American investors could swoop if Everton survive the drop

So now it's the Daily Mail claiming there are three Americans interested in talking to Moshiri about a possible take-over.

Not sure if any fire will come from this smoke, but let's wait and see.

Kenwright Out.

So sorry. You're not allowed to invest here unless the Great Actor says so. And it's his trainset. Na nah na na nah.

The yanks don't have the best track record on owning Premier League clubs. No thanks.

Paul, can't be any worse than our bloke...

It is a great pity that the Premier League didn't adopt the German 50% fan ownership model.

It is not perfect, but it's better than handing over our community institutions to Oligarchs and worse.

I'm for the 51-49 German model Robert. It's not perfect and can be circumnavigated. But it makes it less easy to do so and makes the owners more accountable to the supporters.

Liverpool haven't faired too badly Paul Hewitt.

Paul Hewitt - are you suggesting an Eglish charlatan and a British Iranian fool are better- I don't think you should generalise and we need to review all options on merit- the current setup is clearly dysfunctional and has to change

I don't know much about the German model or how successful it would be but it seems it would be difficult to be worse than Kenwright and Moshiri's combined 25 years of disintegration of our beloved club

All fairly academic as it's based on the premise of our staying up.

Moshiri will be desperate to sell or find investment, so we'll probably see a lot more of this type of stuff in the weeks to come.

Anthony yes, we will.

Along with player speculation - like the supposed Richarlison interest from United and Real, yesterday.

I'm stepping out of my lane a bit now, but with ties to Usmanov cut, Moshiri has lost his main benefactor, is out his depth in running a football club and being advised by a theatre luvvie.

If there is any truth, I'd take an American owner. One thing I know about only having worked for American businesses is that they will run the club like a business at the board level. They will want success. They will invest but it will be more calculated that what we have seen.

Anyway, it's all rumour and apparently subject to us remaining in the Premier League, so let's get today and this season out of the way first.

Regardless, with the size of the club, the support base, the new stadium on the horizon, Everton remains an attractive mid to long term investment opportunity for an investor.

American investors are, well, investors, meaning they're in it for the money, which, in itself, is not necessarily a bad thing. In my view, it is preferable to the Chinese/Arab/Russian model, to say nothing of the Anglo-Iranian one.

When a large number of interested parties, including several Americans, put in bids for Chelsea, I thought that perhaps one or more of the unsuccessful ones might turn their attention elsewhere, and we are an obvious target if we manage to stay up.

Hope springs eternal.

"It's all subject to us remaining in the Premier League".

In other words, there has to be a quid in it. I can't think of many better reasons to sell or buy.

What's our name!?!

Like Danny #12 ] I've worked for a couple of large US businesses. Their Boards are run in a business-like manner. Cannot see any of our current Board lasting more than 5 minutes.

Pity the Americans wanting to buy us are not the team of Mike Gaynes, Jamie Crowley, Lyndon and Michael, eh? :}

Lyndon : - o

Wrong continent, Gerry.

The three are probably Beavis, Butthead & Ronald McDonald. Still, can't be worse than Dumb and Dumber.

Ooops, gotcha Will

No worries, Gerry. You owe me one and there'll be plenty of chances...

Danny

While the idea of being run like a business sounds good, it's also quite scary considering the financial mess we are now in. Presumably the first step to a profit comes with balancing the books and I am not sure how we can even take steps in that direction without selling our only marketable players. Think Venky's or the Swansea ownership.

Moshiri has been warned by Kenwright not to sell up otherwise he will cry his eyes out.
We need a ruthless owner who would drag him out screaming !
Two more wins for us and that leaves Burnley needing at least 3 wins and a draw or 2 wins and 4 draws just to be level. That's a tough ask for a team like that.
Battle like we did today and avoid the silly mistakes and we will be fine. It's in our hands.

The chances are that if some Yanks should buy the club, they'll know what they're doing and have a decent plan in place.

I have to wonder though, how badly they'll trample over us locals with a corporate/franchise outlook to business?

First things first, Kenwright is locked away in his little signalman's hut and he won't open that door to allow anyone else to come in and control his train set.

Tom

"The chances are that if some Yanks should buy the club, they'll know what they're doing and have a decent plan in place."

Randy Lerner? Ellis Short?

What I want to know is what exactly Moshiri said when he took the call with the offer from Mike Gaynes?

Keiran @ 24

Would you like a list of British owners who haven't or aren't exactly doing their clubs any favours?

Picking a few Yanks out and implying they're all bad, doesn't float.

Brian #25, he just wanted to make sure I had no connection to Trump. Said he has enough issues already with Putin-loving rich people.

Kieran #24, don't put every Yank in the same boat. I would say the current US owners of Palace, Villa, Burnley and the effing RS have done a very good job.

The Ricketts family (owners of my beloved Chicago Cubs) are bidding for Chelsea, but if they're looking at Everton too, that's good news. Some of the Ricketts clan are politically disgusting, but they know how to hire top management talent, execute stadium projects, build a team, and win. And they do a really good job of communicating with the fanbase.

With all the Usmanov dealings seemingly still (for now at least) submerged in the dirty swamp water, I don't think we're exactly an attractive buy.

EITC apart, we're a sad guffaw.

Huge debts which are only increasing. Relegation at 50:50. A board that continually amazes with its business ineptitude. Possible points deductions to come for financial impropriety.

To me it would be like perusing a line of Bentleys, Ferraris, Porches, etc, and then opting to go for the 70's Ford Zephyr with bald tyres, rusting body work and a turd on the driver's seat.

That's how it looks from the outside Jim, especially to us Evertonians, but I was told last week that Everton is actually a good investment, but only if they can sort out the mess obviously?

You're not a used car salesman prefixed by 'Swiss' are you Tony?

I sincerely hope you're right. This is all too horrible to take.

If it means stopping Moshiri going out and buying dross without telling anyone then I don't care if Mr Magoo and Peewee Herman buy the club so long as their first job is calling a taxi for Kenwright and taking his keys off him so he can't get back in again.

Mike #27, you make the Ricketts sound just the sort of people to give the club a good shake and sort out the old boys network.

I hear what you're saying Kieran and whether this owner or the potential rumoured American ones, balancing of the books is required, if not already in progress.

I believe Everton is a good investment for reasons I've already stated. Maybe not tomorrow, but definitely in the mid to long term.

We need this owner or the next one to actually release the potential of this club and stop letting certain elements of the club live in the past.

If Manchester City and Chelsea can do it, why can't Everton? Whilst we stood still, those two, who couldn't touch us 30 years or less ago, reinvented themselves with a vision and a strategy.

We are big enough and have the potential. We just need someone who can rid the club of the hangers on and fulfil it.

Lol, Jim #30...

"Running a football club is like making love to a beautiful woman... You've got to caress the ego, breathe softly and gently, and give every inch of it your loving attention. And make sure you've got a nice wet sponge."

If Randy Lerner was female, I'd become a driving instructor.

Rich #33,

I'm useless at attaching links, but YouTube - Swiss Tony 'Putting up a tent'.

Great character.

You know what these American investors are like and, if there is an agreement that Bill has to stay on, then he'll end up finding his desk in the Finch Farm car park, having to clock-on every day and suffering the Koeman tactic of being told with whom and when he could have lunch albeit that if he behaves it will be delivered to his desk, then after a given time, a locker of his own. I don't think he has complained about such actions in the past.

Tom/Mike

I wasn't suggesting all American owners are bad but offering evidence that not all American owners are good in response to Tom's assumption they would be.

It's not about nationality — it is about competence and getting the right owner — although I guess nationality is currently a factor if they're Russian!

I'd love to see Krafty Bob make a bid but historically he has been reluctant due to “salary cap” issues.

Right now Everton is a club spread-eagled, keck-less, over a barrel as far as savvy investors are concerned.

Moshiri and Kenwright are seeking to protect their asses with a mere finger or two. They're ripe for the taking (not from my personal experience mind you!)

Our club is fucked, for years to come under the present regime. Everyone on the planet knows this, but just how much shite (as in "small" money) will Moshiri be able to personally swallow to enable us perhaps, but only perhaps, begin to ascend to "the project" with new owners that he so ridiculously announced six years ago, before he went on to publicly make such an arse of himself?

If there are American investors who are interested in buying Everton, I hope it is the Kraft family that owns the New England Patriots.

Bill

I hope it's the Trump family because any time we lose they'll say it is “fake news” and the Murdoch media AKA Sky Sports and 50 percent of the population will concur

Gerry Quinn -

I've got about 5 bucks in my pocket. Put me on the Board.

Seriously, if Americans did end up buying Everton, I'd be very happy depending upon who actually purchased us. The single best sports management team in North America already owns the not-so-lovable neighbors. It's a damn shame they aren't in the market.

