Makis

How did this lack of motivation manifest itself yesterday?

You have the worst kind of confirmation bias I have seen in a long time. You pick a single match and deduce that it means top teams can be won by the teams outside the top six. And you also decide to basically brush away Koeman's wins against the top six. You also completely disregard the fact Arsenal have been quite shite for some time, but yet beating them is somehow a better accomplishment than beating City. Yesterday we lined up with three forwards, yet Koeman wasn't trying to win?

Moyes didn't know how to beat the top clubs either. And someone should compile a table of how many of the managers in the PL outside top six have a better record than Koeman. Fact is top clubs don't lose too many games against the smaller clubs so I doubt there are many managers who have better stats.

I expect a lot of fans to be disappointed in summer. Expectations are so out of whack from realism. All of the teams above us seem to be looking for defenders + plus a host of CL clubs in the continent. Maguire is much more realistic than VVD (apparently only Everton fans know he's really, really good or even Keane (why would he choose Everton over Spurs/ManU/RS?).

Just a reminder how long the road still is, how many of previous top scorers have made it?

Where do you get these valuations from? Sigurdsson alone is 25 million MINIMUM.

Well, in the case that we end up at the same points it would mean City would have won two games and we'd have lost one. That would decrease the GD quite a lot in any case.

This so looks like a move to London.

Sounds perfect for West Ham. Manages about ten games per season and gets a huge wage for that.

Football players.

That Anderson isn't the mayor, but nice rant anyways.

Nice coincidence, just spotted this on my Facebook feed: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2017/03/27/las_vegas_lures_the_oakland_raiders_with_a_record_breaking_taxpayer_subsidy.html

Why do you bring US teams into this at all? That's what I wonder because they have nothing to do with European teams. In our case even less so. Everton will pay the council, not the other way around. Everton isn't threatening to relocate. The stadium is planned for the next 100 years. But worse still, you claimed the politicians do this because they understand it's somehow financially viable. Now you admitted they are not. You use an example that has absolutely nothing to do with Everton and the City of Liverpool to try to make a point and you wonder why I keep missing your point? You might as well use 2022 World Cup stadiums as an example for all its worth.

I don't even know what you are arguing about. Those stadiums are not around longer and in the meantime cities pay tens of millions per year to finance them while all the income goes to the teams. I don't know why they are even brought into this thread as they have no relevance whatsoever. You claimed they are brought in because they regenerate areas. It looks like the cities would be wiser to use that same money to directly help regeneration rather than lining the pockets of team owners exactly because in about 25 years the same owners who made hundreds of millions of dollars thanks to their free stadium are demanding a new one or they relocate.

That piece mentioned studies that show that those stadiums don't bring revenue. Just check the video out, it has examples. If you want the quick version, start from 11:00.

They build them often because the clubs basically blackmail the cities. But it's hard to say, John Oliver of all people had a funny but informative piece on that on his show two years ago.

Shaw was really good before his injury and he's still only 22. I'd still be a bit worried about Mourinho's comments. You don't often hear a manager criticize a specific player about lack of commitment and ambition.

Studies seem to indicate that in the US cities never get their money back. So it has more to do with politics than money. Politicians fear they might lose voters if clubs leave.

Barry was shocking at GP against them. We practically played with ten men when they had the ball as he couldn't catch anyone. And are you suggesting Davies providing cover for Holgate? Those two against Mane?

You have hindsight to help you, with the players available what could Koeman have done to win that match? And please don't say play Mirallas, he's not so good that he alone would have changed things. And he definitely would not have helped with those defensive blunders and Robles being leadfooted.

Klopp is probably too big of an attraction at the dark side, unfortunately.

Anyone have any idea of the organization? There seems to be quite a few directors and managers in the Academy side.

I'm not sure they are talking about concerts and such. Or does the city really organize those? Usually they are private enterprises (i.e. in BMD's case Everton would organize or hire someone to do it).

Sounds great. The more non-matchday use, the better. This would guarantee some use (=income) from those days.

Why? Tickets back then were affordable to everyone. You couldn't buy a Sky subscription, only way to watch football was to go to the match. And there were far fewer other forms of entertainment available to everyone.