Bring Back Jack?
It was no surprise when reports surfaced last week that Everton were exploring a deal with Manchester City to bring the winger back to Merseyside next season. Injury aside, he’s been a very good loan signing but the next terms need to be highly favourable to the Blues
As Everton’s transfer committee weighed up their options for the summer 2025 transfer window, a marquee loan signing to help herald the start of a new era for the club at Bramley-Moore Dock under new ownership was high on their list of targets.
The man who ultimately fit the bill was Jack Grealish. Unwanted by Manchester City where, following a nine-figure move from Aston Villa in 2021, he had outlived his usefulness having helped the Eastlands club finally win the Champions League and three more Premier League crowns, the then 29-year-old was seeking a fresh challenge to bolster his hopes of making England’s 2026 World Cup squad.
With a compromise reached on the share of his eye-watering wages, variously reported as being between £300,000 and £350,000 per week, and the player sold on the Everton project by David Moyes, Grealish was unveiled last August as arguably the Toffees’ highest-profile acquisition since James Rodriguez arrived in 2020.
Like the Colombian star, Grealish’s impact was almost instant and even though, like James, his debut season with the Toffees has been wrecked by injury, the Brummie native has forged a strong rapport with Evertonians. It was no surprise, therefore, when reports surfaced last week that Everton were exploring a deal with City to bring the winger back to Merseyside next season.
In the opening weeks of the current campaign, Grealish was very much the face of what appeared to be a more dynamic Everton than the one that Moyes had been tasked with rescuing from relegation in January last years.
A substitute when he made his debut for the Toffees in the disappointing 1–0 defeat at Leeds on the opening day of the season, both Grealish and Everton appeared to have achieved lift-off the following weekend in the first ever top-flight fixture at Hill Dickinson Stadium.
He played a starring role in the stirring 2–0 win over Brighton that seemed to have ushered in that bright new era by the Mersey, claiming assists for both goals.
Grealish matched that feat on his second start, laying on goals for Beto and Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall at Wolves in a 3–2 victory and probably should have had another assist to his name when his boyhood club came to town in mid-September in a 0–0 draw whose scoreline belied the host’s dominance on the day.
Three weeks later, as the gloss had started to come off the Blues’ good overall start to 2025/26 with defeats in the Merseyside derby and the League Cup against Wolves and another frustrating home draw, this time against struggling West Ham, Grealish finally celebrated his first goal for his loan club.
The stoppage-time winner he scored against Crystal Palace at the Dock was the new stadium’s first “limbs” moment and he followed it up with another decisive goal at Bournemouth to secure Everton’s first ever league win at Dean Court.
But while the team’s away form under Moyes remained impressive, losses at Manchester City and Chelsea notwithstanding, Everton weren’t able to string together successive wins at Hill Dickinson Stadium until this past month which was emblematic of the general erraticism that has plagued much of the campaign.
And before his season was prematurely ended by injury, Grealish could be just as mercurial as the team’s results. His deflected winner against the Cherries would be his last before he was forced to undergo surgery on a foot fracture and his influence as an attacking outlet would wane as well in the weeks that followed as Everton won just once between 6th December and mid-January.
If there was a general sense that a team grappling with deficiencies at full-back and going back and forth between two struggling strikers had become too reliant on their star loanee, it was, perhaps, borne out in what often felt like a policy of “give it Grealish”.
In other words, as has often been the case with Ndiaye when the team has been struggling: work the ball out to the flank where the loanee would invariably be anchored to the touchline and hope that he could produce a moment of magic. Often, without established patterns of attacking play and the requisite movement around him, that often meant the play would slow down or grind to a halt as Grealish, usually double- or triple-marked tried to draw opposition players towards him before trying to get around them or lay the ball off.
Still, if there was a feeling among some fans that he was a bit of a crutch in that way and there had been plenty of frustration at his dismissal for a second bookable offence against Wolves (when referee, Thomas Kirk, took umbrage at his sarcastic applause when a decision finally went the Blues’ way), Grealish’s work rate, particularly in away games, couldn’t be faulted.
Indeed, it was, perhaps, that heavy load after only playing a bit part in his last season in Manchester that led him to break down with stress fractures in January.
In his absence — not necessarily because of it but the extent to which the team has had to adapt their approach without him is an intriguing “unknowable” — Everton have found some form and momentum since back-to-back home defeats to Bournemouth and Manchester United in February. An excellent away win at Newcastle was followed by the first successive League wins at Hill Dickinson Stadium with a painful and undeserved 2-0 defeat at the home of the division leaders, Arsenal sandwiched in between.
While No 18 is sidelined, his team-mates are gunning for qualification for Europe, a stage very much made for Jack Grealish and should they achieve it, it would represent another pull factor for the one-time Villa hero to remain an Everton player.
If you listen to Grealish talk about the rapport he has built with the Toffees and Evertonians and take on board the fact that he has remained part of the setup at Finch Farm during his rehabilitation from surgery rather than return to City as would ordinarily be expected of a loanee, it seems as though the player would very much like to stay.
And while nothing has been made official, it has been widely reported since the turn of the year that Everton have been keen to work with Manchester City to structure an arrangement whereby they can bring keep Jack at the club.