The Cubs owners would be fantastic. Last I read they were in for Chelsea, but if they're out of that deal they'd consider Everton a serious bargain comparatively.

Bobby Kraft isn't buying a Premier League club - he already loathes owning the New England Revolution. Or at least he ignores them while focusing on the Patriots. Not what we want.

We'll just need to wait and see. When the rumors come out, Mike and I can give our two cents worth, as well as a bevy of 'Mericans on this site who might be more "local" to the buying group than Mike or I.

There's a bunch of good, some bad, and some ugly we need to steer clear of, but hopefully the right ownership group is found.

It has to be the right people though. Americans don't understand the fierce passion the English have for not only their teams, but their sport. We can't have an American group that is gun-ho and wants to force American ways and norms on Everton. The fit has to be right, or our "toxic" fanbase will go apoplectic! 😜

I would truly love this if it happened and it was a good ownership group.

Kieran and others who are concerned about Everton not being attractive due to financial woes, I'd argue that actually makes us MORE attractive.

The Club will be sold for much less than its worth due to its lack of profitability. The debt will be financed by exceedingly wealthy individuals quite easily, in some type of vehicle / arrangement that makes it very manageable. The "heavy lifting" of the construction of a new stadium is underway and all that procedural crap taken care of.

I'd actually think that for an aggressive and intelligent group, Everton are a better investment and have a much larger potential ROI than paying 2 billion for Chelsea.

Now that I think about it, this could be a bit of a magic wand for us if we are bought by the right people, and most importantly:

We stay up! That's the key. Do that, and I could definitely see a purchase occurring, and it would be a very, very fortunate thing for us as a Club, assuming it's the right group that buys us.

You make some good points there Jamie. I personally would welcome American ownership. Ultimately the right ownership, but Americans can relate to us whilst adding a dose of business reality.

I think your point about understanding the local passion of English football is key. That's where I think City's and Liverpool's owners have done well. They have modernised whilst still recognising the local traditions and heritage.

Forget who comes from where, there are bad examples out there. Cardiff's owner changing the colours from Blue to Red (vomit). Hull's owner wanting to change the name to "Tigers".

Invest, modernise but respect the history without living in the past. Moshiri has been led down the garden path. Literally; the old garden path of the past.

Danny -

I can tell you if Americans come in, I'd bet on the following happening:

- A strategic and fiscally responsible recruiting policy, think Moneyball or some version of that, very analytical

- A massive marketing campaign, more Americanized and looking to grow the brand outside Liverpool

- A gigantic focus on the matchday / match-going experience

- A sponsorship focus with the eye on major money for sponsorship rights

- Commercialization and getting our wares just about everywhere they can

That's basically what all the teams here are trying to do, with varying levels of success. But I'd argue that American owners, in the main, do it well.

Jamie C., and I would add that there would likely -- not a certainty, but likely -- be a direct outreach to the local fan base, ranging from high-level corporate communication to promotion to direct interaction with ownership. It would be a dramatic change from what the deliberately remote Moshiri has done. And, if handled properly, it would go a long way towards overcoming the anti-Yank prejudice inherent in the English football fan, a prejudice aggravated by the Lerner incompetence and the Glazer profiteering. Yank owners tend to learn from others' mistakes.

Perversely, however, relegation might make the club actually MORE likely to be appealing because it would reduce our monetary value so much in relation to the club's intrinsic and traditional value. Right now we're Costco, a good value in bulk. In the Championship we'd be Dollar Tree material. The partly-built stadium adds potential value, not detracts from it.

I doubt Moshiri would want to sell for a loss. He's not short of money so presumably is in no rush. Perhaps he might take on investment but I'd be very surprised if he was to give up his position entirely. Which is a shame because – as rich as he is – I'm not sure he knows how to run a football club.

I have always thought that fan-ownership is the way forward. Danny will confirm that German fans get a better deal all round with sensible ticket prices and a decent product on the park.

The Premier League is a bloated monstrosity, full of vested interest, zero morals and over-paid players and managers. It is policed by a corrupt governing body answerable to even more corrupt international bodies. The TV media helps to continue the dominance of the clique of favoured clubs to the detriment of the rest. I can't think of an uglier sport.

Only the likes of Antony Gordon and Jonjoe Kenny trying their best, on ordinary (by Premier League standards) money, gives me any empathy with the team.

Then l look at Ronaldo, the most gifted player (with Messi) of a generation knocking a kid's phone out of his hand as he walks off.

It is hard to imagine any new owners who might be less competent on footballing matters.

However, unless they can match Man City or Newcastle's wealth then any change is unlikely to lead to glory - but a greater grasp of strategy etc will certainly help.

Basically I want the stadium built, European adventures and a cup win or two in the short to medium term.

From there we can dream bigger.

It's not perfect, Eddie, but it does hold a majority shareholder more accountable and less able to ride gun shot. Leipzig are a good example of manipulating the system. All a 49% majority shareholder needs to do is sway a few votes to get their way, but yes, it keeps the clubs in check and in touch with the fans.

That aside, there are many things we can learn from the German game, particularly their investment in grass roots, not just the elite academies that operate behind the closed gates of Finch Farm (for example).

Simple things like free public transport for the day if you have a match ticket. Meanwhile, I get fined £20 at Lime Street because I couldn't buy a ticket at Sandhills to travel 2 stops. I don't know if I'm more bitter about that, the inability to buy a half-time drink from the very stern scouse lady in the Upper Bullens or my letter of complaint from Wolves for being in the home end. Eventful season and not over yet!!

I can only mainly speak of Schalke and I'll put another of my scratched records on. Being able to wander around the academy pitches on the morning before a match gives me as much enjoyment as attending a fixture at the Veltins Arena itself. Open door and a club very much in touch with the community it came from and is rooted in.

Everton have the right idea with EitC, it just went a bit too far on the charity side rather than focus on local football in my opinion. Why not invest in local football and sponsor teams in the area? We are a football club, not a charity. Give back to the community in what we are and do. Mutually beneficial in my simple head. I'm not against charity by the way and contribute to many good causes.

Jamie, you touch on arguably one of the key failings of Everton. The failure to build the brand outside of the city limits and not just go national, but project a global presence. I know I'm blinkered but the potential in this club is there. I maintain, if Manchester City and Chelsea of my childhood (the '80s) can do it, why not Everton? We are as big, if not bigger than both of those clubs considering their starting point.

I don't think fans should have major issues with American investment in the club - Jamie and Mike show how it would change the club. It has improved the shite dramatically under FSG and no-one could claim they are not a very well run club now.

However, my guess is that Moshiri will not sell until the stadium is completed and he can maximise his profit.

Danny @ 7. they're doing okay with their current US owners bit their previous ones left them in a terrible state.

We shouldn't forget Milan Mandaric at Portsmouth either. Not US-born but moved there in the 1960s.

Fair point, Andrew. Only they could come away from the steps of the Law Courts on the brink of being wound up and go on to what they did. I guess it's down to the right owner, regardless of where they come from.

Based on my relatively inexperienced commercial experience since 2016, I just think an American owner would treat it like a business, have no sentiment and build the global brand.

I think our current owner has always had good intent, he just allowed the old boys club access to his wallet. Or should I say filled the pigs' trough?

Is that harsh?

Success of the sort this club yearns for doesn't come from investment, it comes from an unlimited funds buyout, as per Man City, Chelsea, and very likely Newcastle Utd.

Liverpool and Man Utd are financial giants from historic endeavour, it is nigh on impossible for them not to be challenging regardless of who is in charge and interestingly both clubs have American owners, still looked at with varying degrees of suspicion, despite winning stuff

The game-changing acquisition of Klopp has still not eradicated the perception of FSG chasing an extra buck at the expense of local fans over at Monkey Island.

But nationalities are of no import – it is the amount of loot available that remains key. Investment attempting to build a club as per routine business models is suspiciously like the Kenwright-Moyes "cut your cloth accordingly" notion.

Such rumours excite me not one jot.

So, these Three interested Americans: Are they Curly, Larry and Moe? or Crosby, Stills & Nash?! *

* Yes I do realise Graham Nash was born in Manchester!

A couple of lads posting reckon we are a good investment. Well, if we are a good investment, why would Moshiri sell up?

Our financial position is precarious – if not fundamentally broke, with every 94p in the pound being paid in wages. Even your everyday asset strippers would struggle to make money out of Everton.

Yes, they could sell off certain players but, if we get relegated, they would struggle to get a fee for the majority of players, but that's assuming another club will pay them the money they are earning here. Then those you can't sell will be on exactly the same money in the Championship, if we go down, so how is that survivable?

Our best bet is for Moshiri to keep laundering Usmanov's money, build a new stadium, hopefully still in the Premier League, then sell.

