David Unsworth

[markjazzbassist]

Just watched, he did well, I’m guessing he will go 442.

[Btay]

Mirallas played his best game for us I can remember last time Unsy was in charge.

hope we give this a go, best chance at Europe next year 

[chalkpie]

A total class act. I love this guy already - he already seems to hold the honor and integrity that this club deserves, and that is something RK never had. The difference is 180. I know we are all looking at the big names we should be trying to get it, but if this bloke happens to be the right fit, then so be it. I wish him nothing but 100% success on whatever the length of his tenure. 

[mcirony]

Feeling positive for the first time in a while. I really want Unsworth to smash it and get the job. If you look at Tuchels history he started as a youth manager before being promoted to first team management at Mainz where he spent a year or two before going onto Dortmund for a year or two. He has had success but there's no reason why we shouldn't believe that Unsworth or similar will make the transition successfully. Tuchel has the reputation because he was given the opportunity to step up from the u-23s team. Let's all get behind Unsworth and stop[ worrying about which 'big-name' manager we hope for! 

 

[Hafnia]

I recall feeling underwhelmed when we first got Joe Royle..... yet he's the second best manager we have had in my lifetime after Kendall. 

What he achieved with that squad he inherited can never be underestimated - we were completely rudderless and heading for the drop.  He essentially made each and every one of them play for the shirt....  his Everton side was a joy to watch.

I think Unsworth can have the same impact - he knows what we are about.... he's a fan.... he loves us.... he ran through walls for us. 

Yeah I would be excited about a Tuchel coming in but no one will be able to impact the players in an Everton way more than Unsy. 

Those of you who think I'm negative or critical of certain things - weigh them up:-

 

Phil Neville:- downplaying us.... Top 7 is a great finish for a club like Everton

Moyes:- Penknives to gunfights.... never having a go at the top teams away from home

Lukaku:- wanting to play for a "big club" from the get-go of his everton career

Koeman:- going on holiday instead of signing his contract - talking himself as a barca manager, telling press lukaku needs to be at a bigger club

Kenwright:- Overseeing a period of the club being used as a cash vehicle for Phillip Green, kings dock, NFL, Firtress fund, Kirby,

Elstone:- worst CEO ive seen.  Kitbag, chang. kirby

 

Everton should be sat at the top table - we are still a big club and always have been..... people who tell me otherwise or operate us otherwise rile me...

 

 

 

 

 

[Paddock]

Moyes was a much better manager than Royle for us- granted no trophies but he took us from seeious relegation candidates to CL qualification on no budget at all- he tatted out on us in the end but that doesn’t hide what he done for this club.

[Bailey]

46 minutes ago, Paddock said:

Moyes was a much better manager than Royle for us- granted no trophies but he took us from seeious relegation candidates to CL qualification on no budget at all- he tatted out on us in the end but that doesn’t hide what he done for this club.

The problem Moyes has is that he just stayed around too long and that tainted his legacy. 

[Quinn31]

2 hours ago, hafnia said:

I recall feeling underwhelmed when we first got Joe Royle..... yet he's the second best manager we have had in my lifetime after Kendall. 

What he achieved with that squad he inherited can never be underestimated - we were completely rudderless and heading for the drop.  He essentially made each and every one of them play for the shirt....  his Everton side was a joy to watch.

I think Unsworth can have the same impact - he knows what we are about.... he's a fan.... he loves us.... he ran through walls for us. 

Yeah I would be excited about a Tuchel coming in but no one will be able to impact the players in an Everton way more than Unsy. 

Those of you who think I'm negative or critical of certain things - weigh them up:-

 

Phil Neville:- downplaying us.... Top 7 is a great finish for a club like Everton

Moyes:- Penknives to gunfights.... never having a go at the top teams away from home

Lukaku:- wanting to play for a "big club" from the get-go of his everton career

Koeman:- going on holiday instead of signing his contract - talking himself as a barca manager, telling press lukaku needs to be at a bigger club

Kenwright:- Overseeing a period of the club being used as a cash vehicle for Phillip Green, kings dock, NFL, Firtress fund, Kirby,

Elstone:- worst CEO ive seen.  Kitbag, chang. kirby

 

Everton should be sat at the top table - we are still a big club and always have been..... people who tell me otherwise or operate us otherwise rile me...

