Season 2011-12 Fan Articles

The Moyes Conundrum

By Declan   O'Shaughnessy  ::  18/06/2012   53 Comments (»Last) To be honest, I keep flip-flopping when it comes to Moyes. On the one hand, there's part of me that would like to see him go, and someone come in who will instill an expansive style on the club and the players. On the other hand, I severely doubt that anyone else coming in will improve on our league positions under Moyes (and quite possibly fail to match his achievements).

So, although I can't make my mind up what I want to happen, there are some things that always strike me when reading through articles and comments on Moyes. In no particular order, here are some things that I think need to be considered:

1. Do we conflate and confuse playing style and success? Virtually all of the examples of expansive-minded managers that get trotted out are simply not as successful as Moyes has been: Lambert, Martinez, Rodgers would all kill for the sustained league positions that Moyes has achieved. Moyes generally beats these managers when he meets them, sometimes playing good football, sometimes not.

   But style and success do not go hand in hand. You can be ugly and successful, and beautiful and unsuccessful. Sometimes, when the stars align, you can be both beautiful and successful (Barcelona over the last 3 years, Arsenal under Wenger for about 2 years). But to think that playing more attractive football will improve our results is naive, I think.

2. Do we allow success to alter our perceptions of style? We finished 7th last season (again). Honestly, looking at the teams that finished above us, how many do you think play a more attractive kind of football than us? For me, the list is limited to Man Utd, Spurs and Arsenal. You might not agree, but in Man City, Chelsea and Newcastle, I see teams and managers in the Moyes mould. That is, play nice football when you can (start / end of season or when teams roll over and let you do what you want), but then be pragmatic the rest of the time. When the chips are down, don't take chances, be strong defensively and try to nick a goal at the other end. That is the de-facto modus operandi of most teams (successul or not), and Moyes is no different.

   When I see Man City, I see a Moyes team with almost half a billion quid spent on it. I don't see Barcelona. But, if we had our own oil sheikh, would we still moan about the style of football under Moyes, or would we lap it up? I'd guess the latter. I've seen nothing in Moyes to suggest that, given the advantages of other teams, he couldn't win trophies as well. I've also seen nothing to suggest he'd turn us into another Barcelona because I don't think that's his philosophy.

3. Do we all swallow the Sky bullshit a little too easily? For all the success of the teams I mentioned in §2 above, I would argue that only Man Utd have a clearly identifiable ethos that they stick to. Fergie likes his teams to play fast, attacking football and to impose themselves on teams. Spurs pretend they do, but let's be honest (George Graham, Santini, Gross... just off the top of my head). Arsenal used to, but these days I think they're just not good enough to actually impose a philosophy on anyone (they have a vague intent for short passing, but that's as far as it goes). Chelsea, under Di Matteo, have been awful to watch.

   And yet, for all that, Sky will have you convinced that these teams are better than Barcelona for the most part. The most routine save or goal will be met with an orgasmic moan by the Sky commentator / pundit / fuckwit. And I think fans lap that up a little too easily. It could, of course, simply be "the grass is always greener" syndrome. Stabiliy is boring, and often Everton under Moyes are boring, so sometimes the alternatives seem more attractive.

4. Do we confuse end result with end product? The line of thought always seems to be that "Moyes plays crap football. Moyes has won nothing. Therefore, crap football never results in trophies". However, I would contend that this is a false syllogism. And in my defence, I would offer the following exhibits: Chelsea under Di Matteo, Man City under Mancini, Inter Milan under Mourinho. Teams that have, in recent seasons, won the Champions League and the EPL, have been fucking awful to watch. But they've still won.

   Sometimes, a little luck (or a lot of luck) goes a long, long way. It also doesn't hurt that these clubs are incredibly wealthy. But my contention is that the only difference between these clubs and Everton is money; not style. Give Moyes that kind of budget and I think he'd deliver a trophy as well. I also don't think his style would change though. But the idea that Moyes will never triumph because of his negativity or conservative nature is just ludicrous. All he's doing is emulating what he sees around him. Success is bred from money, not footballing philosophy.

As I say, I really don't know what I want to happen at Everton. Well, actually I do: I want us to get a shit-load of money and Moyes to turn into Guardiola overnight. But neither of those things are going to happen.

So, beyond that, I can't make my mind up. I just think that sometimes we reduce the argument about Moyes and his merits to almost comic-book simplicity, and we are all too guilty of failing to see the granular detail.

Editor's Note: This response by Declan to the Why IS David Moyes Still at Everton? thread was deemed worthy of being published as an article in its own right.

Reader Comments (53)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

About these ads