2018/19 Marco Silva - New Poll Added

Grade Marco Silva's 2018/19 Season

  • A

  • B

  • C

  • D

  • E

  • F


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah but until the other week we hadn't beaten a side in the top 9.

In fact, it was one of my biggest issues with Silva - up until Chelsea, I shared in this thread;

Teams #efc have beaten this season – Burnley, Cardiff, Brighton, Palace, Leicester, Fulham, Southampton, Bournemouth, Huddersfield.

To then argue we just need to improve consistency against the lower sides to be in a good place is wrong IMO, when you look at points we've picked up.

We're inconsistent full stop, not just against "lower sides"
Can I ask, where did I say that we're inconsistent just against "lower sides"? I totally agree we're inconsistent in general which I had tried to allude to.

However, I said that if we can improve our consistency against the lower sides, then we'd be in a strong place. Personally, I still stand by this. Why?

Well, I would argue that it's easier for Silva to make improvements that'll gain improved results against sides below us rather than those above us.

Look at the results below:

- Watford: draw and defeat (1 point)
- West Ham: defeat and win (3 points)
- Bournemouth: draw and win (4 points)
- Crystal Palace: win (3 points)*
- Burnley: win (3 points)*
- Newcastle: draw and defeat (1 point)
- Southampton: win and defeat (3 points)
- Brighton: defeat and win (3 points)
- Cardiff: two wins (6 points)
- Fulham: win and defeat (3 points)
- Huddersfield: draw and a win (4 points)

*Still to play a fixture.

That's only one side out of all the opponents below us (of those we've played twice) where we've got a maximum of six points; only three are four or more points.

Yes our results against those above us are inconsistent and have only improved as of late, but if we can continue this AND improve our form against below us...

... then we'll be in a much better place. I look at those fixtures, compared with those from the teams above us, and I know where I feel more aggrieved.

For reference, here's the record from those above us which arguably should be more difficult. Potentially (big IF), it may not be too different from those below us.

- Liverpool: defeat and a draw (one point)
- Man City: two defeats (zero points)
- Spurs: defeat (zero points)*
- Chelsea: draw and win (four points)
- Man U: defeat (zero points)*
- Arsenal: defeat and win (three points)
- Leicester: win and defeat (three points)
- Wolves: draw and defeat (one point)
 
Last edited:
God help us if every time we lose a football match 'the fanbase has been let down in a pathetic fashion' . There are only three possible results in a football match,win,lose and draw, and any of the three is possible in any match. That's why unexpected results happen...everywhere. The level of criticism levelled at Everton by its own supporters,and the level of expectation given our current transition situation is unfortunate, to say the least.
I am disappointed at the defeat but as you say these things happen.
What I am shocked at is the performance or lack of it.
That was as heartless and spineless a performance as I have seen in a while
 
My laptop was off five minutes before last season's lap of appreciation begun. No chance I was wasting my bandwidth on those chumps.
 

Can I ask, where did I say that we're inconsistent just against "lower sides"? I totally agree we're inconsistent in general which I had tried to allude to.

Well, by this;

I think Saturday's result was more a testament to how inconsistent we still are as club: be that the manager or the players.

The fact that we can compete with the better clubs is a real positive as if we can improve our consistency against the lower sides, then we're in a good place.

I don't think it's a case of "if we can improve our consistency against the lower sides, then we're in a good place"

In my view that can only be based on the last few weeks, not the whole season.

I think this because as I said, up until the other week we hadn't beat a side in the top 9.

You've now explained further that "I totally agree we're inconsistent in general"

Marco Silva hasn't conjured up any consistency, or momentum throughout the season.
 
Well, by this;

I don't think it's a case of "if we can improve our consistency against the lower sides, then we're in a good place"

In my view that can only be based on the last few weeks, not the whole season.

I think this because as I said, up until the other week we hadn't beat a side in the top 9.

You've now explained further that "I totally agree we're inconsistent in general"

Marco Silva hasn't conjured up any consistency, or momentum throughout the season.
Sorry, but I think you've got the wrong end of the stick...

Advocating a need for improved consistency against the lower opposition is entirely different from saying we're only inconsistent against lower opposition.

They're clearly not one and the same. My point was that overall, I feel that across the season we've performed relatively well against teams above us.

Results haven't always matched these performances (Liverpool, Manure and Arsenal away come to mind) but they personally provided me with a level of hope.

That's not ignoring Spurs or City but it is what it. The greater concern has been (and still is) our inconsistencies against the teams below us - shown by results.

If we could improve our consistency against those sides - arguably an easier feat - and maintain our level of performance against top teams, we're in a good place.

For example, look at the fight for seventh: if we aren't to achieve it, where would the mainstay of fans look as examples where we should have got those points?

Where would you personally look for dropped points and think, in reality, we should have got more points from there based on a comparison of opposition?

Alternatively, can you say that across the season we've performed relatively well against the teams below us? Compare with those we've played above us.

Yes, we hadn't beaten a team in the top nine a couple of weeks ago but that's been rectified; yet, we've still lost to Fulham and Newcastle as of late...

Put simply which is more worrying: our performances against the top teams or those below us?
 
Sorry, but I think you've got the wrong end of the stick...

Advocating a need for improved consistency against the lower opposition is entirely different from saying we're only inconsistent against lower opposition.

I think Saturday's result was more a testament to how inconsistent we still are as club: be that the manager or the players.

The fact that we can compete with the better clubs is a real positive as if we can improve our consistency against the lower sides, then we're in a good place.

Let me rephrase my answer to be more succinct then.

We're not in a good place if we improve our consistency against the lower sides.

We need to do more. We need to improve our consistency all around to be in a good place.
 

Let me rephrase my answer to be more succinct then.

We're not in a good place if we improve our consistency against the lower sides.

We need to do more.
We need to improve our consistency all around to be in a good place.
I look at certain results against the likes of Fulham (away), Huddersfield (home) and Newcastle (away) where realistically we could have had eight more points.

That would put us comfortably in seventh with seven more points than Leicester with four games to go - that's a relatively good place in my humble opinion.

That's without other fixtures where we were poor. I suspect however, we will have to agree to disagree. Nevertheless, I do agree that we have to do more.
 
Mike Walker aside has any manager been this underwhelming in their first season?

Smith was gash but so were we and Alladyce whilst dour still "did his job".

This fella though all huff and puff.
Just stop. Sam was awful. The team was MUCH worse last year. Silva has been fine. Far from perfect. The players aren't that good. Simple as that. Brands did a good job in the summer, but he has to continue to overhaul the roster.
 
It isn't as if Marco Silva took over a team/squad that were top six contenders last season. We were relegation candidates for a number of months and the Sam Allyrdyce appointment was proof of that.
We finished eight but we all know last season was even worse than this one.

Marco Silva has just about done as much as could be expected with what he has at his disposal and the bright spark is that the Brands/Silva signings have generally done very well.
The manager needs at least one more active summer transfer window to put his own stamp on the team and before we can really judge him as a manager.

I was not in favour of his appointment but he has done well enough to be at least given a chance for another season to prove he can move the team forward.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top