Whether they should is a question that has been raised among fans; as popular as he is, it’s by no means a “no-brainer”. Certainly, if it were to be a permanent switch at the £50m that was part of the original loan deal struck last summer, the answer would almost certainly be no. (In reality, Everton were never going to to pay that.)
Grealish will turn 31 in the early part of 2026/27 and Everton have been down the road of awarding long, costly contracts to players either at or just past their peak many times in recent years.
And unless the winger was amenable to lowering his wages to facilitate a move, it’s debatable whether the mooted figure of £20m would make financial sense given the player’s age and recent injury concerns. On his current salary, a three-year deal would cost the Blues north of £65m all-in; again, an uncomfortable amount of cash for a player on the wrong side of 30.
Far better would be the compromise approach whereby City agree to loan him back to Everton for what will be the final year of his contract at the Etihad Stadium, with the latter covering his wages before signing him on a free transfer in the summer of 2027, if that’s what all parties decide is the best course of action. The player will have his suitors but it doesn't look like he wants to be anywhere other than Bramley-Moore Dock.
Recent results have shown that Grealish is not indispensable to Everton but, when fit, he was undoubtedly an exciting and important member of Moyes’s team. Not only is he bankable asset in terms of merchandising and media attention, if the Toffees are to secure a place in Europe for next season, his talents and experience could be invaluable.
Just as important, he buys into the project under The Friedkin Group and Moyes and wants to be here. Again, breaking the bank to keep him around wouldn’t be prudent but when everything is taken into account, a deal on terms favourable to Everton is something the hierarchy should certainly be pursuing.
Reader Responses
Selected thoughts from readers08/04/2026 09:53:04
I'm unsure. He's undoubtedly been on overall positive influence on and off the pitch, but even before his injury, he was still on his way to Dubai when he had time off (international break and again during his suspension) - and whilst there was no scandal as such, he was still mentioned in various gossip outlets for getting drunk, and having to be taken back to his hotel by a fixer.
He's a young man, at an age where he likes to socialise - like we all do or did, but not many of us were in lucrative careers where taking care of our fitness was important.
I fear he will be more like Rooney than Ronaldo - one who's fitness/performance declined quickly, versus one who's still looking to play at the top level at the age of 40.
You mention, rightly, our reputation of giving out fat contracts to players who were on, or close to, the slide down.
Even if we agree a deal with City to take over his full wage, that still would be around £15-17m invested, assuming there was no other loan fee on top.
Maybe that's the middle way, and if he can prove his fitness (his desire isn't really in question), then that could be the prelude to looking at a free transfer, bearing in mind he'll be approaching 32 then.
08/04/2026 10:24:55
This is a difficult one, there is no doubting his quality and his desire to be part of the Everton future, from the clubs perspective its going to be about cost v impact. His costs are likely to be very high over a short period of time, which goes against the stated ethos of buying younger talent, developing and selling at a profit. Flip the coin, if we get into Europe then we need that quality and some of his costs are offset. So to me, the deal or any part of it, will be directly influenced by qualification to a Euro competition, especially if it's the CL.
Even then, his wages are massive. Something I cannot see TFG buying into.. so a loan extention under same terms till end of next season may be the only way a deal is approached. It all depends on where we finish up this season.
08/04/2026 16:34:05
Do we need Jack? Recent matches have seen the team continue its upward trajectory. In several games since Jack’s injury, the team has looked more effective as a counterattacking force, never more so than the last match against Chelsea.
Before his injury there were times, especially at home, in which our play would have benefited from an increase in the speed of attacks. Instead Jack slowed the game, permitting opponents to get behind the play and making it more difficult for the team to unlock defences.
As an individual Jack poses little by way of a direct goal threat. Two goals in half a season is just about par over his career as a whole. He also seemed reluctant to trust some team mates, perhaps with justification.
He does however offer something we might not otherwise possess in the squad. I see Jack being very useful in away games, especially in Europe, when the team needs a player to slow the game, win a free kick, give his colleagues a breather, manage the game and so on. Is that enough to justify the outlay which, on wages alone, will be significant for a club with relatively low revenue? Another one year loan deal seems to me the best way forward in terms of improving the squad depth without exposing the club to undue financial risk.
08/04/2026 19:33:34
I was unsure when we signed Jack but I must say I have enjoyed watching him play, and I think overall he has proved to be a good signing. As for next season, I am unsure as the Team are in much better shape than last season and we have generally coped quite well in Jack's absence.
So if I was doing the deal I would want to ensure that the terms of the any agreement were reasonable. I think I would also want any agreement limited to another 12 months.
Sound recruitment forms the basis of any successful team and we signed players at the beginning of this season who have hardly played any football. So to my mind Jacks future should be considered along side the rest of the squad. If in the end he stays I will be happy, but if we cannot agree reasonable terms I would expect him to leave.
09/04/2026 00:51:12
For me this should not even be an idle thought... my personal belief is that despite his age, David Moyes would clearly play him at every opportunity - Moyes has a history of playing his favoured players regardless of form, and my fear would be that Jack's presence would again stymie any chance for younger players like Dibling (remember him?!!!!). Grealish is an undoubted talent, he is also costly, and the wrong side of 30. Personally I doubt that even a good run in Europe would leave space for the younger players with Jack in the team.
