Steve Walsh - no longer our Director of Football

Steve Walsh as DOF

  • IN

    Votes: 52 6.0%

  • OUT

    Votes: 727 84.4%

  • Shake it all about

    Votes: 82 9.5%
  • Total voters
    861
Status
Not open for further replies.

..I actually quite like the players we've bought in this window but think they're all a bit similar. It takes different types to build a team and it'll take more than one summer to plug the gaps.
 

I feel like Walsh is a good shield for Koeman and BK/Mosh. Walsh identifies players, unless we know they were all his signings blaming him is unfair. Your Sandro, Gana, Lookman and the Nigerian lad are his pickups Klassen and Gylfi are very much Koeman signings in my view. Then we come to the big holes, he identified multiple strikers and multiple defenders it was the board that failed secure one of each. Making our squad very unbalanced. Having a director of football has safe guarded much of the blame from them. I think there is a big confusion on what a DOF does though. He doesn't negotiate with selling clubs, he identifies players for now and the future.
 
[
Papa Shango said:
Or they didn't want to come here?
Click to expand...

Of course there are multiple reasons why a deal may not happen. The point was Walsh and his scouts supply a list and Ron agrees on the ones to go for, it appears we were waiting on Giroud all summer instead of going down that list earlier. You aren't telling me there wasn't someone on the list we could have got?I refuse to believe it and I don't think BK and or Mosh made enough efforts on targets two, three or four earlier. I fail to see how that failure is all on Walsh? Yes the unbalanced squad is partly down to him and Koeman but negotiating isn't his role. Who is the consistent person in years and years of transfer market failures?Ask yourself. Bill Kenwright. I like the guy but as a transfer negotiater he shouldn't be anywhere near that job anymore.
 
Even with the CF and CB we'd still have been quite unbalanced. We need a LB, a decent back up RB, a LM and a RM as well as the CB and CF that we didn't sign. That's 6 positions short. Mad really when you think about it like.
 

Even with the CF and CB we'd still have been quite unbalanced. We need a LB, a decent back up RB, a LM and a RM as well as the CB and CF that we didn't sign. That's 6 positions short. Mad really when you think about it like.
 
Eggs said:
..I actually quite like the players we've bought in this window but think they're all a bit similar. It takes different types to build a team and it'll take more than one summer to plug the gaps.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think our business was largely good. The one bit and the biggest component that let us down is not replacing lukaku. We were never going to replace his goals directly but I felt that if we put someone up there who could lead the line, slot and link up with the 3 in behind we'd have no problems. The goals would be spread across the forward unit a bit more. Dcl is a great prospect but he's not there yet and sandro needs time to bed in. We really let ourselves down by not bringing in a Prem established striker who can tick those boxes. I still think we will do alright this season but had we signed that sort of striker we would have had a far better chance going into the last 4 games.
 
It could be a little of everyone's fault, Walsh could have identified players, Koeman could have agreed to list of players he was provided with and whoever goes out and negotiates with the players and clubs could have just gone down the list. It could be that there wasn't enough communication around who was being bought until it became clear that Giroud wasn't coming. Koeman does always distance himself from the actual negotiating of players
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top