Everton move for Dyche

Woodleyclaret · Post by **Woodleyclaret** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:59 pm

BFS has a messiah complex , he thinks he can solve all ills.Perhaps we should send him to North Korea to sort out the other meglamaniac

mohamed69 · Post by **mohamed69** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:59 pm

houseboy wrote:Don't know what you mean by that mate but if you think it is far fetched (and of course it may well be) think on this; years ago before the PL came into existence, at the time when it was in the planning stage, the idea was originally put forward that the new league would be a closed shop, with only clubs of a certain size (crowd, ground etc.) to be allowed in, with no relegation or promotion as such. Of course Sky were not involved at that point (don't think they even existed as such) but the FA wanted it that way (or at least some of the decision makers did). Of course it never came to be, thankfully, but you can see the thinking behind the whole PL idea. Now Sky do not sponsor the PL to the amount they do out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it for financial gain. Advertising revenue is one source but so is the sale of games internationally. It doesn't take a genius to see that, for example, Burnley v Watford is not the same draw globally as a game involving the big clubs, particularly the big 6.
When viewed from this perspective it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Sky and/or the FA don't want teams like Burnley in the PL. It's not just Burnley of course, add Bournemouth, Huddersfield, Brighton and even Stoke to the list. When you think of football and Sky do not see it as some kind of sporting love affair, it isn't, it is a business relationship only, nothing more and anything that doesn't bring in the money as they would like is not really wanted by them. Whatever you think of the 'conspiracy theory' type thinking behind this just remember that if you were running a business you would also want to cut out that which is least profitable, it stands to reason economically.

So who are supposed to replace the Burnleys and Bournemouths of the league? Or do you think sky are trying to change the league to be top 6 only?

Why does sky air watford vs Burnley then? They don't have to...

4:20 · Post by **4:20** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:05 pm

The name, Sean Dyche, is a bookies wet dream and has been for a while.

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:10 pm

mohamed69 wrote:So who are supposed to replace the Burnleys and Bournemouths of the league? Or do you think sky are trying to change the league to be top 6 only?

Clubs with big fanbases like Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday, Aston Villa

Why does sky air watford vs Burnley then? They don't have to...

The contract they have with the PL says they have to show a minimum number of each club's games.

FWIW, I think the conspiracy theories are nonsense though.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:10 pm

houseboy wrote:Don't know what you mean by that mate but if you think it is far fetched (and of course it may well be) think on this; years ago before the PL came into existence, at the time when it was in the planning stage, the idea was originally put forward that the new league would be a closed shop, with only clubs of a certain size (crowd, ground etc.) to be allowed in, with no relegation or promotion as such. Of course Sky were not involved at that point (don't think they even existed as such) but the FA wanted it that way (or at least some of the decision makers did). Of course it never came to be, thankfully, but you can see the thinking behind the whole PL idea. Now Sky do not sponsor the PL to the amount they do out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it for financial gain. Advertising revenue is one source but so is the sale of games internationally. It doesn't take a genius to see that, for example, Burnley v Watford is not the same draw globally as a game involving the big clubs, particularly the big 6.
When viewed from this perspective it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Sky and/or the FA don't want teams like Burnley in the PL. It's not just Burnley of course, add Bournemouth, Huddersfield, Brighton and even Stoke to the list. When you think of football and Sky do not see it as some kind of sporting love affair, it isn't, it is a business relationship only, nothing more and anything that doesn't bring in the money as they would like is not really wanted by them. Whatever you think of the 'conspiracy theory' type thinking behind this just remember that if you were running a business you would also want to cut out that which is least profitable, it stands to reason economically.

There could be some truth in what you say, but if it is they aren't looking at it realistically. Have you seen the size of the gates some of the bottom half teams get in Spain, in France, in Portugal. They are all on a par with the Scottish prem. Yes there may be bigger stadiums than the Turf, bigger support than for Burnley, but considering the size of our town the support is phenomenal, not only in England but throughout the continent. Only in Germany do most of the league teams have tremendous support.
I just wish the people who run football, and the people who display it, had the tiniest inkling of what football is about.
And it isn't ******* money.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:14 pm

Aren't they changing the parachute payment rules, to stop clubs coming up and grabbing the money without wasting it on overpaid dross?
I thought that was partly down to clubs like us doing it.

