Jack Grealish: Should there really be a debate?

Jack Grealish’s loan move last summer signalled a change in direction at Everton.

No longer were transfers just about surviving, just about eking out enough to keep Everton’s heads above water.

No, this was a statement of intent. A top-quality player, even if one not entirely at the peak of his powers, capable of shifting the attitude around the club.

And Grealish did just that.

Two assists on each of his first two starts, crucial winning goals against Crystal Palace and Bournemouth.

It wasn’t just his goals and assists, though. Grealish was Everton’s creative fulcrum in open play. Everything went through him.

At times, that was perhaps to his detriment, but that’s not his fault — instead, other players needed to step up and take more responsibility, and David Moyes should have been more flexible in his approach.

Grealish was not perfect, but given some of the dirge Evertonians have had to watch in recent years, he was a breath of fresh air. 

He was also vital to Everton keeping hold of the ball, getting the team up the pitch and generally just winding down the clock when required. His work-rate was second to none.

So, when he went down with that season-ending foot injury in mid-January, on the back of a superb performance away at his old club Aston Villa, it was gutting for everyone: Everton, Evertonians, Moyes, Grealish’s team-mates and Grealish himself.

But one thing is clear: Grealish has loved his time at Everton. Most of his rehabilitation work took place at Finch Farm, which is not the go-to, done thing for the majority of loan players, who typically would return to their parent clubs for treatment.

Manchester City are renowned for treating their players well, on and off the pitch, especially during the Pep Guardiola era. Even though Grealish was not in Guardiola’s plans last year, the level of respect between the two was clear to see.

Now, all of this is great, but football can’t be about sentiment. If Grealish is to return, then Everton must ensure the deal is right for them. They must ensure the mechanics of any transfer, whether another loan deal or some kind of permanent agreement, are as financially favourable as possible (relatively speaking, of course).

But, assuming Everton can do that, then why would every fan not want Grealish back? And I ask this question as over the last few days, it seems there is a big contingent of Evertonians who would not go ahead with the move.

He is a superb player, he elevates the team and offers what Everton just don’t have enough of.

Yes, Everton may have to spend another £10-12M to get him in for the year. But for that cost, you know what you’re getting. Reliable quality; a consistent performer.

Is there really any guarantee that £10-12M gets you better in this market? 

Everton have paid £18M up front for Tyrique George, who has scored one Premier League goal. The Toffees paid £35M for Tyler Dibling. The club have spent an initial £16.5M on Hayden Hackney, who has never played a game in the top flight.

Yes, those players have youth on their side, and they are all highly promising, but we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that guaranteed output is still vitally important.

Should Grealish return, then Moyes will have to ensure he is not Everton’s only source of creativity. The burden cannot all be on his shoulders.

But, there shouldn't really be any debate over whether it’s a good idea to bring him back, if the price is right.

 

 

---

Reader Comments (23)

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

How to get rid of these ads and support TW