The NSNO Everton Forums

Hope we have a buy back clause.

StirlingBlue wrote: ↑Mon Aug 03, 2026 12:56 pm We've got a good young quintet of midfielders (Alcaraz, Tim, Rohl, Armstrong, Hackney) who are all probably competing for the same playing time that they need to develop.

Keep:

Hackney - just signed and is presumably front of the queue for game time.
Rohl was only just signed for a decent wedge and he's got more versatility so is very useful to the squad.
Armstrong is homegrown, youngest, cheapest wages and can go on loan for development time.

For sale

Iroegbunam has enough potential that we could get some decent money for him but doesn't offer anything that we don't have through Hackney, Rohl and Armstrong.
Alcaraz only has a year left and we won't get much for him but I'm sure we're open for offers.

Iroegbunam is unlucky as he's shown glimpses of being a capable PL midfielder but he'll only improve if he's starting every week and he's not good enough to do that for us. We might well look at him in 2 years and wish we'd kept him but cashing in is the right call if there's a decent offer.

I actually think he does, completely different to all of those players. Armstrong looks better in the 10, or at least a more attacking role. Rohl's main position was 10 before he came here, he's proven to be versatile, but he's not a DM. Hackney doesn't appear to be a ball winning type midfielder either, more of a box-to-box, but particularly shines in the opponents half.

I'm not against selling him for a decent fee, but him and Norgaard are the only "ball winners". If you're 1-0 up with 10 to play against a top side, you're not going to bring on Rohl or Armstrong in the middle to try and combat and sure things up. Tim is unique in offering that off the bench. Limited footballer with the ball, but a solid strong ball-winner.

Sell for the right fee if we're going to reinvest and get the fullback(s) we need, but I'm equally as happy to keep him in the squad if the money's not right.

Dont think 15 is anywhere near enough. You dont get anything for that and while hes got his faults he also produces some really good numbers too.

Surax wrote:
I actually think he does, completely different to all of those players. Armstrong looks better in the 10, or at least a more attacking role. Rohl's main position was 10 before he came here, he's proven to be versatile, but he's not a DM. Hackney doesn't appear to be a ball winning type midfielder either, more of a box-to-box, but particularly shines in the opponents half.

I'm not against selling him for a decent fee, but him and Norgaard are the only "ball winners". If you're 1-0 up with 10 to play against a top side, you're not going to bring on Rohl or Armstrong in the middle to try and combat and sure things up. Tim is unique in offering that off the bench. Limited footballer with the ball, but a solid strong ball-winner.

Sell for the right fee if we're going to reinvest and get the fullback(s) we need, but I'm equally as happy to keep him in the squad if the money's not right.

Garner is another ball winner in the squad, and Rohl is more than capable of it too.

The issue with Tim and why he needs to go is that we play a single “sitting” DM and he can’t be trusted to do that as his positioning and awareness are as poor as his tackling is strong.

He could in theory be the “run about and try and win it” CM at times but he’s not good enough on the ball to do that

very close by the sounds of it.

I like Tim but I'd take £15m + £5m odd ones (achievable ones), and a 15-20% sell on fee.

AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2026 5:52 pm I like Tim but I'd take £15m + £5m odd ones (achievable ones), and a 15-20% sell on fee.

That would be a good deal considering we only paid a Dobbin for him ! ( now in the Championship)

Selling your 7th choice central midfielder for a much needed right back is what we have to do to plug gaps.

Bumble wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2026 11:52 am Goodbye Tim, hello Munoz.

I think we'd all take that.

Not trying to be contrarian, but I wouldn’t.

I think we’ve seen Tim develop a lot and there is potential for him to keep improving. For that I don’t think the price is right and putting that money into a much older player who plays in probably one of the hardest positions in terms legs needed to go up and down isn’t really thinking long term. Different situation, but when the recovery speed goes like with Coleman you end up with a very different player. If we were one player away from a trophy I’d be more inclined but right now we’re still turning a tanker around from the position we were in and I’d prefer a much younger profile (<25) of player to grow alongside the others.

Will be sorry to see him go as I like him as a player / but watching the Newcastle game I genuinely can’t see how he gets minutes

In that respect to get a decent fee - enough to buy Munoz - is really good business and something we should be doing

777Kidnappings wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2026 3:56 pm Dont think 15 is anywhere near enough. You dont get anything for that and while hes got his faults he also produces some really good numbers too.

We got Hackney for similar and he was Championship player of the year, I'm confident in saying Tim wouldn't get that.
I'm not convinced Hackney is all that, but he's better than Tim.
Whilst I like him I think he epitomises what's gradually getting worse about top flight football - footballing ability is secondary to athletic ability.

He's not going to start games next season, decent sell ons and clauses will do to move him on

blueToffee wrote: ↑Thu Aug 13, 2026 7:07 pm Not trying to be contrarian, but I wouldn’t.

I think we’ve seen Tim develop a lot and there is potential for him to keep improving. For that I don’t think the price is right and putting that money into a much older player who plays in probably one of the hardest positions in terms legs needed to go up and down isn’t really thinking long term. Different situation, but when the recovery speed goes like with Coleman you end up with a very different player. If we were one player away from a trophy I’d be more inclined but right now we’re still turning a tanker around from the position we were in and I’d prefer a much younger profile (<25) of player to grow alongside the others.

Issue is it's only Hull trying to buy him, so the price is reflected in that. If there were bigger clubs or more after him we'd be able to get more.

Between £18m and £20m total value of the deal feels about right.

He is a good player who has improved and does add value. He is further down the pecking order here but would be a decent player for any of those promoted sides.

I think his consistency just isn’t quite there yet. He also makes the odd mistake on the ball in bad areas of the pitch, and also his stamina is an issue. He often doesn’t finish games strongly because of these things.

However, he does have games where he looks like a world beater. He has a great tackle and actually is a good dribbler of the ball. He is someone that can change a game from the bench better than most.

But he's 6th choice at best for CM. He's out of contract next summer. We're not going to offer him a massive deal if hes 6th choice, and nor should he accept being that. He needs to back himself to do well elsewhere, and we need to take what we can like a proper business.