RocketLawnChair · Post by **RocketLawnChair** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:23 pm

Sky pump millions of £s into the All Football in this country not just the Prem. BUT they have absolutely no influence over who Everton FC want to be manager of their club or which club Sean Dyche wants to manage when given the choice end of.

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:24 pm

mohamed69 wrote:There are really two points here:

1. You think sky are this conniving and coordinated. I'm sure they would be flattered to hear this. Having worked for large organisations I can tell you it's often shocking how uncoordinated they actually are on a day to day basis. I highly doubt the pundits have been forced to say these things to fit such an agenda.

2. Assuming 1 is correct, you assume that Burnley doing well is BAD for the league. Wouldn't a financial minnow and huge underdog punching well above its weight be great for the league and viewership? How does sky benefit from the big teams doing well and the small teams doing poorly, specifically?

Hell fire never agree with anything this poster ever says,but he makes two excellent point there.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:33 pm

houseboy wrote:Don't know what you mean by that mate but if you think it is far fetched (and of course it may well be) think on this; years ago before the PL came into existence, at the time when it was in the planning stage, the idea was originally put forward that the new league would be a closed shop, with only clubs of a certain size (crowd, ground etc.) to be allowed in, with no relegation or promotion as such. Of course Sky were not involved at that point (don't think they even existed as such) but the FA wanted it that way (or at least some of the decision makers did). Of course it never came to be, thankfully, but you can see the thinking behind the whole PL idea. Now Sky do not sponsor the PL to the amount they do out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it for financial gain. Advertising revenue is one source but so is the sale of games internationally. It doesn't take a genius to see that, for example, Burnley v Watford is not the same draw globally as a game involving the big clubs, particularly the big 6.
When viewed from this perspective it is not beyond the realms of possibility that Sky and/or the FA don't want teams like Burnley in the PL. It's not just Burnley of course, add Bournemouth, Huddersfield, Brighton and even Stoke to the list. When you think of football and Sky do not see it as some kind of sporting love affair, it isn't, it is a business relationship only, nothing more and anything that doesn't bring in the money as they would like is not really wanted by them. Whatever you think of the 'conspiracy theory' type thinking behind this just remember that if you were running a business you would also want to cut out that which is least profitable, it stands to reason economically.

You need to lay off the football if it makes you feel like this.

Do you not think EPL/Sky want to sell a competitive product? Clubs like ours/bournemouth/huddersfield make this league what it is. Yes we can't compete over a full 9 month season but sometimes over 90 minutes we can. That's what makes it stand apart from Seria A/La Liga and so on.

What clubs is their to replace us? Aston Villa?? Leeds??
Burnley now would be seen as much as an attraction to foreign supporters than watching Villa. Leeds haven't been in the EPL for 10 years of sumert. So you have what? 25/26 year olds abroad who have never seen Leeds in the top devision.

Jblonde002 · Post by **Jblonde002** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:35 pm

houseboy wrote:Now Sky do not sponsor the PL to the amount they do out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it for financial gain. Advertising revenue is one source but so is the sale of games internationally. It doesn't take a genius to see that, for example, Burnley v Watford is not the same draw globally as a game involving the big clubs, particularly the big 6.

Sky don't sell international rights do they? I thought that the Premier League sell international rights, and concordantly Sky would only be interested in domestic gain from advertising revenue?

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:43 pm

mohamed69 wrote:There are really two points here:

1. You think sky are this conniving and coordinated. I'm sure they would be flattered to hear this. Having worked for large organisations I can tell you it's often shocking how uncoordinated they actually are on a day to day basis. I highly doubt the pundits have been forced to say these things to fit such an agenda.

2. Assuming 1 is correct, you assume that Burnley doing well is BAD for the league. Wouldn't a financial minnow and huge underdog punching well above its weight be great for the league and viewership? How does sky benefit from the big teams doing well and the small teams doing poorly, specifically?

1 - I don think that Sky are coordinated - they dont have to be. It only takes a couple of individuals in positions of power to influence a whole organisation (why else do organisations have Chief Execs etc?). What I do know is that they are a company who's purpose is to make money, and I am expressing my opinion on this.