They probably won't recoup all the money they have spent but will get a lot more than the rumoured £250 million this group of Americans are said to be offering.

Barry @54 -

Success of the sort this club yearns for doesn't come from investment, it comes from an unlimited funds buyout as per Man City, Chelsea and very likely Newcastle Utd.

I think the club across your park shows you don't have to spend stupid money to be successful. It's this Moneyball approach that is the way forward.

American owners are, by and large, putting GMs (General Managers, read DoFs) in place that adhere to this policy to maximize profits and reduce cost on players.

Teams that buy big – like we did with aging stars and splash signings – don't succeed, or at least waste money on players with high price tags when the metrics show you can achieve similar results as a squad with much, much less expensive players.

Liverpool have done this, as do the Red Sox. They'll pay the stars, but compliment them based upon affordable, metric-centric players.

In baseball, a center fielder who isn't great at the plate but prevents 5 runs per game against due to his speed and ability to track down fly balls. A catcher whose start-to-win ratio because he works so well with pitchers he accumulates 7 more wins per season. A first baseman whose defensive abilities create 3 more outs per game because he scoops sold throws for outs instead of missing them and creating runs for the opposition. A batter whose slugging percentage is crap, yet his ability to move runners into scoring positions, creating runs, is fantastic.

Etc, etc, etc. The above are all baseball analogies but simply take soccer and throw in the relevant criteria: A winger who tracks back and creates more possession, a striker who doesn't score per game as much, yet holds the ball up and creates more chances on goal / scoring opportunities due to his play. A midfielder whose challenge win rate is off the charts but doesn't necessarily fit a mold. Insert whatever metric is applicable to soccer. My examples are more elementary than my baseball ones due to my limited knowledge, but it all translates.

And the point is you find these players, save millions on signing them, and build a team.

This is something the neighbors have done exceedingly well under American ownership and that ownership group's adherence to their statistical approach to signing players.

I said it when FSG (always say NESV or New England Sports Ventures as I'm long in the New England tooth...) acquired 'them'. I knew they'd do well, and be run efficiently. I predicted it without hesitation.

And that is what a good American ownership group will bring to Everton if that day ever comes. It's the model here, and when done properly, it works.

Some other teams and ownership groups in American sports that adhere to this philosophy off the top of my head are the Packers, the 49ers, and the Steelers. All of them will splash cash if needed, but it's all in budget, and they surround the team with their metric player and are always up there or thereabouts in the standings. Very well run organizations. That's what we need and it's out there if that day comes where Moshri decides he needs to sell or needs majority investment.

I imagine the private placement needed to raise the funds for the completion of the stadium build will require a solid financial plan for the club and market confidence in the club and in Moshiri. Do these exist at the moment with such uncertainty on and off the field? Surely firstly we need to be clear and safe from relegation.

Only Moshiri will know how much he is exposed through the sanctions on Russia (which will have hit USM) as well as how closely his wealth is tied in with Usmanov. If we follow Spurs example, as has been reported, the £300-£350m that is needed will presumably be added to the club debt. Uncertain times.

Brian, 56, all Usmanov's assets are frozen and all ties with him severed. What you suggest is not going to happen. Moshiri no longer has the funds to complete the ground build. He needs either investment or to sell the club.

Brian 56, if what you allege is true, then Moshiri is the worst launderer since Dot Cotton...

Jamie Crowley - excellent post. Been saying it for years. The Moneyball approach should have always been the system for Everton, even more so given the financial constraints of FFP.

Brentford also use this system. And they've done very well given they're a minor London team. But it was Moshiri's or Usmanov's money that Bill could splash on the train set which set the wheels in motion for a complete train wreck. That he thought he knew better and still does.

Moyes was the closest we came to Moneyball but it was still handled diabolically.

Ordinarily, none of us would say that investing in Everton is a good investment – especially based on the last 5 years or so! But if Chelsea are worth £3 billion, that makes me think there are things at play that we don't know about yet.

Who in their right mind would value Chelsea at that price? They need a new stadium also, which will probably cost them another £1 billion based on property prices in London.

Maybe owning the TV rights is going to come in, and selling games and TV season tickets direct to fans all across the globe makes them an attractive proposition, even at that price.

If that is the case, maybe we are a half-decent investment at £400 million plus the stadium cost?

It's all above my head, but I'm pretty sure the future for football clubs is selling games in the States, the Middle East etc. If you can sell games for, say, £5 to 5 million global fans direct, that's an extra £25 million per game.

Maybe we are not seen as such a bad investment after all, and that is why there are Yanks out there looking to get involved with us?

If the offer of £350 million includes clearing or at least taking on our debts then the actual number is more like £600-650 million. Add to that the stadium cost and the figure rises to over £1billion.

The stadium must be key in any purchase because of the future investment it offers. I think Moshiri will want more than is being rumoured for that very reason.

It could be a very interesting and exciting summer, just need to stay up!

Jamie Crowley @57

If you don't think our neighbours haven't spent big, you haven't been paying attention.

Since the Premier League's inception, they've been throwing money at it and, as with all the big spenders, eventually they get lucky – it is the only MO that works.

Moneyball can't work at top-level footy because the game at it's best is an off-the-cuff and constantly moving entity. American sports are 2-second explosions of action, mostly by individuals, thus statistics can be meaningful. In footy, the nuances of teammate contributions can only be gauged by recognising patterns and emotions that construct a footy match – there is no statistic for that.

Moneyball as per the movie has no place in top-level footy and should never be mentioned.

Any established Premier League club is potentially a good investment, mainly because of the TV money. We will be a good investment if and when the new ground is built.

Moshiri has managed the club diabolically and wasted at least half a £billion and has neglected the business side for some reason. Surely the next owners must be more astute.

Steve #51, agreed on Moshiri's timing... IF he can manage financially until then. I posted a Forbes article from January that indicated his net worth had actually grown over the past year, largely due to his divestment from Usmanov's company (the "laundering" comments above are just plain silly"), but a lot of bad stuff has happened since January.

Jamie #57, terrific summary, and I would add that the Moneyball concept (sort of a quaint old expression now, but relevant) has been applied to areas of sports franchise performance well beyond the athletes themselves. As recently as five years ago, the US sports landscape was still dotted with really shitty franchise ownership. Now, with the lessons learned from the pandemic crisis, some of the worst offenders have either sold out or shored up. There is still idiocy around, like the Browns giving $230 million guaranteed to a sex offender, but the standards overall have improved significantly.

And, off-topic, I'd suggest Everton Women step in immediately to sign a very young prospect named Lomee van de Beek, Donny's newborn daughter. Donny's partner is Estelle Bergkamp. Dennis' daughter. That kid has some serious heredity going for her.

Mike, Steve, I'm not sure Moshiri can manage until then. There is a reported £300M black hole. He can't cover it, I believe, with the cash he has left. He needs investment (which would have been from Usmanov) or to be taken over.

Unfortunately those with the biggest money to invest will be looking at Chelsea as they are the better prospect for the immediate future given their Champions League exploits and prospects.

However, others will see Everton as a rather cheaper acquisition, so it will be detrimental to Everton's ability to spend big on players and also compete with big-wage paying clubs where most top players will be attracted to.

Obviously it all depends on the league status and these last 8 games – of which four will be the most difficult, at least on paper.

It may be a big ask but, if they can win four of them, we will be safe – and I just hope the last two games, Palace at home and Arsenal away, do not become significant.

Tom, 67, our ability to spend big on players next season will be reduced anyway by FFP, I would imagine, as we have just posted a £120M loss and our wages are 94% of turnover. We will probably only be able to spend money from player sales, I would guess.

I doubt any investor would accept the current status quo of an arm's-length owner and a previous owner running the club, who had to sell the club in the first place, because of the way he was running it. Verified by millions spent and ending in a relegation dogfight.

I am sure that being taken over by another Investor would be anything but straight forward, given the parties involved. Kia Joorabchian will probably be the broker, with a sizable finder's fee, which would add to the mix.

Jamie #57

Oh for a template like that. What a brilliant post.

Clive #66: "He can't cover it I believe with the cash he has left."

You have asserted that twice now. Based on what evidence? Who or what is your source for that speculation?

Forbes says otherwise, reporting that Moshiri sold off most of his USM Holdings stock over the past 18 months, long before the Ukraine crisis, and is sitting on a "sizable cash pile."

To quote directly from a March 6 article: "Short of any government intervention, Moshiri's personal finances aren't in any immediate danger."

I consider Forbes one of the most reliable sources of individual financial information in the world. If you have a better one that disagrees, please post.

PS... Moshiri has been targeted for much derision on TW, with people calling him stupid (based on his poor performance as Everton owner) and wondering how he became so wealthy. If Forbes is correct and he sold off his USM shares before their value plummeted, then he is obviously very, very smart indeed -- as a money man, if not as a club owner.

