The NSNO Everton Forums

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 2:15 pm So you think it's more likely the board are deliberately withholding funds that a manager they've publicly backed could use to strengthen the team, thus having a higher possibility of achieving their goals, than us just spending what we are able to within the constraints of CSR.

If you really think that you've fallen so far down the rabbit hole you're currently spooning a very confused bunny

Jesus you’re a prick.

I don’t know or care why they are being so uninspiring. For whatever reason however, they are!

Maybe it’s the case that with an injection of money the quality would go up dramatically. That is still conjecture though I’m afraid buddy.

If you think the idea the club has such a poor financial or CSR outlook that they are incapable of improving the team beyond the extremely tepid rumours we’re getting atm is…better…than the club choosing not to spend (for whatever reason), then OK. We have different ideas of what better means.

brap2 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 2:34 pm Jesus you’re a prick.

I don’t know or care why they are being so uninspiring. For whatever reason however, they are!

Maybe it’s the case that with an injection of money the quality would go up dramatically. That is still conjecture though I’m afraid buddy.

If you think the idea the club has such a poor financial or CSR outlook that they are incapable of improving the team beyond the extremely tepid rumours we’re getting atm is…better…than the club choosing not to spend (for whatever reason), then OK. We have different ideas of what better means.

I mean you say I'm a prick, you generally behave like a prick whenever replying to me, so if it bothers you so much maybe consider how you speak to others... Or don't, whatever, doesn't bother me either way.

And for the record, yes I think the players we are signing and the amounts we are paying are all related to our CSR position. To think otherwise is every bit as much conjecture, but also weird that the board would self sabotage, and by weird I mean highly unlikely.

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 2:37 pm I mean you say I'm a prick, you generally behave like a prick whenever replying to me, so if it bothers you so much maybe consider how you speak to others... Or don't, whatever, doesn't bother me either way.

And for the record, yes I think the players we are signing and the amounts we are paying are all related to our CSR position. To think otherwise is every bit as much conjecture, but also weird that the board would self sabotage, and by weird I mean highly unlikely.

You are very mean to me and I shall simply choose to ignore it. Nice try Andy, but not today.

Clubs make business decisions every day. To think everyone spends to the limit every single window would be highly unlikely. There’s always more windows to come.

That said this is a 2 window plan and this is the second window so maybe you’re right. Final stretch now all we need is *checks notes* Alistair Johnston.

brap2 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 2:49 pm You are very mean to me and I shall simply choose to ignore it. Nice try Andy, but not today.

Clubs make business decisions every day. To think everyone spends to the limit every single window would be highly unlikely. There’s always more windows to come.

That said this is a 2 window plan and this is the second window so maybe you’re right. Final stretch now all we need is *checks notes* Alistair Johnston.

We've committed approx £145m over the past summer and this so far, and are looking at adding maybe another £15m - £20m to that at least. That's without any significant outgoings to balance the books.

If you think we can spend around £160m+ without sales and sit on a big chuck just to gaslight Moyes then I worry how little you understand about how football works.

But yeah, enjoyed your final sentence as that's much more on brand, back to the quipy bantz we all know and love

brap2 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 11:38 am I agree but we’re about to replace our best CM with 31 year old Norgaard and our rb we’ve needed for ten years with a 28 year old Canadian who plays in Scotland.

For whatever reason they have decided to keep a holding pattern this year (Moyes?) so replacing Ndiaye right now would probably look more like whoever the modern equivalent to Andros Townsend is.

Would Brennan Johnson tick your "Andros Townsend" box?

Cozzie wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 3:25 pm Would Brennan Johnson tick your "Andros Townsend" box?

Id rather keep McNeil than get Brennan Johnson

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 2:59 pm We've committed approx £145m over the past summer and this so far, and are looking at adding maybe another £15m - £20m to that at least. That's without any significant outgoings to balance the books.

If you think we can spend around £160m+ without sales and sit on a big chuck just to gaslight Moyes then I worry how little you understand about how football works.

But yeah, enjoyed your final sentence as that's much more on brand, back to the quipy bantz we all know and love

More personal attacks. Sad, but I’ve come to expect as much.

To be honest I think financials ARE an aspect in planning, the major aspect, and I think the club is skint. I also think they are being…conservative.

brap2 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 3:59 pm More personal attacks. Sad, but I’ve come to expect as much.

.

Haha you called me a prick a couple of posts back, I'm not sure you can really take the high ground here

Raptor wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 3:27 pm Id rather keep McNeil than get Brennan Johnson

Going from Ndiaye to Brennan Johnson would be awful stuff.

blueToffee wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 4:24 pm Going from Ndiaye to Brennan Johnson would be awful stuff.

But think of the pace!

All we every wanted is some pace!

He’s our 3rd best player imo. I’d sell him for 70 no probs.

But tbf he’s the funnest to watch and as I get older that’s becoming one of the more important aspects of it all.

Bob Sacamano wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 4:42 pm He’s our 3rd best player imo. I’d sell him for 70 no probs.

Who is better, Pickford and Tarkowski?

I’m proper torn about this whole situation.

Given it’s Saudis and we could get 70-80 I’d reluctantly say it’s good business and move on.


But as usual it’s the timing! We should have said 70-80 by the end of July or no deal. Having at best a week to fill the shoes in the desperation days of the market is dumb as f***

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2026 4:12 pm Haha you called me a prick a couple of posts back, I'm not sure you can really take the high ground here

Report submitted, hopefully mods act swiftly.