2 - Burnley doing well is good for viewing whilst they are considered a small club "punching above their weight". As soon as they become "established they will be marked as unfashionable alongside Stoke, West Brom etc, and the initial appeal will dissipate.

tbh I dont want a mass debate about Sky as I am clearly not as an experienced mass-debater such as yourself. I merely expressed my opinion, of which you disagree with. You still haven't answered why my inference and opinion is deemed "pathetic", but now I'm not interested.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:45 pm

I can see arguments both ways, you can't really turn a job the size of Everton down but would the fans and board put up with the turgid football we had to put up with in his first season, Dyche needs a pre-season to get over his ideas and fitness, he could be sacked before he gets the chance.

Rick_Muller · Post by **Rick_Muller** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:48 pm

claretandy wrote:I can see arguments both ways, you can't really turn a job the size of Everton down but would the fans and board put up with the turgid football we had to put up with in his first season, Dyche needs a pre-season to get over his ideas and fitness, he could be sacked before he gets the chance.

this thread is really is bridging posters who dont usually agree, but I do agree with you here claretandy.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:48 pm

joey13 wrote:An existing Premier league manager as only moved to another Premier league club during the season once and we all know who that was don’t we.

Still the case that most managerial moves take place mid season. Owners are not prepared to wait till the end of the season if their club is in trouble.

Horseface`s situation was very different - he left for a club similar to us in size and league position. We were already on a bad run of form and I know for a fact that he was having meetings with Garside in December before any formal approach was made by Bolton to Burnley.

If Everton make a formal approach to Burnley and SD decides he would like to speak to them all I was saying is that I do not think that is cause to question his integrity at all. If SD thinks it would be wrong to leave us mid season then that`s a big risk for him that Everton are prepared to wait given their precarious position in the table.

Clearly none of us want any of this to happen - but whatever does happen SD will not go down in my estimation at all.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:59 pm

Sean Dyche, as good as a manager that he's been for Burnley, will not be able to attract the world class players that Everton feel they should be in for.

He'll guarantee them premier league status all day long. And if he goes, there'll undoubtedly be a new manager bounce at Goodison. However, his style of play, which suits Burnley just fine, and his lack of ability to attract the very top players. Means it won't be long before the Goodison faithful will be moaning n groaning and saying they're sick of just treading water and Dyche has reached his own glass ceiling.

Managers become flavour of the month. Gary monk was being touted as a replacement for Arsen Wenger 18 months ago. Roberto Martinez was the new footballing messiah as well.

Brian Clough didn't feel the need to manage a big club. That's why his achievements with Forrest were all the more remarkable. As were Bobby Robsons at Ipswich.

At Everton, Sean could easily become, an all too brief mention on their "previous managers" list.

Staying at Turf Moor, he's names already well on its way to being carved in legendary Burnley folk lore.

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:08 pm

Jblonde002 wrote:Sky don't sell international rights do they? I thought that the Premier League sell international rights, and concordantly Sky would only be interested in domestic gain from advertising revenue?

Badly worded by me, it's not the games its the sale of the licences that Sky benefit from. The PL sell games to overseas broadcasters but Sky can still sell licences for there products also. It's all a bit complex but Sky DO benefit from overseas sales as they are an international brand. Don't ask me how it works, I don't know, but if you go abroad you are still able to watch Sky sports in almost any bar you walk into for example, and those licences are what Sky make their overseas money from.

BleedingClaret · Post by **BleedingClaret** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:17 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KFmdenP9Hg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:19 pm

Turning jobs down that you're not suited for, or the job is crap is OK. I would turn down the chance to race for Ferrari or be Director of Tate Modern.

Foshiznik · Post by **Foshiznik** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:23 pm

houseboy wrote:Badly worded by me, it's not the games its the sale of the licences that Sky benefit from. The PL sell games to overseas broadcasters but Sky can still sell licences for there products also. It's all a bit complex but Sky DO benefit from overseas sales as they are an international brand. Don't ask me how it works, I don't know, but if you go abroad you are still able to watch Sky sports in almost any bar you walk into for example, and those licences are what Sky make their overseas money from.

Surely they also earn from filming the games? not all broadcasters from Sky, BBC (For MOTD), Bein Sports, etc. bring cameras do they?