Apparently the RS applied a Moneyball approach to finding Klopp (I read this on Wikipedia – so it must be true)... and I guess Moyes had no option but to apply a version of it too during his tenure.

The club is crying out for an injection of quality management at Board level – and that looks unlikely unless either a substantial new investor joins the party or Moshiri sells out. Without either of these happening, I expect we'll be starting next season with the same structure and personnel in place.

While all the current stories focus on USA investors, I wonder if there might be any Japanese interest? They specialise in looking at businesses / sectors and copying the best practices around – and doing it quickly.

There's not really a black hole in funding. The club has made it clear since 2020 that they were going the same route as Spurs and going for a private placement for around 70% of the stadium costs. This isn't about Moshiri cashing in his premium bonds. The Esk has covered this brilliantly over the past couple of years.

Mike D,

I read something late last year that Rakuten of Japan (shirt sponsors for Barcelona) were looking to buy a Premier League club. Haven't seen anything about it recently.

English footy supporters pointing fingers at America regarding sports club ownership?

Potential American owners, as with any potential foreign owner getting into the English game, have nothing more to prove than they can be as disastrous at English football club ownership as Englishmen have been since the 19th century. A bar so low it's sunk into the ground.

As the subject of American sports club owners has come up in here from time to time, I'll ask a question I've asked before. Where on earth did non-Americans get this completely false notion that American sports club owners, in baseball, NFL, basketball, or ice hockey, are good (or even competent) at it?

Excepting a handful, cumulatively (And by handful I mean a new-born infant-sized handful), club owners here aren't provably bad at running a club.

What we have in pro sports today is a result of one man's efforts and he wasn't an owner of anything. An old union labor lawyer named Marvin Miller; who'd cut his teeth on battling major, powerful U.S. corporations. The fledgling baseball players' union hired him to come in and help in 1966. Using existing federal labor law and patience, he led the players' union in breaking baseball's (in)famous Reserve Clause in the early 70s.

As baseball was still our #1 sport and he did what he did under federal law, all other sports had no choice but to follow this to varying (and ongoing) degrees of attempted/successful suppression of employee wages and rights.

Despite the constant labor agreement battling, there is in place here financial parameters established that everyone pretty much abides by. In other words, there is a financial structure that all negotiation is subject to. This doesn't exist in English footy or as far as I can see in European football at all.

So, labor, nor ownership groups opened the way to American sport as big business. Owners have simply enjoyed the fruits as much as the players. In the NFL, more (WAY MORE) than the players. On a much lower level, MLS is outright fucking the players over financially (And so the league's progress itself).

Since the huge media contracts are here in big-time sport just as in England, plus we don't have relegation in any of the sports; owners are guaranteed major profit before a game is played. Leaving most owners, to supporters' chagrin and anger, perfectly content.

Anyway, Everton like any pro sports club have to get really, REALLY lucky if Moshiri sells up. And if supporters are looking to American for one of the infant's hand-sized number who are good at it to buy the Club? Pray. Pray hard and mean it. Because few exist over here.

To switch it 180 degrees. NYC Football Club, majority owned by ManCity, entered MLS league play in the 2016 season. 2021 they won the title. If the rumors are true their owner's first attempt to get into big-time English footy was Everton not ManCity, we almost got "really REALLY lucky".

Mike G #74,

The feature that interests me about the Japanese is their ‘copy it – but do it better & very fast' approach might be what we need to quickly make up the enormous amount of ground we have lost in recent years.

I'll admit to knowing nothing about their success in running sports businesses – but I'm guessing that someone on TW can put me right.

Mike D, that is true. They looked at what managers were able to be successful with a model based on net spend, resale value and player development. Klopp was identified as having delivered at Dortmund, albeit he tailed off at the end of his tenure there.

I suspect they also looked at his style of play and felt a fast, physical approach would work well in the Premier League.

More than this, they adopted a strategy by which a club of lesser means than City, Chelsea and Man Utd could punch above their weight. Sickening though it is, they are a very well run club on and off the pitch.

US ownership does not guarantee this by any stretch as has been witnessed elsewhere.

Wolves, Leicester, Brighton, Brentford etc are also well run clubs with a variety of owners. However each of them develops players in order to punch above their weight.

This is a common theme.

Hopefully any new owners would pay heed and seek out value in recruitment and invest heavily in the academy.

We have an Iranian owner, and we're stereotyping American owners… just bizarre. For every Lerner there's a Henry. Judge “objectively” as and when it's anything other than paper spitballs.

Mike #70,

I have posted that information from Forbes 3 times over the last few months but no-one seems to, or wants to, believe it.

Jerome #69,

Everton FC Co Ltd is owned by shareholders, Farhad Moshiri being the major shareholder with 92.16% of shares through Blue Heaven Holdings Limited. Bill Kenwright holds 1.72% with the remaining 6.12% being held by others.

Shares in Everton FC are closely held. They are privately tracked and any transactions go through the club's brokers, Blankstone Sington.

Danny #62,

The broadcasting rights to the Premier League are controlled by Sky Sports and sold to the highest bidder. For Canada, the winning bid for the 2020-21 season to the 2022-23 season was by DAZN, and they have lost out for the 2023-24 season and the next 3 years to Fubo TV. Still trying to find the cost for next season; you can pay monthly or yearly.

The problem with Forbes is that they've shaded some other reporting to favor their preferred position. Whether this is a difference between their reporters and their editorial positions could maybe be offered for some consideration but their history of reporting at the margins of financial topics is well documented. As for me, and me alone I'm speaking for, anything that sounds like 'what they would believe or support' is taken as an opinion and nothing more. If it is in the Financial Times of London then I'm interested in reading it in full.

Hi Bill,

That is how it works currently. I'm pretty sure in future, the clubs will be looking to sell the TV rights themselves direct to global markets. I believe the potential to make money if they do this is what must be behind people looking to buy Chelsea for £3 billion etc. It may take 4/5 years for this to come into play, but what else could be driving the valuation of these clubs if not that?

Bill #79, me too, but the fiction is always more fun to believe than the facts.

James #75, sorry, but to hell with Marvin Miller. Nobody would remember Miller much today were it not for the courage of Curt Flood. Miller was taking baby steps until Flood sacrificed his career to give him a Supreme Court case and some precedent to build on. Great point, wrong guy.

I don't think there's been a single post off the mark on this thread - at least in the main I should say.

There's a lot of true and salient points.

We DO need to get "lucky" with any new ownership or investment partners.

Americans are not some magic elixir that will ride in on a white horse and save the day and club, magically turning a poorly functioning entity into a world-beating winner.

What I'm trying to impress upon all and sundry, is that the American sports owner has absolutely evolved, and MOST of them do try to implement some version of "Moneyball" into their management philosophy.

When done correctly, it unequivocally yields positive results. Those result ebb and flow like the rising of the tide, but the overall bar is raised without question.

Forget about the Red Sox and FSG - they are the pinnacle of the point I'm trying to illustrate. Let's look at the Pittsburgh Steelers.

The Steelers are a very loyal team. But they buy with metrics involved. At every single position on the field, they know exactly what they want, and they find the best "bargain" to fill that slot. They identify "star" players but they never, ever overpay them. If the star player feels he's worth more than the Steelers will pay him and the grass is greener on the other side of the septic tank, they let the player go. They then plug that hole with the next player they can find with similar metrics. Again, they NEVER overpay for a player. They recently ended an 18 year run (someone check that fact, it's close enough for the point) with their franchise quarterback Ben Roethlisberger. He's aging and simply past his prime. They STILL made the playoffs this past season miraculously. I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Steelers will find a new QB that fits their team and style of play, and not pay over the odds for whomever that is. They, historically, are a habitually winning team.

And it's that type of approach by American ownership groups that makes a world of difference, and that type of approach is being implemented literally all over the sports landscape here. The middle of the road teams are SO MUCH BETTER than they were 5 years ago. And that's implicitly due to ownership groups adhering to Moneyball metrics in some way, shape, or form.

It is, without question, implementable (is that a word?) in the EPL!! Any question about that look over your park!

Anyone who watched the NFL this season saw parity galore and fantastically run teams who all use some type of Moneyball approach. This phenomenon has raised the bar incredibly here.

49ers, Packers, Rams, Patriots, Steelers, Bengals, Bills - just to name a few who run stupidly good franchises from the top down. And there's others who haven't produced but adhere to the general idea that I'd wager will make runs soon. The idiots - Miami, Redskins (will NOT use their PC name), Jets, and some others really don't espouse this way of running a team, and they suffer.

I'll even go out on a limb and say the LOWLY Detroit Lions have undergone (word?) a metamorphosis and will be very competitive, if they stay the course, in the next 2-3 years due to their recent revelations about Moneyball tactics at the management level.

