• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

James McCarthy

Status
Not open for further replies.
I liked him when fully fit. A real physical player. But is limited on the ball. A fully fit mccarthy would be an excellent addition to most squads. Useful in particular matches esp in premier.

However never fit so above is kinda pointless. Fingers xd he has some kind of luck. Real bad injury last time.
 

Zatara said:
How is it poor judgement to sell a player who is consistently injured ?

Hes a good player imo but whatever the circumstances hes had injuries for years and not played for us but gone off with ireland...
Click to expand...

For those exact reasons, if we did decide to sell him, as an asset he is at his lowest value at the moment. In business terms it would make more sense if we decided to cut our losses to loan him out for six months to a PL club, let him reestablish himself and value appreciate. Same thing with Snchderilin.
 
Neiler said:
For those exact reasons, if we did decide to sell him, as an asset he is at his lowest value at the moment. In business terms it would make more sense if we decided to cut our losses to loan him out for six months to a PL club, let him reestablish himself and value appreciate. Same thing with Snchderilin.
Click to expand...

What if they perform poorly or get injured?
 
Zatara said:
What if they perform poorly or get injured?
Click to expand...

That fairly obvious, their value doesn’t increase, you are then looking at crystallizing a loss depending on the player. In McCarthys case even playing two games would increase his value, realistically he’s a desirable player with question marks over his fitness. If we were being clever in terms of asset management their is loads of headroom to improve his value from this point. His book price is his wages really, so the majority would be profit.

In playing terms, I wouldn’t be in favor of a sale.

Schederlin is a different matter, we are crystalising a loss on the fee if he was sold for anything under 15 mill. So a loan there makes sense too.

In playing terms I’d get rid of him though.
 

I imagine the idea was to give him a run out second half yesterday. Marco probably expected us to be at least 3 or 4 up with the team he put out and very comfortable.
Obviously didn’t work out like that and he didn’t want to risk bringing him on.
 
Neiler said:
For those exact reasons, if we did decide to sell him, as an asset he is at his lowest value at the moment. In business terms it would make more sense if we decided to cut our losses to loan him out for six months to a PL club, let him reestablish himself and value appreciate. Same thing with Snchderilin.
Click to expand...
Agree totally regarding Macca but honestly think Snides wouldn't be arsed enough to put in the effort.
 

Had we done what we should have and controlled the game yesterday by getting another one or two goals, he'd have come on.

As it was we needed to make attacking changes to ensure we had that control.
 
Neiler said:
For those exact reasons, if we did decide to sell him, as an asset he is at his lowest value at the moment. In business terms it would make more sense if we decided to cut our losses to loan him out for six months to a PL club, let him reestablish himself and value appreciate. Same thing with Snchderilin.
Click to expand...

I think that’s a really fair point but you’re reliant on a confidence the player will perform on loan , if he doesn’t the price is only going one way .
 

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