Espia · Post by **Espia** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:25 pm

If he waits for the next premiership vacancy , where will it be ? West Ham perhaps ? ..... then he could keep his claret and blue jim-jams.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:39 pm

It's all sky with nothing else to talk about.

Ipreferaflan · Post by **Ipreferaflan** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:43 pm

I personally would not begrudge him for one second if he took the job - he probably won't get offered a better one, regardless of current league position. As other posters have eluded to though, he could just as easily be sacked and long forgotten by February if things don't work out there. I'm sure that'll be running through his mind and is more than likely the only thing that would stop him going.

Dougall · Post by **Dougall** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 2:43 pm

Pstotto wrote:Turning jobs down that you're not suited for, or the job is crap is OK. I would turn down the chance to race for Ferrari or be Director of Tate Modern.

I'd take the Ferrari gig - you get paid about £3million per race ! 45 mph - mirror, signal, manoeuvre - what could go wrong?!
And I'd fancy my chances at the Tate Modern as well - who'd be able to tell if I messed up?!

houseboy · Post by **houseboy** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:25 pm

Foshiznik wrote:Surely they also earn from filming the games? not all broadcasters from Sky, BBC (For MOTD), Bein Sports, etc. bring cameras do they?

Quite possibly. as I said I don't know all the ins and outs but I do know Sky make a fortune from overseas rights on the PL. A colleague of mine who worked for years in telecommunications tells me that Sky actually DO organise the sale of games to foreign broadcasters because they own the rights to them here, but we are now getting into 'things I don't know about' territory so don't take that statement as fact. Whatever happens Sky make gazzilions out of the PL because otherwise they wouldn't pay the ridiculous amounts they do for the rights in the first place. The one thing I do know a lot about as I have spent the best part of 30 years in marketing and advertising is that Sky could not possibly rely on advertising alone, they couldn't possibly recoup the investment from that, although there is significant income from it.

BennyD · Post by **BennyD** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:34 pm

RalphCoatesComb wrote:I'm with you but, he is bound to be ambitious and Everton, in the long-term, are a bigger Club than little old Burnley. As was said last night on one of the Sports Radio channels, SD is not going to get a Chelsea, Arsenal, United or City. Realistically, Everton could be the bigger English Club that he could aspire to at present.

7th in the Premier League is impressive but, is that as good as it gets? The only way is DOWN. For Everton, the only way is UP

Personally, I don't want him to go and don't believe that he should go but, I will shake his hand and say "Thanks Sean. You'll always be a Clarets Legend"

Which would look better on his CV; getting 'little old' Burnley (unexpectedly) into the top 10 or getting Everton into the top 10? If he doesn't get Everton up there his job is under mega scrutiny whereas with us there is no such pressure. Also, these days, the 'size' of the club doesn't really matter as most of the money comes from SKY and the thing that matters most is league position. I know he's going to go at some point but, if he hangs on until the end of the season, I reckon there will be a better job than Everton coming up and if we are still in the top 10 he will be in the frame for it. Then I would shake his hand and tell him he'll always be a Clarets legend but, IMO, he's better than Everton.

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:37 pm

"Everton move for Dyche"

Not read that anywhere. I've read on Sky Sports they think he'll be approached, but nothing that they've already moved for him.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:58 pm

I genuinely don't think that the Everton board will be brave enough to offer it to SD. Everton fans expected to be challenging the top four this season, they will see it as a Moyes type appointment.... a jump back several years. He will certainly not get time to sort it.

I still think he has to go though if the call comes.... just doubt it will.

Pstotto · Post by **Pstotto** » Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:04 pm

I'm old fashioned Dougall, I would be dishonouring the job. I'm too proud.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:30 am

kaptin1 wrote:Being reported on Sky Sports that Everton will move for Dyche in next 24 hours.

It's over 24 hours now. Can we assume it was bullshit from Sky?

Or is Everton's fax machine on the blink?

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 7:44 am

I have it on good authority that Everton met with BFS yesterday.

ablueclaret · Post by **ablueclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:41 am

Sadly for SD his methods don't fit the top clubs vision.
Given the chance I'm sure he"d do well after a sticky start mainly because he would sort sides out defensively. That's why I fancy Liverpool would be a better fit than Everton who have always had a tendency to be more concerned with style than substance.
For him at present the project he has here is a more viable and sensible one than those on offer, and if he can show he can become more adaptable whilst still remaining successful the doors will eventually open for him, however if he can make the transition here he won't need the move.