It works when done properly. It's the idiot owners who just chuck cash around at the new shiny thing (sound familiar???) that do not succeed.

This can work, and absolutely will work in English footy. I pray we cotton on to the concept soon. Christ above, it's worth a try after spunking half a billion dollars on shit that isn't even coming close to an acceptable ROI at that level!

We all, at the core, root for owners. Owners win championships. There's always going to be the Man City's of the world who can literally throw shit on a wall, overpay by silly amounts, and stay top. But that is certainly not the model for Everton, mo matter how hard we've tried the last 3-4 years to follow that absolutely shitty, failure-inducing model.

Cheers.

Jamie, some very good posts and truly thought provoking reflections on the approach and use of metrics as used in successful baseball teams and how or could they be implemented by EFC in the EPL. The amount I known about baseball is limited to my understanding of rounders, a quaint English game that we were taught at school, probably the forerunner of baseball?
I think the use of metrics in any team sport is truly significant in how well a team is put together and how well it performs, but ultimately it comes down to set plays, minimizing randomness / chance. Whilst games such as baseball are the perfect foil for its total application, due primarily to its individual series of set plays, application in football would have, in my opinion, less of a successful impact due to its open continuous play, lack of set plays, and that pure randomness during play that is unforseen.
Can the selection of good players based on overall and specific competencies be shaped into a team? Of course it can and undoubtedly it has been sadly lacking at our club, can it guarantee success? I would say that it's application in football would make for a better team and thereby a better outcome, but overall your application would only have limited success because of the sheer incompetence of referees, VAR and the ping pong randomness of absurdity that a round ball has in a pinball penalty area. As I said, great posts though!

Christine -

Firstly hello! I hope you are well. Always good to see your posts.

Rhetorical, dare I say smart-assy question as a response.

Plug your nose...

If Moneyball applications aren't applicable to footy, how do you explain Liverpool Football Club?

If that puke-inducing question just puts anyone into anguish-orbit, then try:

Villa - Doing better than us, young coach for less $$, haven't overpaid for anything to my knowledge.

Leeds - arguably one of the most exciting teams to watch the last few years. Dare anyone to name a player they overpaid for, they have their system and metrics, they have undergone a seizmic coaching change and will still probably stay up. Americans (49ers) are the minority owner behind the Italian fella, but they are massive Moneyball proponents and the Italian owner loves the approach and has bought into it completely.

Burnley - Yup. They're going down. But can anyone please explain to me how in the world they've stayed up for as long as they have?? Tiny club that honestly could be in League One or Two. #moneyball

Palace - Above us. Not overspending. American metric-based owners.

Christine -

Further comment.

I think you're correct in that the approach can HELP a squad and club, but isn't a guarantee of success.

What I'm trying to say is that it will guarantee a level of "success". Off years / rebuilding a bit would see teams fall in the standings for 1-2 years. But they will always benefit in the long run.

Burnley is the tough one as an example. They're probably going down. But as I said, it's honestly a miracle they've been in the EPL at all, and they're one year down they bounced straight back up. They just don't spend silly money, and if they do it fits their system.

All of this gives the franchise a much, much better vision, ethos, environment, and ultimately position in the standings / table year after year. Scattergun, throw shit on the wall, spray money around approaches are done by 3-4 teams in WORLD SPORT and aren't sustainable.

I've made my points. I'm off. Christine, you're a treasure. Be well please.

Off years above^^

throw shit on the wall above^^

Bill#79

My reference to Kia being a broker, is finding a buyer or buyers for the Club and receiving a finders fee. The actual sale of the Club would be handled by other parties and with the involvement of Stock Brokers Blackstone and Sington. .

Jamie (83) - Christine makes a fantastic observation and your subsequent posts do nothing really to counter them. Football is not yet a slave to the statistic in the same way that baseball, American football or basketball are - and perhaps that is because the sport operates in an entirely different way, where individual performance is much harder to measure and team cohesion is a much tougher prospect to create.

Anyway, I'm no expert on Moneyball, but from what I understand - simply put - it was a method of identifying under-valued players using metrics that were often overlooked as less important by scouts during assessments. Is that roughly the gist of it? I hope so. And if it is then can you let me know what you think these overlooked metrics are in football?

You say that Liverpool, Villa, Leeds, and Burnley shows signs of having approached recruitment led by this Moneyball method. Can you explain how you worked that out? I mean I know Burnley work to a tight budget but I don't see how they've applied Moneyball as a model. Not overpaying for players is not automatically Moneyball as far as I can tell. What evidence do you have for any of these claims?

I am not a money person and what I have been reading above is way over my head. But I thank people like Jamie - Mike - Danny - Kieron and Christine into the insights of investing in Everton. I feel more reassured knowing that people like you and Paul the Elk are watching over our affairs. Thanks all of you.

Andrew -

Yes, I'd say you definitely have the gist of it. Insofar as the overlooked metrics in football, I need to ponder that for a bit and answer on another post. As you, and anyone on TW knows, soccer is not the sport of my childhood. It wasn't present in culture on any meaningful level as I grew up, and I didn't touch a soccer ball until I was 40 years old! The basic learning of the sport and it's applications and nuances are not, and due to my upbringing never will be, part of my DNA.

I truly believe that knowledge of sport - any sport - translates and therefore my opinions and observations, while admittedly rough as hell, have purpose and meaning. If not, I'd never bother to post. What would be the point? I also think I've learned a hell of a lot about footy through playing as an adult, tutelage by dear friends who played at high levels (RIP Steve Ashcroft, I love you mate), and just watching countless hours of games and immersive interaction on TW, reading, etc.

I have to concede the point (not entirely, more on that) of footy being fluid and not stats based. But I will ponder that and throw some shit on the wall back at you probably later tonight. It fascinates me, so I'm eager to give it a whirl.

What I will say is this.

In my entire life, my two biggest sports loves are Everton and the Boston Red Sox. One of the reasons for my VERY long and passionate points about this subject is what I've see from my two teams that I see as part of my identity and life.

Everton has never espoused a moneyball approach. MAYBE under Moyes but I'd argue no because it was more an economically driven player recruitment and NOT metric based. Where we are now after the way they've managed our Club is so disappointing it defies explanation.

On the other hand, my Boston Red Sox have since 2002 or so, started by Theo Epstein, used a Moneyball approach that early days was bordering maniacal. They now own those folks across the park, and that team is competing at the highest levels under a metric-based recruitment policy, under the ownership of FSG. I've personally benefited from "Moneyball" with the Red Sox. A team that couldn't win a damn thing won the World Series in 2004, and have gone on, all the while adhering to Moneyball, to win multiple Championships and cement themselves are the team to emulate in professional baseball. Somebody's Auntie, Uncle, brother, sister, cousin, et al have benefited from FSG's adherence to metric-based recruitment at Liverpool. You already know that - you've probably seen them win the Champions League and the Premier League, and might have a very happy relative because of it.

It's so plain for me to see because I have two concrete examples - my two primary sports teams - where you have one doing it the right way, and the other the wrong way. The one doing it the right way continually wins. The one doing it the wrong way is on the verge of utter collapse.

This personal experience has made me, for years, YEARN for our ownership to espouse a Red Sox approach to everything it does. I don't care if that's sacrilege to say, I've lived a sport life that bears it to be true. I want what is best for Everton full-stop, and this approach would be a revelation for Everton as my personal life has witnessed.

Will get back to you on soccer applicable metrics I think could be utilized.

Burnley may be more of a Moyes-like, economic-driven necessity to recruitment rather than Moneyball. That's possible. But American owners minimally haven't been all spend-spend-spend at Burnley, and it's resulted in that Club punching WAY above their weight. And I'd bet there's some metric-based recruitment there. It's seriously a major thing over here, and it has a very, very good track record.

Again, soccer related metrics let me think on that.

I'm generally with Jamie on the metric/moneyball approach. Years ago I used to read a lot of Paul Riley's 'Different Game' blog. He's not updating it now but he's an Evertonian and has also developed his own metric system and consults for a number of lower level clubs. Here is his analysis of Barkley v Sigurdsson before the Icelander had kicked a ball for Everton https://differentgame.wordpress.com/2017/06/12/the-data-scout-gylfi-sigurdsson-v-ross-barkley-part-one/
Anyway if you read through the blog you'll see a lot of different metrics, all related to football. There's no doubt in my mind that Liverpool (even though it sickens me to say it) are the most successful proponent of using metrics in their recruitment and player sales in the Premier League. The fact that they share the same owners with the Boston Red Sox is no coincidence. Don't think metrics can be used in football then take a look at the Statsbomb website!

If we'd of used metrics in our player, DOF and manager recruitment then we'd have been a hell of a lot better off than we are now.

