John Stones transfer saga

Jamiednm · August 27, 2015

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trolls are out ranting at my friend & sports journo <a href="https://twitter.com/LukeKerrDineen">@LukeKerrDineen</a> for suggesting Stones would be better off at Chelsea - the truth hurts</p>— Peter Knight (@peterknightblog) <a href="">August 27, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

when i score we riot · August 27, 2015

Christ on a bike, every day until tuesday is gonna suck.

The Equaliser · August 27, 2015

Khalekan said:
Yip.

Although I don't believe for one second be spoke last night without knowing the board were standing right behind him.

And not a stiletto or a dagger in sight

Hopefully you are right. We'll know soon enough anyway.

davek · August 27, 2015

Tubey said:
He's done the only thing that made sense mate.

Look at beyond the player being Stones - if we had accepted that and sold him, we would have made a rod for own backs with any and every talented player on the books for next summer and beyond. We'd be planting a selling club label firmly on ourselves for the foreseeable future.

We can't outspend the top four; we only have a chance to outbuild them.

I dont think that's any more true for Everton than it is for, say, Liverpool (Suarez, Sterling, Torres). If it's a major talent then the trophy winning financial elite clubs will get their player. That doesn't mean they'd show the same intensity to bid for Mirallas, Barkley, Coleman etc.

Shibbywiggles · August 27, 2015

Jamiednm said:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Trolls are out ranting at my friend & sports journo <a href="https://twitter.com/LukeKerrDineen">@LukeKerrDineen</a> for suggesting Stones would be better off at Chelsea - the truth hurts</p>— Peter Knight (@peterknightblog) <a href="">August 27, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The irony in that FFS. He is literally trolling us by saying that... Does he understand the term he's using?

Tubey · August 27, 2015

davek said:
I dont think that's any more true for Everton than it is for, say, Liverpool (Suarez, Sterling, Torres). If it's a major talent then the trophy winning financial elite clubs will get their player. That doesn't mean they'd show the same intensity to bid for Mirallas, Barkley, Coleman etc.

How about flipping that around and not going with the status quo?

If TV money is so extraordinary as to keep the club running without player sales, how about we set a policy of not selling unless we want to and build a squad?

It'd be nice if Everton were the club to make a contract mean something again.

bring the ghost on · August 27, 2015

davek said:
...maybe, maybe not. And that's a fair bit off. Can you see Stones starting at CB next summer for England?

This club cant afford to turn this money down. Ideally we could. But we have owners who wont give the tv revenue cash over to the manager that should be given to him. We always have to factor that into any situation over player sales. It's not right, of course. But it is the reality.

I admire RMs position on this, btw. I'm just not sure it's what's right for this season. There will be many furious fans at the end of this window when we dont get targets in, but the two issues are interlinked.

I've been thinking about this.

On paper, we can't afford to turn down the £40m but, with limited time to reinvest (and the usual question marks as to how much of it we will use on new players), will we improve the squad by selling Stones?

I think we would have a better season by keeping stones than selling him. If he is still in demand next season, then he will command a similar (if not higher) trasnfer fee.

davek · August 27, 2015

Tubey said:
Let's put it this way, and I'd be amazed if even @davek disagrees at this point.

If Stones is sold now for anything short of at the very least £50m, Roberto Martinez should be handing in his resignation 10 seconds after Stones signs his Chelsea contract - because he would have been sold up the river big time on this.

I do disagree with it. Approaching £50M! Martinez would have to be barking mad not to take that if the money was promised to him (or even £30M of it).

How is all this business mixed up in your mind with Martinez having to leave?

This is the football industry mate. RM has said money cant buy everything, but every player has his price. To me, if his statement last night concentrated minds at Chelsea to cough up over £40M then he's pulled off a masterstroke.

davek · August 27, 2015

Tubey said:
How about flipping that around and not going with the status quo?

If TV money is so extraordinary as to keep the club running without player sales, how about we set a policy of not selling unless we want to and build a squad?

It'd be nice if Everton were the club to make a contract mean something again.

Does it look that way to you right now with £5M spent this summer?

Deleted member 28206 · August 27, 2015

What struck me as important from Martinez was he said it was "too late to accept his transfer request".

Very focused words

Tubey · August 27, 2015

davek said:
I do disagree with it. Approaching £50M! Martinez would have to be barking mad not to take that if the money was promised to him (or even £30M of it).

How is all this business mixed up in your mind with Martinez having to leave?

This is the football industry mate. RM has said money cant buy everything, but every player has his price. To me, if his statement last night concentrated minds at Chelsea to cough up over £40M then he's pulled off a masterstroke.

I massively disagree. For aforementioned reasons.

Stuartisitc1878 · August 27, 2015

Shibbywiggles said:
The irony in that FFS. He is literally trolling us by saying that... Does he understand the term he's using?

a plethora of Journo's and wannabe bloggers have devoted a lot of time to this story on the assumption that it was a dead cert to happen. Right now Roberto is messing up everyone's ITK credibility. The Chelsea-loving media have now resulted to just belittling Everton to try and force this to happen.

toffeestillidie · August 27, 2015

davek said:
I dont think that's any more true for Everton than it is for, say, Liverpool (Suarez, Sterling, Torres). If it's a major talent then the trophy winning financial elite clubs will get their player. That doesn't mean they'd show the same intensity to bid for Mirallas, Barkley, Coleman etc.

All of those players were sold on their terms. Suarez stayed a season longer than he wanted to, and nearly won them the league.

We don't want to sell Stones, it's not the right time to sell him. A year from now things may be different, but I think it's important for clubs to dig in their heels and at least make sure they aren't bullied into selling at an inopportune time.

Caolam · August 27, 2015

If we hang on to Stones it will be a proud moment in time. Hopefully we will build on this. Never know, in times to come we might say when a multi millionaire club tries to muscle in on a player and the host club doesn't sell, Everton, that is.

toffeestillidie · August 27, 2015

davek said:
I do disagree with it. Approaching £50M! Martinez would have to be barking mad not to take that if the money was promised to him (or even £30M of it).

How is all this business mixed up in your mind with Martinez having to leave?

This is the football industry mate. RM has said money cant buy everything, but every player has his price. To me, if his statement last night concentrated minds at Chelsea to cough up over £40M then he's pulled off a masterstroke.

Who do we buy with that money? If there was a replacement for Stones to be had that wouldn't hurt the quality of our first team, Chelsea would be in for him.