative measures like the 66% aren't very helpful really because they lack context. How did that £8m increase compare to the clubs above us or to clubs like Leicester, West Ham and Southampton?

If a £1 bet returned you £1.66 that's a 66% increase too, but it's also nothing to write home about.
...

February 08, 2018, 09:44:05 PM
Reply #7
Offline

van der Meyde


If you have commercial activities overall, then you end up saying about how West Ham have new stadium, Leicester have recent success, they are not comparable situations. 66% was just to highlight stagnant is not an accurate summary. Feel free to pick the bones out of the new deals.

On shirt sponsor, Leicester are getting around £4m a year because it's the owner's brand and old deal. West Ham £8m, Southampton about £6m. But would expect similar or better results from commercial operations at stadiums due to locations and facilities. 
In the main, I don't really think you're wrong about Elstone's performance. I do think having figures for those "less fashionable" clubs though is important. For all of their advantages, we'll have some of our own, so it will average out somewhat. (Also, the use of relative figures is just a big bug bear of mine. :))

So, if we're comparable with Leicester, West Ham, Southampton and West Ham, you won't really get all that much argument from me at this stage.

There definitely are areas related to him I'd  pull up though. He's been CEO (or deputy CEO) during two failed stadium moves. He presided over the new badge fiasco.

There may also be an argument that he's a little short termist in his deals. As you said earlier, well only improve revenues when we sign new contracts. So given that, 5 years for SportPesa and 10 years for Kitbag feel like they could bring in a little more money now but with less relative to our potential down the backend. (There have certainly been suggestions that this sort of thing has hindered Arsenal.)

I don't really think he's the figure of failure he's painted though, no.
...

February 17, 2018, 06:18:18 PM
Reply #8
Offline

van der Meyde


Yeah been wrestling with it myself. Don’t rate Walsh at all, but if Henry and Lookman develop how I think they should - he’s potentially got 4-6 hits on his CV.
I don't think the two views are necessarily inconsistent with each other though.

Of the players you and @Mick 1995 have mentioned, Sigurdsson, Onyekuru and Lookman all look to be talented players. In isolation, they're all decent signings. But they've also all spent large parts of their career playing down the left as attacking players. (You could possibly throw Bolasie and Sandro into the mix there too.)

Or the whole 'three number 10s' (plus Davies and Vlasic...) thing.

Building a balanced squad is a huge part of the DoF role. It's inevitable that some players will be viewed as donkeys if they've got that much competition, there's just no way they'll get the minutes to prove otherwise.
...

March 05, 2018, 05:21:02 AM
Reply #9
Offline

van der Meyde


Can we change the thread title and remove the conditional element? 'When should we sack Steve Walsh?' seems more appropriate.

Or maybe 'please God, will someone fucking sack Steve Walsh now' for something more direct.
If we're going to sack him, it should be now.

If we're still debating it, we risk ruining our summer's deals.

I'd like to think Moshiri appreciates the importance of the timing - particularly after Walsh's initial appointment - but I'm not certain he does.
...