Everton progressing forward without Jack Grealish – is a permanent move necessary?

Jack Grealish was an instant fan favourite from the moment pen was put to paper, but following the long-term foot stress fracture, Everton have been adapting effectively.

The 30-year-old is currently on a season-long loan at the Blues, and many of us Evertonians may question whether a permanent move is necessary.

The winger suffered the injury during the 1-0 win over former club Aston Villa back in January, and has since had surgery.

Before the setback, Grealish claimed two goals and six assists for the Toffees, and won the Premier League Player of the Month for August after an immediate impact. It was an incredible introduction to life on Merseyside, with the Englishman even being in contention for a spot in the World Cup squad this summer.

The rehabilitation process means Everton will be without Grealish for the foreseeable future, forcing Moyes to turn to other options, including Dwight McNeil, Tyrique George and, less frequently, Tyler Dibling.

The Glaswegian’s tendency to restrict youngsters’ playtime has meant that, for the majority of fixtures, McNeil has been given the nod. There is no doubt that George, if his loan move is made permanent, and Dibling are viewed as part of the Toffees’ long-term project, but their lack of chances this season could raise questions about their future at Hill Dickinson Stadium.

Do the numbers make sense for Everton and Jack Grealish?

Grealish’s contract has a £50M option to buy but with the current state of the squad, and other priorities on the transfer list, perhaps a permanent move is not the route to go down.

Few would expect Everton to meet that asking price, but even a reduced fee represents risk. Not least due to the wages of Grealish, who turns 31 in September. Everton are reportedly currently covering around 75% (£225k) of his £300k-a-week wages.

Tyler Dibling is contracted to the Toffees until 2029, and Tyrique George’s loan from Chelsea contains a £25M buy option, on which a decision is still to be made.

Grealish’s age makes his permanent signing short-termism, at a time when Moyes has made frequent reference to the long-term transitional project at Everton.

“This club is too big, too strong a football club. It shouldn't have been in that (relegation) position. We've got to keep growing,” the Scot said recently.

If growth is the objective, Moyes must place trust in youngsters to lead the Toffees for the future. If Everton can be in contention for Europe without Jack Grealish, it could be argued that there is no point splashing the cash for someone whose returns may soon diminish.

There will be plenty of alternatives available, both within the current squad and with the summer transfer window coming up. There is an opportunity to improve the squad with the right deals. The Toffees’ future is bright, and it does not need to come at a superstar price tag.

Reader Comments (27)

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 ()

We're not under an obligation to buy him from what I understand.

So how about another loan and a deal with Grealish to sign with reduced wages but a signing on fee in lieu of the transfer fee at the end of it?

If Man City will go for it. If Grealish will also. If our recruitment team think it's a way forward. If Ndiaye accepts he'll have to play second fiddle out on the right.

If it comes down to the question of one or the other, who is it? Grealish or Ndiaye? Or even A N Other?

Gaute Lie 2 Posted 08/05/2026 at 15:21:46

I would say no, because:

1. Money. Too much money demanded, too high wages. 2. Does not contribute enough with goals or assist. 3. Age 4. Does not defend enough. 5. Not wanted by Manchester City. Why would we take what they don't want?

If we could get him on the cheap, and the salary would be reasonable, I could see him in the club next season.

Otherwise, No.

Mike Gaynes 4 Posted 08/05/2026 at 16:50:12

Grealish is on a level of quality that no other Everton attacker can approach. And quality in attack is something we have desperately needed for years.

He has shown his flair, his passion for the club, and his affinity for the fans, and he has produced on the pitch.

Absolutely bring him back, if there's a fiscally rational way to do it.

Christy Ring 5 Posted 08/05/2026 at 16:51:55

Grealish has one year left on his contract, so if we decide to take him permanently, there should be no fee.

But his wages would be the issue in my opinion, as it will probably be his last contract.

John Collins 6 Posted 08/05/2026 at 17:09:10

"He's chewing it, he wants too many touches."

He's not and he doesn't.

Anywhere near reasonable wages and it's a no-brainier to ask for another loan. The kid wants to be here, he won't get a game at Man City. Will they want that unhappy player on the training ground?

Steve Brown 7 Posted 08/05/2026 at 17:12:32

2 goals and 6 assists in 19 starts, for a team with a goal difference of 0 in the league.

We need him and have badly missed his game management.

Liam Mogan 8 Posted 08/05/2026 at 17:54:36

Depends on what the other options are and if we can get better.

Jack's not getting any younger, can't run much, but still has a lot of quality on the ball. Gets injured quite a lot though and has missed a lot of games the last few years.

Seems a nice lad tbf and clearly likes a good time.

Mark Ryan 9 Posted 08/05/2026 at 18:28:42

Mike Gaynes @ 4 nails it.

I would also add that, if you support Everton and you don't want to watch Grealish play football, then you are the victim of being brainwashed into watching footballers who are half-arsed like Barry.

You have forgotten it's called The Beautiful Game for a reason. Grealish is still one of the best footballers in England and he wants to play for us. Wake up and smell the coffee

Dale Self 10 Posted 08/05/2026 at 18:49:23

I believe it helps our transfer business image, and that matters right now. Plus, Grealish may be someone that tilts a player our way who will be weighing other offers.

As long as he takes care of himself, it seems a good move to have him back. At least with another ball carrier, it makes us less predictable in attack. Game management, mentioned by Steve, is also a key consideration.