Jamie (91) - The thing about Moneyball is that it was a canny system that grew out of necessity. It was a system that was available to everyone, but nobody was looking for it other than the people who found it. It was gold in the creek that nobody frequented. But as soon as gold was found everybody was in that creek - and the knock-on effect of that is that there is less gold to go around.

Anyone on here who thinks that we - or any other club - can just tap into the Moneyball philosophy and be more successful has fundamentally misunderstood the nature of advantage. You find an advantage - a rick in the market - and you exploit it until it disappears. It's a bit like arbitrage; soon enough the market corrects. The Moneyball rick does not exist as an abstract concept - it only exists if there is an undervalued metric or metrics that you have identified and others have not - and you exploit it successfully. So what are those metrics? And if everyone is looking for them - and finding them - and attributing them new higher values, then the rick soon disappears and then it's on to the next metric before someone else finds it first. It really is like the gold rush.

Data-driven recruitment is something every club is doing and has been doing for years. Data really is the new gold, and it is across all-levels of the professional game. Some have just been more successful than others - whether that is in relation to recruitment, or set-piece patterns, or dietary advice, or training structure, or any other measurable jigsaw piece.

Interesting you mention Villa Jamie. As some know, I keep an eye on them with the family connections and I actually have a soft spot for them. Some of my best away day and semi-final memories were at Villa Park. Sheedy's goal for the win the season we won the league when we seemingly took over the ground lives in the memory. The M6 was a sea of blue.

In terms of player investment, they are doing okay. Some raised an eyebrow or two when they spent £30+ million on an untried striker from Brentford but he has done well. And yes, they sold their best player; but to command £100M for an academy player trumps the £12M we got for Rodwell, whatever we got for Barkley and are likely to get for Davies should we sell.

They have made a similar managerial appointment in my opinion. On the fence; jury still out.

They may appear better run, but let's take into account they recently spent 3 seasons in the Championship and until recently were not too far from the trap door we are in. In fact, win our game in hand and they are only 5 points ahead of us.

Just adding a bit of perspective. Aston Villa is not what I aspire to be.

Mike (82) - I should have mentioned Curt Flood. Fair play.

Pre and post Flood's case, all wheels forward to getting rid of the Reserve Clause were mounted and driven by Miller; with (again, fair play) a turbo-charge from Flood's suing baseball.

"Nobody would remember Miller much today were it not for the courage of Curt Flood."

This is false and you know it to be false.

Jamie, thank you for your kind words. I'm doing okay, spending my days renovating a 1960s home with a 1960s budget! Lots to keep me busy as everything a tradie seems to quote for starts at a $1,000.00! The doctors told me to keep doing whatever I am doing as it's good for me... so today I dug a trench and planted some 35 bushes for a 25-m hedge! Gives me plenty of time to think of your post!

I think you are right to say that metrics when applied to football are no guarantee of success, even your example of the other lot can only take you so far, especially on a limited budget. Truth is yes, metrics can deliver a team like Leeds, and it will ensure a better-than-average set of results, all things being equal... but there's the rub.

It will only take you to the point where best metrics will deliver but not excel; true talent and skill is not a metric, it's a gift. It's the difference between the good teams and the great ones. It's the only metric that nullifies the vagaries of chance, poor referees and luck. That's the real difference between success and done well...

Glad to hear you are keeping well, Christine. Being able to dig such a tench is a sure sign of being able to get mind and matter in the right balance.

Thank you to all on this thread that informed me of the Moneyball metrics approach – something that I had not come across and will be finding out more about. Any other approach at Everton would be better than the current self-serving haphazard approach. Good week just got to grips with Relvolut.

Danny 94 well said

I still remember Mr Gaynes getting a round in at The Midland, then feigning horror when the barmaid said they didn't accept cards, and he had no cash.

He's just the fella for us.

Balls. The clubs will be worth far more once we moved into the new stadium.

Investment yes, that's what all club's look for. But I don't think Moshiri is selling up anytime soon.

I'm now anticipating news of our rebranding as Everton Eagles. Soaring to the top of the league!

Christine -

That's wonderful news. Keep digging those trenches sister! I'm sure the shrubs look brilliant. Be well.

Andrew - I was going to reply but I think John Crawley's post / link says it all.

Divvying up the field into quadrants. Percentage of balls played where? Percentage of tackles where? Zones attempted to pass to from each quadrant, shots taken from each quadrant, etc. You can then get a very good idea of a player's actual style of play. Couple in some distance covered stats, and then whatever stat is the most important to the philosophy of the manager and the club, and you've got some real data to make your decisions with. I'll bet like a million dollars (hyperbole alert) Everton either doesn't do that, or they do it on a surface level that makes no difference.

Theo Epstein. Honestly, not being snarky, read about him a bit. His analytical approach to sport is like an algorithm for success. If Billy Beane is The Godfather of Moneyball, Theo is the Moses to his Jesus.

But, metrics-based theory goes on and on. For a footballing tactically challenged mind like me to answer your question satisfactorily is an uphill challenge.

It's clear football can use metrics - of that there is no question whatsoever in my opinion. However as Christine points out, it's not the be all end all and doesn't guarantee success. I'd argue it greatly enhances it, and there's teams out there as I've noted previously that have used in and show it's a positive tool. Those teams are more so in America admittedly, but I'd argue the bias against any American dabbling in soccer is a large reason people over the pond are resistant to it.

And no, I won't elaborate on that last sentence. Use your imagination.

Cheers

Sound's like Sam and Sean style of coaching.

Play the percentages.
Don't think, don't be creative, just play it forward and see what develops.

Big, strong, fast, know where to be, know where the ball is likely to be played and repeat.

Jamie (101) - You've sort of accidentally illustrated my query about metrics in football by referring to a blog post from five years ago. These are known metrics. They have been used for years.

Moneyball – as I understand it – operates by either attributing extra value to data that is considered to have been under-valued, or by finding new metrics that offer a keener insight into what is required. So it's all very well and good having the data and the metrics, it's what to do with it that actually matters.

Any major football club will have their data analysts continually crunching stats and looking for useful patterns, but having the ability to interpret the data successfully – in recruitment and beyond – and gain an advantage on the pitch... that's a whole other ball game.

Pete #99, I wasn't feigning. I felt like an ass. Oy vey.

Jamie #101, I'm not sure I'd categorize Theo as a Moneyball guy per se. Theo gets the overall analytics picture in a way Billy never did, and I'd say he learned a lot more from Larry Lucchino than he did from Billy. I wonder who his next team will be.

James #95, I stand by my statement. In his first four years as head of the players' union, Miller got the first CBA and a $3000 minimum pay increase for the players -- good, but not game-changing. When Flood challenged the reserve clause in 1970, Miller bluntly told Flood he "didn't have a chance in hell." He never would have taken on the reserve clause but for Flood. Never. The historic legacy Miller subsequently built was based entirely on the foundation laid down with, and by, Curt Flood.

Michael #104, get yourself back over here and make up for it 😜

A little late to the data party but hey timing was never a strong point of mine.

A distinction between the 'Moneyball' approach and more experience-based approaches probably lies in the aspects of their application; Baseball lends itself much more to analyses of the individual and specific situational strategies within that game as opposed to the interactions of several players in a less rigid formation.

I am probably selling it a bit short given the overshifts and other subtleties of baseball that escape me but individual profiling would seem to work much better in a sport like baseball compared to English football.

Just a thought, have a go if I'm off there.

Everton going back to America this Summer...

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-pre-season-tour-breaking-23678638

Andrew -

Any major football club will have their data analysts continually crunching stats and looking for useful patterns

If Everton have actually used metrics in any meaningful way?

Tosun, Gomes, Bernard, Theo, Bolasie, Schneiderlin, Klassen, Rooney, Gylfi (why pay that money when we had Barkely at the time??), Vlasic, etc.

I understand everyone misses the mark occasionally, but I refuse to believe to implement metrics either properly or at the level they should be.

Also, even if it's been implemented for years, I don't buy this diminishing resource argument. If there's players continually coming through the soccer system, how does that resource diminish?

Mike Gaynes -

Theo Epstein is actually working for a sports investment company now. I didn't even KNOW this until a few days ago after a Google search. Shocker - Liverpool is a client.

Also, all the people saying this is a baseball-centric approach and won't work in soccer due to the fluidity of the game, one more time I'll rhetorically ask this question:

How do you explain Liverpool who adhere to this ideology fanatically?

Seems to work awfully well for them?

But, nah, it's a baseball thing. Why would we ever want to learn anything fro m our peers and rivals? I rather enjoy languishing in 17th place after spunking half a billion on players.

