Ross Barkley

[gordondaviesmoustache]

As an evertonian my question for city fans is why do you want him now?

The lad has magnificent potential but thats all it is at the moment - he's far too up and down to command a regular place in your side with the resulting publicity of him gathering splinters on the bench (england's next great hope ruined by city etc...)not being worth the hassle

All this when you have that fabulous player silva (best in the league for me) who can play that no 10 role infinitely better at the moment

If everton are to sell then kenwright will have to pitch it as a deal that we just couldn't turn down (given that the tv money has suddenly made us financially secure) - you'd be silly (imo) to deal at the sort of price we'd be after

I have to say, first and foremost, it's pretty naive of Everton supporters to think that a decent set of accounts makes you financially secure in the long term. You're treading water. In actual fact you are still up for sale because Kenwright doesn't want to invest in the infrastructure required to help you push on commercially so that you can have sustainable success over a period of time. Your current financial security has come from a greater or lesser extent from selling your best players every other summer. You don't have the money to invest another 40/50 million in that squad, nor the money to build a new stadium. I'm not trying to be harsh, but that's a reality. I understand the bullish talk from Martinez about the club not needing to sell to pay off debts or an overdraft, but your board of directors IMHO aren't going to knock back a cash offer of 40 million pounds for any of your players.

Anyway, so why do I want Barkley. I think he's as good as Martinez is talking him up to be. He's got the potential to be the best English player of many generations. He is already at his tender age, although inconsistent, at his best better than 99% of the midfield players in the league. You mention Silva but generally Silva has played either from the left or from the right for City. I think Barkley's role in our squad would be to effectively take the place of Nasri/Toure as he can play either centrally or from a slightly wider position.

There's another reason I want Barkley, which is much more parochial in a way. Other than Milner and Hart we don't have any English players who are good enough. To be a top club and to have consistent success you need a core of English players in the dressing room. Our previous title winning team had Milner, Johnson, Hart, Barry, Lescott, and Richards. Since then we've lost Lescott, Barry, Richards and Johnson, while the incoming Rodwell and Sinclair proved to be garbage. Milner still hasn't signed his new contract so it's possible he could go too. In that sense we're crying out for at least a couple of English players in the dressing room.

A decent set of accounts?

Like many, including West Ham and Southampton, they mortgaged their TV money to Vibrac, a dodgy pay day loan outfit in the British Virgin Islands, because they simply don't have the day-to-day cash flow they need to sustain the club.

Nothing wrong with that, they get £60m up front, but it's essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Just as we get the tired accusation that we will go bust if our owner walks away, Everton would really be in trouble if they were to ever be relegated or the TV deal went bump.

Clubs thought the likes of Setanta and ITV Digital would be hole-in-the-wall cash machines for life...

Aside from any financial, PR considerations, why on earth would anyone voluntarily "walk away" from owning a leading football club? I'm struggling to think of anything that would be more enjoyable and intoxicating. Anyone who genuinely believes that someone could "get bored" of owning a club like City, with all the challenges and potential glory that presents, cannot really like football very much or 'get' what the game is about.

Fucking JCL plastics.

 

[BillyShears]

A decent set of accounts?

Like many, including West Ham and Southampton, they mortgaged their TV money to Vibrac, a dodgy pay day loan outfit in the British Virgin Islands, because they simply don't have the day-to-day cash flow they need to sustain the club.

Nothing wrong with that, they get £60m up front, but it's essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Just as we get the tired accusation that we will go bust if our owner walks away, Everton would really be in trouble if they were to ever be relegated or the TV deal went bump.

Clubs thought the likes of Setanta and ITV Digital would be hole-in-the-wall cash machines for life...

Leeds United being the prime example of borrowing on tick.

I didn't know that, I have to admit. Makes it all the more shocking just how clueless some Evertonians are at present.

Just out of curiousity does anyone know what the current state of play is with regards Everton getting a new stadium. Do Kenwright and his board have a site/plan or something or is it simply lip service for the supporters?

 

[bluedan]

As an evertonian my question for city fans is why do you want him now?