 

 

 

 

 

Arsenal: 354m pounds in revenue for 2015-2016 (3rd)

Chelsea: 335m pounds in revenue (4th)

Liverpool: 302m pounds in revenue (5th)

Manchester City: 392m pounds (2nd)

Manchester United: 515m pounds (1st)

Spurs: 210m pounds (6th) (and this will climb with their new stadium)

 

Everton: 122m pounds (11th highest in the league)

Sunderland: 108m pounds

Bournemouth: 88m pounds (Lowest)

 

Haf, we are much closer to bottom than we are to Spurs in the financial power of the club, at least per May 2016. We have a large and passionate fanbase, great history, but realistically we can't compete financially with the biggest clubs barring major changes. 

 

[Shukes]

Luckily we have a manager that believes Everton are a big club. 

[Hafnia]

9 minutes ago, Quinn31 said:

Arsenal: 354m pounds in revenue for 2015-2016 (3rd)

Chelsea: 335m pounds in revenue (4th)

Liverpool: 302m pounds in revenue (5th)

Manchester City: 392m pounds (2nd)

Manchester United: 515m pounds (1st)

Spurs: 210m pounds (6th) (and this will climb with their new stadium)

 

Everton: 122m pounds (11th highest in the league)

Sunderland: 108m pounds

Bournemouth: 88m pounds (Lowest)

 

Haf, we are much closer to bottom than we are to Spurs in the financial power of the club, at least per May 2016. We have a large and passionate fanbase, great history, but realistically we can't compete financially with the biggest clubs barring major changes. 

 

If we only had £5.99 in our bank account we would still be bigger than 3 of those teams...

Everton is royalty....  pioneered much of what is seen in the modern game, won more than most of the other teams could dream about.

Unfortunately you are subscribing to the financial part of it all.... that's not even scratching the surface. 

 

[Quinn31]

Just now, hafnia said:

If we only had £5.99 in our bank account we would still be bigger than 3 of those teams...

Everton is royalty....  pioneered much of what is seen in the modern game, won more than most of the other teams could dream about.

Unfortunately you are subscribing to the financial part of it all.... that's not even scratching the surface. 

 

I get your point that we are bigger historically/have more history than Spurs, Man City, Chelsea, but that is not what pays transfer fees and players wages. 

[Matt]

32 minutes ago, Quinn31 said:

Arsenal: 354m pounds in revenue for 2015-2016 (3rd)

Chelsea: 335m pounds in revenue (4th)

Liverpool: 302m pounds in revenue (5th)

Manchester City: 392m pounds (2nd)

Manchester United: 515m pounds (1st)

Spurs: 210m pounds (6th) (and this will climb with their new stadium)

 

Everton: 122m pounds (11th highest in the league)

Sunderland: 108m pounds

Bournemouth: 88m pounds (Lowest)

 

Haf, we are much closer to bottom than we are to Spurs in the financial power of the club, at least per May 2016. We have a large and passionate fanbase, great history, but realistically we can't compete financially with the biggest clubs barring major changes. 

 

Finances do not make you a big club, history and success do

[Quinn31]

Just now, Matt said:

Finances do not make you a big club, history and success do

Agreed, but finances do play a big part in determining your league position. 

 

Maybe I'm missing the point and that praising ourselves and calling ourselves a big club has less to do with on the pitch expectations as it does just stroking our own egos. 

[markjazzbassist]

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

Finances do not make you a big club, history and success do

the only people that feel that way are evertonians or fans of other "big" clubs that have fallen by the wayside (villa).  soton, stoke, west ham, they all think they're as big as us.  call them what you will, but they don't care about history.  man city?  neither do they.  neutral fans?  they don't give a fuck about 30 years ago, they think we are a mid sized mid table club.

 

not trying to be an ass here, i get our great history and am proud of it, but the only ones that care about it is us and until we get fans to understand that and stop resting on those laurels well still be looked at as a mid table club.  we need trophies/success NOW, that's the barometer of a big club.  Look at Portsmouth, anyone think they are a big club?  Forest?  no, no one cares about their past success, their NOW succes is nothing.  hence small time clubs.

