The NSNO Everton Forums

How fucking boring are you lads chatting about this.

Jack Grealish playing for Everton a couple years after facing relegation season after season, deepest darkest shite we endured. And you are all hammering on about 10 million quid, cost ratio and sell on fees...how boring.

Just enjoy football lads!!

Audrey Horne wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 10:13 am How fucking boring are you lads chatting about this.

Jack Grealish playing for Everton a couple years after facing relegation season after season, deepest darkest shite we endured. And you are all hammering on about 10 million quid, cost ratio and sell on fees...how boring.

Just enjoy football lads!!

Pretty sure everyone wanted us to be run sustainably when we were facing relegation and financial Armageddon, just because we're about 8 months past that phase doesn't mean we should just completely forget just why we were in so much trouble in the first place.

I'd rather enjoy my football watching us build something that's not going to fall apart again because we didn't learn anything from the last time.

There's plenty of exciting talent around the world we could attract, so it's not Grealish or bust. Deals should be done with the long term benefit of the club front and foremost, and maybe there's a way that can happen with Grealish, but the argument should always be 'is this a good investment'.

For many reasons (shirt sales, excitement on the pitch, attracting other players, raising the club's profile etc etc) signing Grealish under the right conditions will tick these boxes, but also under the wrong conditions it doesn't.

Can't just blindly throw huge wages at a guy who might only play 15-20 games next season, but if it can be done within our structure and these things are accounted for in what we pay him and anything we pay to City then it's fine.

Whether people like it or not, our financial prudence is what will ultimately decide our success or lack of.

TheRam wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 8:07 am I feel like people are getting stressed over made up numbers again.

Also deciding exactly how quickly his form will drop off, exactly how badly he’s looked after himself, how many times he’ll get kicked and how many games he’s going to play.

I wish I’d looked after myself that badly.

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 11:09 am Pretty sure everyone wanted us to be run sustainably when we were facing relegation and financial Armageddon, just because we're about 8 months past that phase doesn't mean we should just completely forget just why we were in so much trouble in the first place.

I'd rather enjoy my football watching us build something that's not going to fall apart again because we didn't learn anything from the last time.

There's plenty of exciting talent around the world we could attract, so it's not Grealish or bust. Deals should be done with the long term benefit of the club front and foremost, and maybe there's a way that can happen with Grealish, but the argument should always be 'is this a good investment'.

For many reasons (shirt sales, excitement on the pitch, attracting other players, raising the club's profile etc etc) signing Grealish under the right conditions will tick these boxes, but also under the wrong conditions it doesn't.

Can't just blindly throw huge wages at a guy who might only play 15-20 games next season, but if it can be done within our structure and these things are accounted for in what we pay him and anything we pay to City then it's fine.

Whether people like it or not, our financial prudence is what will ultimately decide our success or lack of.

It sort of is Grealish or bust though, because he’s the only player we can reasonably get of his standard right now.

Who do we get if we don’t get Grealish? Mandala back on loan again?

Toddacelli wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 12:49 pm It sort of is Grealish or bust though, because he’s the only player we can reasonably get of his standard right now.

Who do we get if we don’t get Grealish? Mandala back on loan again?

Bakayoko, Fofana, Conceição to name but 3 of the exciting young rapid wingers we tried to sign in the summer but couldn't attract. All probably give us more of what we need in terms of pace and potential sell on value.

I think people have got a bit stuck on Grealish because he's a big name, has a crazy amount of talent and formed a great bond with the fans. All fantastic things to have, but in reality he's managed half a season before being out for the remainder which carries on his many absences last season with City through injury despite playing very little.

You could probably take out Grealish and put any of the other 3 I've listed above in the team instead and had at least the same level of impact over a whole season... So there's many options out there that aren't a post peak injury prone superstar on ridiculously high wages for a team like us.

Don't get me wrong, I totally get the Grealish love, I was the same with James. It's that extra sprinkling of gold dust we don't get to experience usually, and for that alone it's great to have someone in the team who is a that extra level above anything we get to see normally... But you can't build a team around him because he's not definitely going to play every week, and he doesn't fix the issue we have of zero pace in the team.

As I've said loads, I'm not necessarily against signing him, I'm probably more in the yes than no camp, but the maths have to add up. We shouldn't be a vanity project team again, we tried that and it nearly destroyed the club. So the deal needs to match where we are as a club or it doesn't make any sense imo.

Audrey Horne wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 10:13 am How fucking boring are you lads chatting about this.

Jack Grealish playing for Everton a couple years after facing relegation season after season, deepest darkest shite we endured. And you are all hammering on about 10 million quid, cost ratio and sell on fees...how boring.

Just enjoy football lads!!

Totally agree its not like them dark times had anything to do with finances is it. People forget that we had a billionaire accountant then and they continue to forget its not our money so really doesn't matter anyway

777Kidnappings wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 1:02 pm Totally agree its not like them dark times had anything to do with finances is it. People forget that we had a billionaire accountant then and they continue to forget its not our money so really doesn't matter anyway

It's ten million that's being bashed about on here not 100 million haha

I just don’t see this move in isolation causing any major problems.

If we start regularly shelling out for pretty good players with similar age profiles to Grealish, then we’re heading down the same horrible path as under Moshiri.

If we do this sort of thing sparingly and for needle-movers like Jack, I fail to see any serious opportunity cost. He’s that good.

I imagine the issue is some people don't see him as a needle-mover (madness to me). I've heard people moaning more about him 'slowing down attacks' than anything positive in recent months tbh.

I'd rather get Grealish on loan again and give him a proper full back to play with.

Shogun wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 2:43 pm I imagine the issue is some people don't see him as a needle-mover (madness to me). I've heard people moaning more about him 'slowing down attacks' than anything positive in recent months tbh.

I'd rather get Grealish on loan again and give him a proper full back to play with.

I think he is a needle mover if we have the right players around him, and attacking pacy LB would make the world of difference.

I just think for a needle mover he'll most likely play 25 games at best (his past 3 seasons he's made 20 appearances in each), so that has to be taken in to consideration with wages and general squad planning.

Grealish on loan (approx £15m-£20m including loan fee and wages) and someone like Fatawa on the cheap from Leicester as his backup would be fine.

I just don't want us to put all our eggs in one basket.

Shogun wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 2:43 pm I imagine the issue is some people don't see him as a needle-mover (madness to me). I've heard people moaning more about him 'slowing down attacks' than anything positive in recent months tbh.

I'd rather get Grealish on loan again and give him a proper full back to play with.

He was guilty of that at times, but then he was also our plan A, B and C which meant he often didn't have any option but to slow it down and see if he could create something from nothing.

When we had everyone fit he looked better, and when we invest in more talent over the summer I'm sure we'll see even more good games than bad.

He's also built a connection with the club and I think his attitude and his real, experienced understanding of what it takes to win, is a huge bonus and something moyes values.

Since moyes returned are we averaging significantly more points with grealish then without? Feels like hes been a standout when hes played but that maybe it hasn't led to significantly better results

Audrey Horne wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 1:38 pm It's ten million that's being bashed about on here not 100 million haha

Its potentially 50 or 60m in fee and wages.

Shogun wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 2:43 pm I imagine the issue is some people don't see him as a needle-mover (madness to me). I've heard people moaning more about him 'slowing down attacks' than anything positive in recent months tbh.

I'd rather get Grealish on loan again and give him a proper full back to play with.

100% the issue right here. He needs a marauding full back to leave him one on one or give an outball to.

We sort that with him next season will be sensational.

777Kidnappings wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2026 4:21 pm Its potentially 50 or 60m in fee and wages.

It’s also potentially a lot less as well.