The lad has magnificent potential but thats all it is at the moment - he's far too up and down to command a regular place in your side with the resulting publicity of him gathering splinters on the bench (england's next great hope ruined by city etc...)not being worth the hassle

All this when you have that fabulous player silva (best in the league for me) who can play that no 10 role infinitely better at the moment

If everton are to sell then kenwright will have to pitch it as a deal that we just couldn't turn down (given that the tv money has suddenly made us financially secure) - you'd be silly (imo) to deal at the sort of price we'd be after

I have to say, first and foremost, it's pretty naive of Everton supporters to think that a decent set of accounts makes you financially secure in the long term. You're treading water. In actual fact you are still up for sale because Kenwright doesn't want to invest in the infrastructure required to help you push on commercially so that you can have sustainable success over a period of time. Your current financial security has come from a greater or lesser extent from selling your best players every other summer. You don't have the money to invest another 40/50 million in that squad, nor the money to build a new stadium. I'm not trying to be harsh, but that's a reality. I understand the bullish talk from Martinez about the club not needing to sell to pay off debts or an overdraft, but your board of directors IMHO aren't going to knock back a cash offer of 40 million pounds for any of your players.

Anyway, so why do I want Barkley. I think he's as good as Martinez is talking him up to be. He's got the potential to be the best English player of many generations. He is already at his tender age, although inconsistent, at his best better than 99% of the midfield players in the league. You mention Silva but generally Silva has played either from the left or from the right for City. I think Barkley's role in our squad would be to effectively take the place of Nasri/Toure as he can play either centrally or from a slightly wider position.

There's another reason I want Barkley, which is much more parochial in a way. Other than Milner and Hart we don't have any English players who are good enough. To be a top club and to have consistent success you need a core of English players in the dressing room. Our previous title winning team had Milner, Johnson, Hart, Barry, Lescott, and Richards. Since then we've lost Lescott, Barry, Richards and Johnson, while the incoming Rodwell and Sinclair proved to be garbage. Milner still hasn't signed his new contract so it's possible he could go too. In that sense we're crying out for at least a couple of English players in the dressing room.

A decent set of accounts?

Like many, including West Ham and Southampton, they mortgaged their TV money to Vibrac, a dodgy pay day loan outfit in the British Virgin Islands, because they simply don't have the day-to-day cash flow they need to sustain the club.

Nothing wrong with that, they get £60m up front, but it's essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Just as we get the tired accusation that we will go bust if our owner walks away, Everton would really be in trouble if they were to ever be relegated or the TV deal went bump.

Clubs thought the likes of Setanta and ITV Digital would be hole-in-the-wall cash machines for life...

Leeds United being the prime example of borrowing on tick.

Speaking of accounts. When will ours be released? Would love to hear some positive news coming out of the club soon. Especially after hearing Uniteds fall in revenue today

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

A decent set of accounts?

Like many, including West Ham and Southampton, they mortgaged their TV money to Vibrac, a dodgy pay day loan outfit in the British Virgin Islands, because they simply don't have the day-to-day cash flow they need to sustain the club.

Nothing wrong with that, they get £60m up front, but it's essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Just as we get the tired accusation that we will go bust if our owner walks away, Everton would really be in trouble if they were to ever be relegated or the TV deal went bump.

Clubs thought the likes of Setanta and ITV Digital would be hole-in-the-wall cash machines for life...

Leeds United being the prime example of borrowing on tick.

I didn't know that, I have to admit. Makes it all the more shocking just how clueless some Evertonians are at present.

Just out of curiousity does anyone know what the current state of play is with regards Everton getting a new stadium. Do Kenwright and his board have a site/plan or something or is it simply lip service for the supporters?

West Ham have been patting themselves on the back the last few weeks, showing decent figures, but it's essentially a false position.

Goodness knows what they and Everton have paid to firms in terms of interest in recent years.

It was only a couple of seasons ago Everton were forced to go to SKY and ask for a drawdown.

It's said 25 per cent of the Premier League now go to Vibrac.