[Matt]

20 minutes ago, Quinn31 said:

Agreed, but finances do play a big part in determining your league position. 

 

Maybe I'm missing the point and that praising ourselves and calling ourselves a big club has less to do with on the pitch expectations as it does just stroking our own egos. 

Yeah, but they don't define the clubs stature. That's the point. Seems a lot of people relate rich to successful; they're 2 different things that can have link, but are separate entities.

[markjazzbassist]

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

Yeah, but they don't define the clubs stature. That's the point. Seems a lot of people relate rich to successful; they're 2 different things that can have link, but are separate entities.

the only people who feel this way are clubs who don't have much money.  sad but true.

[Matt]

Just now, markjazzbassist said:

the only people who feel this way are clubs who don't have much money.  sad but true.

Not even close to being true. In my experience, and in my case specifically, the people who think that have been following the game all their lives and remember the times before oil money etc. 

[Sibdane]

I would say in recent history we haven't been that successful, and I don't see how anyone can argue against that. Historically yes, we're a big club, but there are clubs bigger than us right now, as others have said. I think if we are going to say we are big club then we need to put "historically" before it, or we need to add a tier above "big," because we're just not at the same level (currently) as we used to be, and we rarely show up against the clubs above us.  

The good news is that we have an investor that is hopefully going to help us compete at the next level.

I think the point I'm trying to make is yes, historically we're a big club, but finances have made some clubs around us bigger than us and that has diminished our stature a bit.

 

[Aidan]

1 hour ago, Shukes said:

Luckily we have a manager that believes Everton are a big club. 

Knows *

[markjazzbassist]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

Not even close to being true. In my experience, and in my case specifically, the people who think that have been following the game all their lives and remember the times before oil money etc. 

sure, but that's just a small part of the equation.  Stadium, current success, revenue, trophies, champions league, all part of the equation as well.  We don't do well in any of those either.  so in reality history is the only thing going for us in the "big club" column.

[Matt]

27 minutes ago, markjazzbassist said:

sure, but that's just a small part of the equation.  Stadium, current success, revenue, trophies, champions league, all part of the equation as well.  We don't do well in any of those either.  so in reality history is the only thing going for us in the "big club" column.

Stadium is linked to both stature and revenue. We've got one of the oldest, most revolutionary grounds going and we'll have a new, hopefully more groundbreaking, stadium figuratively (and soon to be literally) on the horizon

Competitions and current success are indeed part of the equation, but considering the club has been around longer than most, and we've got more success in competitions than most, we are a big club by definition. I'd argue that "current" success is not the way to look at it, because then you have to ask how far back do you want to go? If you want to define success on a specific timeline, you could say Man United aren't that big a club because it's been 5 years since they won a title. Is that true? Of course not, they're a massive club because of what they've won. Same as the shite too, unfortunately. 

To be honest, I'm kinda shocked this has to be explained on an Everton forum to fellow Evertonians. If you don't understand why we're such a big, club, you need to look back and learn. Just because we've not seen it in our lifetimes (in my case at least) does not discount the successes of the club through its lifetime. 

[Sibdane]

3 minutes ago, Matt said:

Stadium is linked to both stature and revenue. We've got one of the oldest, most revolutionary grounds going and we'll have a new, hopefully more groundbreaking, stadium figuratively (and soon to be literally) on the horizon

Competitions and current success are indeed part of the equation, but considering the club has been around longer than most, and we've got more success in competitions than most, we are a big club by definition. I'd argue that "current" success is not the way to look at it, because then you have to ask how far back do you want to go? If you want to define success on a specific timeline, you could say Man United aren't that big a club because it's been 5 years since they won a title. Is that true? Of course not, they're a massive club because of what they've won. Same as the shite too, unfortunately. 

To be honest, I'm kinda shocked this has to be explained on an Everton forum to fellow Evertonians. If you don't understand why we're such a big, club, you need to look back and learn. Just because we've not seen it in our lifetimes (in my case at least) does not discount the successes of the club through its lifetime. 

