I'm eternally grateful to whoever it was who put their foot down when Raul et al started to float Mourinho as an Emery replacement by the way. Bloke is utterly finished as a manager.

Worth the risk for James at that price, had no idea it was so low

AAStyle- wrote:

Should we have made a bid for James? Seems like his final price was just 12M pounds.

I think he's the right fit for Everton not so sure about him fitting our team.

Pickford's distribution is woeful.

GooneriC wrote:

Worth the risk for James at that price, had no idea it was so low

I imagine his salary isn't.

I think if we still played with a number 10 then maybe but there's no role for him. He's obviously good enough though.

Mirth wrote:

Pickford's distribution is woeful.

Robinson school of kick it as hard as you can. 

Spurs now have a trip to Bulgaria to take on Lokomotiv Plovdiv, courtesy of our FA Cup win 😆

Klaus wrote:

I'm eternally grateful to whoever it was who put their foot down when Raul et al started to float Mourinho as an Emery replacement by the way. Bloke is utterly finished as a manager.

They also put forward Ancelotti who is good but doesn't have fresh ideas either.

Mourinho off to a great start. Face of a winner and all

Mirth wrote:
Klaus wrote:

I'm eternally grateful to whoever it was who put their foot down when Raul et al started to float Mourinho as an Emery replacement by the way. Bloke is utterly finished as a manager.

They also put forward Ancelotti who is good but doesn't have fresh ideas either.

I'd have taken him at the time. He's a safe pair of hands that players respect. Think he'll do well this season too, that Everton midfield looks pretty solid.

Qwiss! wrote:
Mirth wrote:

They also put forward Ancelotti who is good but doesn't have fresh ideas either.

I'd have taken him at the time. He's a safe pair of hands that players respect. Think he'll do well this season too, that Everton midfield looks pretty solid.

He is a decent appointment for someone like Everton especially with the signings they're making but we were definitely in the need of something more if we want to do more than make small gains. Someone like Carlo would have never been able to change the culture and attitude in the same way Arteta has, in fact I think he would have exasperated it. 

Mirth wrote:
GooneriC wrote:

Worth the risk for James at that price,  had no idea it was so low

I imagine his salary isn't.

I think if we still played with a number 10 then maybe but there's no role for him. He's obviously good enough though.

Took a massive pay cut. Was earning 200K+ at Madrid now apparently he is on 130k base salary.

That's still a very high salary.

Leicester look like they will have a very good season again. Will be in the picture with the top 6.

Spurs look poor and the squad tired. It needed a refresh somewhere and they have not got it. I think they are in for a very poor season.

The Everton front three of Richarlison, DCL and James will be fun to watch. Three contrasting styles that compliment each other. Good for 8th or 9th in my opinion.

WBA are going down. No question about it.

goon wrote:

It's definitely not right. Stuff like this is why I don't really trust xG, I get no model is perfect but that seems way off to me.

James having a good debut for Everton.

Also thought Allan was great for them today. Looks reborn after a poor year in Italy. 

Claudius wrote:
Quincy Abeyie wrote:

Seems low, although I don't think it was an easy chance since Alisson had come out as well as he could. A penalty is 0.8 and there the keeper is on his line and you have the perfect angle to score. Maybe xG has a problem calculating lob opportunities and therefore gives a low result when the keeper is covering a lot of the angles when you don’t consider lobs? Have no idea how it works to be honest.

You realize that xG is based on all previous chances that have as many similar characteristics as that one. They keep updating the models to add more details, even dimensions like height of the ball to help calculate each opportunity. 

Great goal Everton. It’s been coming. Hope they get more. 

That's what I thought, but it doesn't sound right that 7 % of chances like Bamford's are put away. 

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
Claudius wrote:

You realize that xG is based on all previous chances that have as many similar characteristics as that one. They keep updating the models to add more details, even dimensions like height of the ball to help calculate each opportunity. 

Great goal Everton. It’s been coming. Hope they get more. 

That's what I thought, but it doesn't sound right that 7 % of chances like Bamford's are put away. 

The percentage doesn’t feel too low: Wide of goal, weaker foot, marked, goalie in front of him, away from home, etc.

There’s no way less than 1 in 10 score from that position, the suggestion is that it was highly unlikely he’d score.

Unless it took into account that it was Bamford shooting, in which case it’s generous.

Just checked the xGs for our game. Laca’s goal had xG of 0.05? Fuck off 😆

goon wrote:

Just checked the xGs for our game. Laca’s goal had xG of 0.05? Fuck off 😆

Maybe it didn't consider that it was Bamford shooting, but rather just assumes that all shots are taken by Bamford.