Tony Hughes 11 Posted 08/05/2026 at 19:09:39

Absolutely keep him if financially possible. His football intelligence his above anything else we have and the fact opposing teams have to mark him with two players is a plus.

Get him a flying left-back alongside him and let him drift about inside.

Ian Horan 12 Posted 08/05/2026 at 19:35:30

Can players buy themselves out of the contract in the last year?

I may be wrong but I thought it was a development of the Bosman rule...

Keith Gleave 13 Posted 08/05/2026 at 20:13:04

I may be the only person who thinks he didn't perform that well.

Every time he receives the ball in a break, he stops, the defence gets back and nothing comes from it.

David West 14 Posted 08/05/2026 at 20:24:05

Grealish knows he's taking a pay cut to leave Man City; the problem lies in the massive wages left on his current deal. He will probably do well to get £100k on his next deal, so he's getting 3 years wages for the last year at Man City.

It's on Jack: Does he want to play while he still has something to offer? Or is he just out to maximise his wages?

If it's the latter, I can see him seeing out his city contract and going to the MLS with his Louis Vuitton slippers on for a couple of years.

Darryl Ritchie 15 Posted 08/05/2026 at 20:45:36

We are a fairly competitive team without him.

We are another level with him. No-brainer.

Billy Shears 16 Posted 08/05/2026 at 20:48:40

Hopefully not, I wouldn't go for him!

Develop Dibling as a left-winger and sign Sorba Thomas from Stoke instead... cheaper option than Jack and a couple of years younger too!!

John Collins 21 Posted 08/05/2026 at 22:26:54

None, but back to the question mate

Derek Thomas 27 Posted 08/05/2026 at 22:50:52

Mike @ 4; "...if there's a fiscally rational way to do it." aye, there's the rub. People's idea of 'a fiscally rational way' for an aging, probably physical diminishing, asset will vary all over the place.

I hope the club see sense and... if they really feel they have to (rolls eyes)... only go for a 1-year loan.

Paul Kossoff 32 Posted 09/05/2026 at 01:21:02

A player can buy himself out if his contact, FIFA says so... In FIFA we trust.

[Obviously I mean FIFA 98 on PlayStation.😀]

Ajay Gopal 33 Posted 09/05/2026 at 05:14:05

My worry is that, if we sign Grealish, Moyes will play him every single minute, every single game, at the expense of the younger players like Dibling, Alcaraz and whoever else we sign to replace McNeil.

And then, he will come out with statements like ‘we are a bit short on players'. Yeah, that's because you will play your favourites until they break down.

Alan J Thompson 34 Posted 09/05/2026 at 06:55:24

May be we should look at the other side of the coin. If Grealish is signed permanently then what happens to Ndiaye, Dibling, McNeil, George or anyone else who plays wide???

Do we just put them out on the wing they don't prefer, or do we resurrect McNeil's transfer and send George back to Chelsea and then ask the question of who was responsible for bringing these players in and how many does the squad require, or is it that thing about camels and committees?

Or perhaps we can find an overlapping right-back who can do that without there being a right-winger.

Do we have anyone with a cunning plan?

Peter Mitchell 36 Posted 09/05/2026 at 08:02:17

Grealish has been great for us and it would be good if we can get him back for at least another year.

When he plays, he occupies 2 defenders, which creates space for others (like Ndiaye, who also occupies 2 defenders).

Grant Rorrison 37 Posted 09/05/2026 at 08:29:18

I'd rather we signed someone like that Eguinaldo fella at Shakhtar.

Grealish is getting on a bit and I'd only take another loan.

Ian Bennett 38 Posted 09/05/2026 at 09:08:27

The option of another loan seems attractive, and avoids the potential of a high earner doing next to nothing in 2-3 years time if the body fades on a permanent deal.

He does slow the game down, but at times when it is needed, it could be vital to retain the points. Monday a classic example of needing someone to buy a foul and run the clock down.

His goal & assists are amongst the highest in the Premier league per 90 minutes, and he wants to play for us, in a side that is still short of goals.

The choice seems to pay another £225k a week, which is broadly £10m for the season, or keep Mcneil who is worth £17m or so and paid £2m a season. They arent mutually exclusive, but I don't see the point in both, when we need more pace in the squad.

Id go with the former, and use the £9m odd left over to put against Tyrique George or someone else good enough to replace Grealish in 12-24 months time.

Mcneil has had his chance. He is in his prime vs the other players mentioned, but like a couple of others in the squad, he is never going to propel us into the top 6 or later stages of cups.

Id be smart on Grealish. I think we will end up bidding against ourselves if we arent careful, like Sigurdsson from Swansea.

Adrian Phillips 39 Posted 09/05/2026 at 09:24:23

Dubling at 40m plus we would be lucky to get 18m. This is not that Moyes hasn't played him. Its because he simply isn't good enough. It is buying an over hyped youngster, who had a good half season with southampton, but was later dropped from the starting lineup. Unfortunately that fit in form was what he brought with him to everton. And Grorge isn't showing much either.

Lester Yip 40 Posted 09/05/2026 at 11:52:02

A loan move for sure. He's a level above. Like Rodriguez, though his limitation, you know some magic could happen when he's got the ball.

The ability to consistently pass accurately, draw opponents in, is worth the price.

James Marshall 41 Posted 09/05/2026 at 15:30:22

Grealish is gold. We've missed him massively for so many well documented reasons. Sign him I say.

Hopefully we'll be in Europe and marquee names and players will be important moving forward.