Cubanclaret · Post by **Cubanclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:43 am

If Everton regard their current predicament as gravely as many observers than BFS would be the man to hang your hat. Sean would be then be an ideal candidate to take things on possibly in the summer.

Grumps · Post by **Grumps** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:48 am

If you believe the sun, BFS is meeting with Everton today.

ablueclaret · Post by **ablueclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:49 am

They do probably require an experienced manager grounded in the English game, and although SD would do it over time he might not have the skills necessary over the short-term.
He's certainly worth a punt but I fancy it wouldn't be the right club for him with the fans expectations of success based on flowing football.

halfmanhalfbiscuit · Post by **halfmanhalfbiscuit** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:07 am

Sun latest...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... lves-nuno/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:11 am

Grumps wrote:If you believe the sun, BFS is meeting with Everton today.

Again? He met with them yesterday.

claretblue · Post by **claretblue** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:11 am

halfmanhalfbiscuit wrote:Sun latest...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... lves-nuno/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

YES YES for Nuno!

halfmanhalfbiscuit · Post by **halfmanhalfbiscuit** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:13 am

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/fo ... n-13839453" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

After over 2,000 votes, 53% don't think that Dyche is right for the Blues - leaving 47% believing that the 46-year-old should take the role on a permanent basis.

Fans have also been reacting on Twitter - but the overwhelming view from social media at least is that the Blues should be looking elsewhere:

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:15 am

Reports saying they are talking with the Wolves manager. Probably want the super agent Mendez bringing his stars to Everton before the really big clubs.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:42 pm

Alan Nixon says Everton are speaking to Big Sam

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... ise-staff/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If that's the case I can't see SD going there.

Wokingclaret · Post by **Wokingclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:49 pm

Spijed wrote:Alan Nixon says Everton are speaking to Big Sam

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football ... ise-staff/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If that's the case I can't see SD going there.

Good news, but shows some owners are really thick

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 12:49 pm

I think Everton will talk to a few managers first, and narrow it down after that.

The problem is with this is that SD is really good at that kind of thing, but its also good because he'll make them aware of what he wants as well, so it might not get past that stage*

*they might not meet him or his representatives either as well, but I'd find that very hard to believe

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:07 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:I think Everton will talk to a few managers first, and narrow it down after that.

The problem is with this is that SD is really good at that kind of thing, but its also good because he'll make them aware of what he wants as well, so it might not get past that stage*

But to look on the bright side, Dyche is more likely to move if Everton let him know he is their one and only, he's the man for them; than if they go round the houses, offer it to one or two more people perhaps, and then tell Dyche "you'll do".

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:09 pm

or, he might not want to go to that shallow bunch of no hopers with their enourmous chip on the shoulders, bill kenwright should stick to poncey musicals and being remorseful for the shabby way he treated betty turpin in coronation street.

Clarets4me · Post by **Clarets4me** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:09 pm

Guardian reporting that Nuno, the Wolves manager has been offered the job, and is thinking it over...

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:10 pm

Yeah, but those of us who realise that Burnley is our football team, and not necessarily the peak of football achievement in the world will be slightly more realistic!

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:10 pm

I am not sure what the fuss is all about.

Everton have had one rank bad result in the league - against us.

They have been spanked by some of the top six (who hasn’t) but got a draw at City and have won a couple at home.

They need a bit of pace up top, but they still have some exceptional players who are playing below their standard and won’t be hard to improve. I see that confidence is shot and maybe that Koeman had to go, but this talk of them being a shambles that nobody would want - total nonsence. Dyche, BFS whoever would be daft to turn them down.

They will finish top 12, quite easily.

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:12 pm

i hope they sink without trace, arrogant fans who seem clueless, and a shoddy board. good riddance if they flop.

Wokingclaret · Post by **Wokingclaret** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:15 pm

Clarets4me wrote:Guardian reporting that Nuno, the Wolves manager has been offered the job, and is thinking it over...

But he is likely to decline

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:18 pm

Daily Express says Nuno has already turned them down.

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football ... n-Park-job" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;