Jamie (108) - I don't know the ins and outs of how Everton approach recruitment, but in this day and age I assume that data analysis and detailed player breakdowns are very much part of the picture - and have been for years.

I think Moneyball enthusiasts think of the system as like a supercomputer that eats up the data and then magically spits out the names of the players that need to be signed. It might have worked like that at the beginning - when budget constrictions and the specific metrics being scrutinised considerably tightened the net and gave Oakland the required handful of viable names - but twenty years on, and into the world of football, the landscape is completely different.

As for Everton's failure and Liverpool's success in terms of the last seven years of recruitment, I should think that the chaos of 6 different managers versus the relative stability of one has been a key contributing factor. Liverpool have benefited from the continuity of vision and attainment that Klopp's team have brought into their football club - while we've had so many resets and about-turns and managers keen to assert themselves with new signings that any joined-up thinking went out of the window years ago. As I said previously, it's often more about the people in charge of making decisions based on the data analysis than the data analysis itself.

"Also, even if it's been implemented for years, I don't buy this diminishing resource argument. If there's players continually coming through the soccer system, how does that resource diminish?"

Sorry, but I don't understand this paragraph at all.

Jamie Crowley @109,

Liverpoool have been winning things before Moneyball was invented the present method is a continuation of their tried and tested graft married to skill within a strong team ethic.

Klopp is the reincarnation of Shankly who created this blueprint and their recent rise to another level is due to his man-management and charismatic leadership. Moneyball doesn't figure.

Last time I heard Liverpoool fans mentioning it was with utter contempt in the early FSG years.

Barry (111) - A boastfully stupid response.

Jamie is correct.

Klopp's coaching team absolutely, positively uses statistical analysis with the RS; including optional in-game tactical decision making.

You could have taken 5 minutes to find multiple links proving that it is so.

Andrew (110) - "I think Moneyball enthusiasts think of the system as like a supercomputer that eats up the data and then magically spits out the names of the players that need to be signed. "

If you think that your thinking is way off.

All Jamie is talking about, and it applies to any business not just sport, is that for those seeking it, there is another layer of information available to look and use it to inform the decision-making. That's it.

The use of the info still comes down to people who understand what they're looking at, those clinging to "'My-Own-Eyes' is all the analysis I need.", and those owners who don't care and suffer by their indifference.

Pro sports like any other big business.

Not specific to your comment, but ManCity have been and remain all-in on the use and application of statistical analysis as a tool for improvement. Not just the RS.

Moyes too. In his case, he wanted the info that helped him neutralize or mitigate the best opposing players' impact against us. The example used, where on the pitch David Silva liked to receive a pass so he could put a defender there.

It's a tool. Like all tools, it's used well or it isn't. Nothing "magically spits out" about it.

Jamie (109) You're right all the way thru.

Keep going.

Mike (104) - "I stand by my statement."

You always do.

Jamie #108, wow, damn, got a link to that Theo info? Hadn't heard anything about that. I do know that he's employed by MLB as sort of a Consultant In Charge Of Making The Game Watchable Again. He's proposing a 14-second pitch clock, fielding position restrictions and automated ball/strike calls. Tom Verducci posted an article just yesterday on SI.com:

https://www.si.com/mlb/2022/04/12/baseball-radical-changes-coming

That's all about analytics as well.

Pete #105, I bought a round from 7000 miles away. Didn't that get me off the hook?

Gerry #107, that's great news. I'll be hoping for a game in the Pacific Northwest.

James #115, I think I'm pretty good about admitting when I'm wrong. Just from our current squad, I have had to hold up my hand on wrong assessments of Coleman, Townsend, Gray, Holgate and Gordon. But I do sorta like my own opinions.

James (112) - “Klopp's coaching team absolutely, positively uses statistical analysis with the RS...”

I agree. But every club does this. Does that make it Moneyball? I don't know, as it seems that data analysis and Moneyball are often conflated when to me they mean very different things.

James (113) - “It's a tool. Like all tools, it's used well or it isn't. Nothing "magically spits out" about it.”

Which is my entire argument. Any criticism I have of Moneyball is not to do with its conceit, and more to do with how it has become like a magic spell that fans think clubs need to buy in on. “Why aren't we doing Moneyball?” Like it is some magic ticket we've stupidly failed to purchase. We're doing “Moneyball” - or trying to - I think every club of our stature is - but not every club manages to get the magic beans. Some just get regular beans, even if they've paid cow money. The analysis can be perfect, the metric can be new and exciting, but the player coming through the door can still fail.

Andrew Keatley 118

Spot on, stats might be used in togger but not as a replacement for judgement. So many variables at play in the fluid continuous game that is footy something Americans seem incapable of grasping.

James Flynn is simply wrong

Been mulling this over for a few days and what Jamie C's perspective on the RS and also on others on Man city and the use of stats in football.

As I said before, the use of stats in football cannot alone give you a successful club. Man City and the other lot might use stats religiously but, and it's a big but, it's a combination of players with great stats and great skill that makes a winning team.

There's the rub: great skill costs. It's only the wealthy clubs can afford the best players who by default have the required stats and the skill to compliment it. So while there are the Leeds United who may admirably use stats to fashion a team, they are stacked with good players in the positions, whilst Man City or the other lot, have better access (money) to buy those players not just with better stats, but better skills.

Because money buys the best skillful players when it compliments the stats. In other words, it's only the best of the best that gets success generally. The counter to this is Leicester City. For that one season, that team won the league because they were a coordinated team at their peak, their timing brilliant as those big clubs with the money fell.

But Leicester were a beautiful outlier. Stats alone won't win trophies at the highest level, but you won't win trophies without using them either. Playing in a team where the chemistry is brilliant, where players are good, where their skill sets are complementary, can – albeit fleetingly – compete with the very best.

What guarantees success? Nothing. Buts that's the beauty of football.

Good post, Christine, but all the best teams have loads of guts, and I haven't got a clue how the stats would determine such a vital commodity!

Christine -

You're correct, of course. Money can and does buy success. Such is the way of the world.

I think my plea is in no small part down to us spending so, so much money with a return that saw us go down the table. So, having seen so many American football and baseball teams implement the metrics-based approach to good effect, and seeing some soccer teams also implement this system to good effect, my thought is it surely can't hurt.

If you have money, that's clearly the biggest factor. The frustrating thing is Everton's money was so poorly spent.

I think there's some absolute truth in metrics not being as compatible as other American sports – it's a different game all together as so many have pointed out. But I think the implementation of a metrics-based approach would be beneficial, even if it may not be as influential in soccer as it is over here in our two major sports.

As I said earlier, Americans swooping in with investment or buying Everton is not a magic wand. For crying out loud, Burnley's ownership sacking Dyche shows Americans can absolutely make idiotic decisions. And as Barry pointed out, there's a plethora of American ownership stories that didn't turn out well!

I do believe that American ownership who adhere to metrics-based approaches have raised the level of competition over here in baseball and our football, and they're doing it in England with soccer.

Whether or not you think that's a good idea, that's up to each individual. All the arguments and counter-arguments are above. I'm solidly behind it.

But yes, the almighty dollar / pound speaks the loudest, of that there is no doubt. Not only in sport, but life. Ask Wells Fargo, Pfizer, Apple, Facebook, YouTube, etc. The buck speaks loudly, and 99% of us are pawns who have good hearts and care about various things, while the power people go about their business and we watch. 🙄😜

And another thing you rightly mention is stats alone won't do the trick. I concur with that completely. It's just another tool in the box to use - and I'd argue an important one. I'm a massive believer in "team chemistry" as well as the metrics approach. Now how in the hell you weave all that together to create a winning mentality is quite the trick, and one we could talk about for hours and days.

Bottom line is we need Everton to try some other approach, because what we're doing ain't workin'!!!

Cheers.

Barry @ 119 -

You say:

So many variables at play in the fluid continuous game that is footy something Americans seem incapable of grasping.

I'm not, hand on heart, picking a fight here, Barry. I only wanted to mention that Americans easily, easily understand variables at play in a fluid, continuous game. We have basketball and hockey - those are two of the most fluid sports on earth. And hockey, and I do know a thing or two about this sport, is a fluid game played at such incredible speed that the fluidity and movement is imperative to even understand the sport on any level.

We get it. We're just way, way late to the party on soccer. But to say we don't understand it or recognize the aspects of it are, in my opinion, not accurate.

I'd argue that just because there's stoppages in play in basketball and hockey it's no less fluid than soccer. Soccer has the ball into touch, fouls, free kicks, corners, injuries (far too many of them fake), substitutions, etc. It absolutely is a fluid game without question, but the idea that it's this constant ball of surging and receding, yet non-stop, energy isn't accurate. They don't run around for 45 minutes straight. There are stoppages and halts in play frequently, they just manifest themselves differently.