Which just goes to show a lot of these mid-table clubs are built on nothing more than the guaranteed £60m a season the TV deal ensures.

 

[OB1]

A decent set of accounts?

Like many, including West Ham and Southampton, they mortgaged their TV money to Vibrac, a dodgy pay day loan outfit in the British Virgin Islands, because they simply don't have the day-to-day cash flow they need to sustain the club.

Nothing wrong with that, they get £60m up front, but it's essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Just as we get the tired accusation that we will go bust if our owner walks away, Everton would really be in trouble if they were to ever be relegated or the TV deal went bump.

Clubs thought the likes of Setanta and ITV Digital would be hole-in-the-wall cash machines for life...

Leeds United being the prime example of borrowing on tick.

I didn't know that, I have to admit. Makes it all the more shocking just how clueless some Evertonians are at present.

Just out of curiousity does anyone know what the current state of play is with regards Everton getting a new stadium. Do Kenwright and his board have a site/plan or something or is it simply lip service for the supporters?

West Ham have been patting themselves on the back the last few weeks, showing decent figures, but it's essentially a false position.

Goodness knows what they and Everton have paid to firms in terms of interest in recent years.

It was only a couple of seasons ago Everton were forced to go to SKY and ask for a drawdown.

It's said 25 per cent of the Premier League now go to Vibrac.

Which just goes to show a lot of these mid-table clubs are built on nothing more than the guaranteed £60m a season the TV deal ensures.

But for the grace of Mansour...we used to borrow against our season tickets too.

 

[BigOscar]

All very well slagging off Everton's accounts, but I entirely agree with the guys actual point, he's nowhere near good enough to displace Silva as our best number 10, so it would be very odd for us to spend a fortune on him to either have him sat on the bench, or force our best player to play out of position in order to play a signigficantly inferior player in his position.

I'd far rather we spent that amount of money on the positions we are weak in, rather than blow it on someone we really don't need. I'd rather have a £40m winger (or even two £20m wingers), enabling us to play Silva in the middle, than a £40m Ross Barkley, forcing us to play Silva as a winger. Either that or spend the money on a world class replacement for Yaya in CM. For me, number 10 is pretty much the last position we need to spend a fortune, given that most of the time we don't even play with one, then if we do then we already have the best in the world.

 

[MeatHunterrr]

All very well slagging off Everton's accounts, but I entirely agree with the guys actual point, he's nowhere near good enough to displace Silva as our best number 10, so it would be very odd for us to spend a fortune on him to either have him sat on the bench, or force our best player to play out of position in order to play a signigficantly inferior player in his position.

I'd far rather we spent that amount of money on the positions we are weak in, rather than blow it on someone we really don't need. I'd rather have a £40m winger (or even two £20m wingers), enabling us to play Silva in the middle, than a £40m Ross Barkley, forcing us to play Silva as a winger. Either that or spend the money on a world class replacement for Yaya in CM. For me, number 10 is pretty much the last position we need to spend a fortune, given that most of the time we don't even play with one, then if we do then we already have the best in the world.

But we have only 2 English players. Milner and Hart, surely we need more. Lampard will leave soon. Milner has yet to be even sign extension.

And I prefer we buy English players who are good enough to make some kind of impact, not the likes of Scott Sinclair etc. garbage.

 

[BigOscar]

All very well slagging off Everton's accounts, but I entirely agree with the guys actual point, he's nowhere near good enough to displace Silva as our best number 10, so it would be very odd for us to spend a fortune on him to either have him sat on the bench, or force our best player to play out of position in order to play a signigficantly inferior player in his position.

I'd far rather we spent that amount of money on the positions we are weak in, rather than blow it on someone we really don't need. I'd rather have a £40m winger (or even two £20m wingers), enabling us to play Silva in the middle, than a £40m Ross Barkley, forcing us to play Silva as a winger. Either that or spend the money on a world class replacement for Yaya in CM. For me, number 10 is pretty much the last position we need to spend a fortune, given that most of the time we don't even play with one, then if we do then we already have the best in the world.