I don't think anyone is discounting that the club has historical success, just that it can't be the only barometer for current stature and we've fallen behind relative to the other clubs above us.

Liverpool is a big club, but are they as big as they once were?

[Sibdane]

Just for the record, I believe Everton are one of the bigger clubs in the league (obviously), but there is room for growth and think that's the whole point of this "debate."

[Matt]

8 minutes ago, tonkaroost said:

I don't think anyone is discounting that the club has historical success, just that it can't be the only barometer for current stature and we've fallen behind relative to the other clubs above us.

Liverpool is a big club, but are they as big as they once were?

Yes, they are as are we. 

Just curios then, how far back does current success cover?

[Quinn31]

Just now, Matt said:

Yes, they are as are we. 

Just curios then, how far back does current success cover?

One side of the debate: Everton are a historically significant football club

The other: Everton aren't financially equipped to buy the very best players in the world right now, and thus regularly compete with the likes of Man U, Chelsea, Man City for the PL title and Bayern, Barca, and Real Madrid for the Champions League title

Part of me thinks this has been a debate between two sides addressing different questions

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, Quinn31 said:

One side of the debate: Everton are a historically significant football club

The other: Everton aren't financially equipped to buy the very best players in the world right now, and thus regularly compete with the likes of Man U, Chelsea, Man City for the PL title and Bayern, Barca, and Real Madrid for the Champions League title

Part of me thinks this has been a debate between two sides addressing different questions

I'm not dismissing that, that would be silly. But we still are a big club based on history. 

Can anyone tell me what the timescale is for "current" success?

[Sibdane]

8 minutes ago, Matt said:

Yes, they are as are we. 

Just curios then, how far back does current success cover?

Okay, so on the other side of the equation... is Man City bigger now than they were before? If you say yes then you make the point that current success increases/decreases stature; if you say no then your point is that historical success is the only thing that matters.

And I don't think there's a certain set of years that you look back on to determine current success... let's say 10 years if you want do define it. All of the factors come into play: historical success, current success, finances, fanbase, quality of squad, etc.

[markjazzbassist]

matt you're looking at this with blue tinted glasses, i'm not.  from a neutral perspective we haven't won anything in over 20 years, have finished on average in that time mid table (ie not top 5), have an ancient small stadium (compared to "big clubs"), have continually sold our best players to fund transfers, have had maybe 2 world class players in the last 2 decades (rooney, lukaku), and haven't made a dent on the european stage for over 30 years.

 

if i'm a neutral that's a mid table side.  if i'm an evertonian we're the biggest club in the world.  

[Matt]

7 minutes ago, tonkaroost said:

Okay, so on the other side of the equation... is Man City bigger now than they were before? If you say yes then you make the point that current success increases/decreases stature; if you say no then your point is that historical success is the only thing that matters.

And I don't think there's a certain set of years that you look back on to determine current success... let's say 10 years if you want do define it. All of the factors come into play: historical success, current success, finances, fanbase, quality of squad, etc.

Yes, and then I'm making the point that they are bigger than before, not big in my opinion; they're rich, done well recently and have a squad to go on to be big. I remember them dropping down to league 2,  and before 2011-12 they'd won 2 titles and 4 FA cups. Hardly an impressive CV.

I'm saying success is success, over the whole history of a club. Even if you can define "current" success, then it's cherry-picking. 10 years is a good indicator of recent success, sure, but it's not a timeline to define how big a club is. That's based on the whole history.

I'm going around in circles. Going to get the match ready.

Just now, markjazzbassist said:

matt you're looking at this with blue tinted glasses, i'm not.  from a neutral perspective we haven't won anything in over 20 years, have finished on average in that time mid table (ie not top 5), have an ancient small stadium (compared to "big clubs"), have continually sold our best players to fund transfers, have had maybe 2 world class players in the last 2 decades (rooney, lukaku), and haven't made a dent on the european stage for over 30 years.

 

if i'm a neutral that's a mid table side.  if i'm an evertonian we're the biggest club in the world.  

I'm looking at it based on facts, no glasses needed. I would need glasses to only see what I want to see and ignore the rest

[Romey 1878]

Unsworth has gone balls in tonight. The confident bastard.