Americans can cotton on to a fluid sport. In fact, we already have in multiple sports, and we're making leaps and bounds in soccer as well.

On that note, doesn't anyone want a friendly bet on the USA winning our group in the World Cup ahead of the mighty England? I mean, we Americanize your sport to a large degree, and I'm thinking we'll show you how it's really done come December. Any takers?

Moneyball vs my own eyes? Some from Column A and some from Column B please. Wind it back 60 years and call it the Denis Stevens factor.

I never really understand the resistance to data and stats in football. I think it's possibly because that's not how we did it when we were last successful 30 years or so ago. That was in many respects a better time but things have moved on.

Stats and data are never going to be the be-all and end-all. Human judgement will always need to play a key part. But stats and high-quality data can support human judgement no end.

They can also tell you much more than you might think. For example, banking data can identify couples who are headed for divorce before either party has consciously admitted it to themselves, let alone each other.

There really will be data evidence to support judgements as to player character and not just physical attributes.

Stats and data are key to good decisions in sport, investment, in commodity purchase and in business generally.

In the transfer market, they highlight where value can be found in markets. But they also highlight where the risks lie, where the poor value lies. And in that way you can deploy strategies to dampen down risk (considerable in the transfer market) and reduce cost.

It doesn't make for perfect decisions every time by any stretch – but it reduces the risk of (a) making a bad decision and (b) how much a bad decision hurts when it inevitably happens.

It's fairly plain that, whilst we might have had plenty of data, we haven't used it to build a good strategy.

And in that respect, we're a really badly run club.

Robert (125),

“I never really understand the resistance to data and stats in football. I think it's possibly because that's not how we did it when we were last successful 30 years or so ago.”

Whose resistance to data are you talking about? Everton Football Club? If so, can you please give examples/evidence of this resistance. Genuinely curious.

Andrew #126,

I think Robert's just referring to the Luddites on this thread...

Agree with much of this thread.

One point though - Premier League clubs' "value". Premier League clubs' going price has actually very little to do with traditional business fundamentals. A poster posed the question, how can Chelsea be "worth" £3billion as an example?

Well, it's actually nowt to do with revenue, TV money, streaming rights, the pre-eminence of the Premier League over its European competitors, or the potential of future profits.

It's simply all supply and demand. There's 20 Premier League clubs, and that number is forever stuck at 20. Yet there are now around 2,700 billionaires around the world - a 50% increase in only seven years.

If only one in 50 billionaires dreams of owning a Premier League club – as an example – then the math becomes fairly simple. The number of high-wealth individuals is growing at the fastest rate in history and they're competing over assets that have a finite and limited supply with no potential for growth or dilution. This is what drives the rise in the asking price for football clubs. More individuals having the means to own an elite football club will drive the prices of elite football clubs inexorably higher, pretty much regardless of profit-and-loss type numbers.

Divorce business fundamentals from the vanity-type aspect of owning a football club and you can see why even our ill-run and oft-troubled club valuation has and will continue to rise higher. A rising tide lifts all boats, after all – even decrepit ill-maintained old tugboats like the good ship Everton.

While I agree the use of metrics is important, the overruling principle has to be will he fit into the team and play the system the manager operates with.

Footballl is a team game and the synergy of a well-moulded team will outweigh most individual metrics.

There is also the harmony of a club top to bottom (i.e. Leicester) where a club is totally united. That is one of the biggest factors holding Everton back.

Christine alludes to the rub of the green. No stats can measure that when the margin for error is paper-thin in most games. Same with big decisions, minimal injuries. Okay sounds like I'm bitter against the other crowd but that pact with lucifer holding strong as ever. Maybe if we ever get there the likes of Mike Dean may have two toffee supporting season ticket holders instead of our neighbours. One day eh.

Jamie #123, is that really you? Offering to put actual money on Gregg Berhalter?

Never expected that one.

Derek #128, that's a great post.

It's obvious that Everton haven't been looking into data, when you read some of the posts on this thread imo. Mina's injury problems, Tosun's lack of pace. Schneiderlin's lack of character, same with Walcott, although Iwobi does seem to be on the way to rectifying this very major flaw?

Koeman's three number tens, who even signed the players this January? I could go on, because the recruitment has been appalling. Silva needed a central defender with pace, he got a very inexperienced centre-forward to great fan-fare instead, and although most of us are novices to this type of stuff, after reading this thread, it's very obvious that there hasn't been a “clear strategy” at Everton for years?

Jamie C, good post, I'll have the bet, even though I've got massive respect for Americans, when it comes to sport, and genuinely think that USA are one of football's emerging nations, on the world stage.

I agree with that last paragraph about the US, Tony.

It was in our lifetime and not that long ago that it was unheard of to have American players in the European top-flight leagues. And rare for them to qualify for the World Cup.

They really have come on leaps and bounds in a relatively short space of time and have huge potential.

Explains things very simply that post Derek M, so the best thing any club can hope for, is gaining an owner or owners, who understand sport, rather than an owner who doesn't want to give their investment much time.

I hope Moshiri sells Everton, because even without looking at the data, it's obvious he hasn't got a clue how to run a successful football club, but maybe like his chairman, it's also because he hasn't been as careful, whilst spending somebody else's money? Aaaaarrrgggghhhh!

Derek (128),

One thing that occurs to me amongst the debate about Moshiri's increasing wealth, is how much EFC is valued at? You might think it has been increasing too. Once the Stadium is opened, it is pretty much certain that the value will increase further, hence him increasing his shareholding on an ongoing basis.

Tony and Danny,

I wonder if it's really true that the US are on a firm upward trajectory in terms of 'soccer'? Personally, I think they peaked around the time we had Tim Howard and Landon Donovan playing for us, and have faded since.

Indeed the Fifa World Rankings show that's the only time they briefly penetrated the top 10. How many high-profile players do they have in the top leagues? It probably means nothing that the only one I could name is Antonee Robinson!

But their qualification for the World Cup in Qatar may signal that was merely a bump or a plateau on the perennial ascent to be a real world powerhouse for soccer. They certainly should be, considering the massive wealth of talent there must in that vast country who have gone through many years now of their college soccer development system.

I'd agree to some of that, Michael, they had a recent blip in comparison to the earlier development. That's why I was conscious to suggest they've come a long way in a relatively short space of time.

Like I harp on about Germany, some of the facilities out there are second to none. I'm hoping to get some coaching in the next time I visit San Antonio, where my company is based. "Soccer" is big there in terms of participation.

I would argue they continue to produce good players. Pulisic at Chelsea and Weston McKennie, now at Juventus, but who I watched play for Schalke.

Everton fans would love McKennie. Versatile, box-to-box or holding midfielder and full of energy. I am reading rumours that Conte is keen on bringing him to Tottenham, so that ship may have sailed for the 2nd time.

Michael, it might be significant that the top US players like Pulisic, Reyna, Dest, Pepi, McKennie and Aaronson are all still very young and there is now a fairly regular flow of 18- to 21-year-olds of talent out of the US into top European leagues. It is all potential at the moment but it looks promising for them.

Anecdotally of course but I understand from my US brother in law that widespread concern about head injury / dementia in American Football pushing talent into Soccer as he calls it.

Obviously Football has its own issues with dementia etc but that's the message from California, albeit from a sample of one.

Michael -

Robert Tressel has it right. I believe the average age of the USMNT is just under 23? It's right around there. This cycle may see us ousted from the group stages - who the hell really knows with that level of inexperience? But the talent is there.

We miss "the tip of the spear" frankly. Pepi is my greatest hope to fill that void, but I believe he's still only 18 years old? Either that or he just turned 19.

Our coach was chopping and changing a bunch - at Panama my son and I were ready to kill him! SO incredibly frustrating. But I have to say - to Mike Gaynes' surprise, he was absolutely excellent the last three games of the qualifying cycle and got just about everything spot on. Even the Costa Rica loss I can't fault him for, it was just "one of those games".

Tony Abrahams - you're on! The loser contributes to the winner's charity of choice. I did that previously with Brent Stephens and it worked fantastically. Bet's on, and remember:

Any man who squelches on a bet is no man at all.

Finally -

I'm so big on this American team. I think, in the end, they'll outclass the Donovan-Dempsey-Howard teams. Their youth in this cycle could indeed mean a hasty exit. But if that talent is harnessed and they play to their potential, I've told my sons I think they are capable of reaching the final 8 teams. I truly believe that.

No problem, Jamie, I was going to suggest giving it to one of your kids' soccer teams, but I've got no problem with your choice of charity either, mate.

I think that the USA have moved on with regards having more and also better technical players now, Michael, and that's why I think they are getting progressively better at the world's greatest game. I might be just guessing though because I don't watch many games involving the USA, but I think the players Robert mentions have a little bit more to their play than just hard work.