But we have only 2 English players. Milner and Hart, surely we need more. Lampard will leave soon. Milner has yet to be even sign extension.

And I prefer we buy English players who are good enough to make some kind of impact, not the likes of Scott Sinclair etc. garbage.

I don't care about these HG quotas, there are far easier ways around them than wasting all our money on someone we don't need just for their nationality. We could just as easily dump Willy for a HG backup and actually buy the best player available instead of the best homegrown player available.

We can have 18 foreign players, that's more than enough if we plan properly. Our starting 11 shouldn't pay any attention at all to the quota imo, we should be aiming to get the best possible team, then look at the best way to then fill out the squad with the places left. If a HG player is good enough for our first team, then that's a bonus, but we shouldn't be spending huge money on people who aren't good enough, just because they are homegrown.

 

[FantasyIreland]

I agree with Oscar.

If we have to go down the HG route then signing Sterling would make far more sense.He's a player with attributes we lack and would make an immediate difference to our first team.We could then chase other players I feel are more suited to our needs,and are of a superior quality......Koke and Reus.

Barkley is a very high risk gamble and one we don't really need to take imo.

 

[bluechampion7891]

All very well slagging off Everton's accounts, but I entirely agree with the guys actual point, he's nowhere near good enough to displace Silva as our best number 10, so it would be very odd for us to spend a fortune on him to either have him sat on the bench, or force our best player to play out of position in order to play a signigficantly inferior player in his position.

I'd far rather we spent that amount of money on the positions we are weak in, rather than blow it on someone we really don't need. I'd rather have a £40m winger (or even two £20m wingers), enabling us to play Silva in the middle, than a £40m Ross Barkley, forcing us to play Silva as a winger. Either that or spend the money on a world class replacement for Yaya in CM. For me, number 10 is pretty much the last position we need to spend a fortune, given that most of the time we don't even play with one, then if we do then we already have the best in the world.

But we have only 2 English players. Milner and Hart, surely we need more. Lampard will leave soon. Milner has yet to be even sign extension.

And I prefer we buy English players who are good enough to make some kind of impact, not the likes of Scott Sinclair etc. garbage.

I don't care about these HG quotas, there are far easier ways around them than wasting all our money on someone we don't need just for their nationality. We could just as easily dump Willy for a HG backup and actually buy the best player available instead of the best homegrown player available.

We can have 18 foreign players, that's more than enough if we plan properly. Our starting 11 shouldn't pay any attention at all to the quota imo, we should be aiming to get the best possible team, then look at the best way to then fill out the squad with the places left. If a HG player is good enough for our first team, then that's a bonus, but we shouldn't be spending huge money on people who aren't good enough, just because they are homegrown.

17, but I totally agree with you. In fact, I'd say that we should have a pool for 15 players who are all good enough for starting 11: 1 keeper, 2 fullbacks, 3 centerbacks, 3 center mids, 4 attacking mids/wide players, 2 strikers. this would mean that we can rotate easily without a drop in quality, and for every position other than keeper and fullback we can suffer 1 injury and still essentially be at full strength.

As far as HG goes, we'll probably have 3 definitely for next season, Hart, Milner and Boyata (i feel he is good enough for 4th CB rather than getting Denayor back and on bench not playing better to loan him out so that he improves quickly - he can one day play a 1st team role but he needs to start). thats 2 AT and 1 CT, we need 2 more only to have a 22 man squad with two players for 2 positions (for both PL and CL, and it wont matter if they are club trained or not). We can get Schniederlin (who could probably even start for us), bring back Lopes (as 4th or 5th choice wide attacking option), or get rid of Sanga for Clyne or Willy for a HG keeper, or even Sterling who could start a majority of games (lets face it, he's better than Navas who has been starting a lot) and so on. Much easier to fill those positions.

If we have the money after improving our first team (3-5 new arrivals) and further expense wont run us afoul of FFP, I wouldnt be averse to get Barkley and have him as first choice sub for either a CM (box to box option) or Silva, or get him and loan him back. But he should even be among our top 5 targets to improve the 1st team