I'm wary of again signing older 'marquee' players - even if they are stellar performers. I would much rather see the younger talented players being given their chance to shine and forge their own place in the team, the likes of Rohl, Dibling, Aznou.. Alcarz and Garner I think have the chance to provide a longer-term benefit if used, and with Grealish in the side I suspect that many of those players would wither - with Moyes sticking to a known team and format... as he has done so often before.
Sorry, but for me it is a hard pass.
09/04/2026 07:22:58
All the criticisms/wariness of signing Jack permanently are perfectly valid. I too had my reservations last summer...but My God I enjoyed watching him play for us.
A true footballer.
09/04/2026 07:50:37
I've mentioned before that we seem to be building relationships with Chelsea and City with regards to signings. It may be a case of discussing several players who may be available. The club may find a better value player as an alternative to Grealish. KDH has been amazing value as an example.
09/04/2026 08:41:26
The initial sparkle had dulled by the time his injury struck. But, with a more attacking left back supporting him, and freeing him, he could shine again next season and beyond.
I really like Jack and would want him to stay. But, not at silly money.
City, ourselves and Jack need to find a compromise that suits all. I think City will want a fee as it helps their PSR or whatever the new "Let's keep the Top 6, the Top 6" glass ceiling is called.
09/04/2026 12:00:27
I remember way back when, when we were an average to poor side (pick your own decade), turning up at goodison for one game to find out when they announced the team that Latchford was injured and wouldn’t play.
Given that he was pretty much our only decent player it was a real downer.
Now this team has a number of decent players but watching Grealish go about his business has been pure joy to me.
A proper talent that I hope we sign permanently.
I accept his wages would need to be severely reduced and, yes, he does slow the game up at times, but he’s a proper footballer who has connected with the fan base so let’s have him back I say.
09/04/2026 15:59:03
Pros:
- Still highly talented and has a lot to offer the team
- Seems genuinely likeable and really good for the dressing room
- Appears to have been touched by Everton as the saying goes
- Experience would be very useful if we qualify for Europe
- Merchandise / club profile
Cons:
- Have probably played some of our best football without him in recent weeks
- Moves Ndiaye out of arguably his best position
- Maybe takes minutes away from younger players (although not as much of an issue if in Europe as well)
- Age
- Massive wages
In summary, I have no idea…
09/04/2026 21:12:38
Peter (19..still try’s to pass himself off at that age!!),,As ever.. sensible comments. He being with us immediately raised our profile… nicely coming as we entered a new era at BM. We needed a commercial high lift whether we like it or not and he has been a small part of the large jigsaw in that direction. As Peter states he has been a grand lift in raising the profile and if it takes a bit of business savvy in working out a deal for a bloke who has endeared himself to a wide fan base ( Top of the league in shirt sales btw) we move on and get those positives to moisten the airwaves…. What’s not to embrace??? Positively Bramley Moor…. God’s New Morning Awaits Us….
10/04/2026 08:51:12
He provided some flashes of light when the BMD was at it's gloomiest earlier in the season. Ironically his injury gave Ndiaye an opportunity to remind everyone where he plays best.
I would hate to see Jack go elsewhere and sparkle, but Christine sums this up quite succinctly. Cost V Impact.
10/04/2026 08:53:32
At best best TFG would consider Jack a loan, on reduced wages.No way would a permanent signing be considered.I am so glad he was brought in as a Loan originally.
Jack Grealish tendency to drift left, cut inside, and hold possession does often slow transitions and can crowd the left half-space, reducing space for an overlapping fullback.He is also likely to be slower a year on and after his injury.
IMO that could be a real tactical misfit. I think Everton need quicker, more direct wing play or someone to stretch the pitch and allow their left-back to overlap freely (like Vitalii Mykolenko pushing forward),
Grealish’s style might indeed become a liability rather than an asset. He’s elite at drawing fouls and retaining the ball, but not an out-and-out pacey winger who hits the byline.
10/04/2026 15:15:03
Like others, I see a bit of a dilemma. He is undoubtably a class act, and yet our performances have, by and large been better without him.
On balance, though, I would try and re-sign him:
- we need plenty of options, particularly if we do get into Europe
- his experience would be a great asset - particularly on Dibling. He is a living example of how a 'fancy Dan' player can operate. (I thought his best performance last season was at Old Trafford - a masterclass in closing the game down)
- he genuinely is a player who can get the crowd off their feet.
Add Your Thoughts
Only registered users of Evertonia can participate in discussions.
Or Join as Evertonia Member — it takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your thoughts on artices across the site.
08/04/2026 08:00:28
I think you're right Lyndon to say that here will be competition for his signature. But it will be from teams/clubs at our level, potentially playing in Europe. They will also want what Jack can offer but will have the same budgetary constraints. I can't see a regular CL team looking to sign him.
What will work in our favour is geography, we're not a million miles way from where he is presumably settled around Manchester. He also knows the club and has been well looked after. He knows the squad and has played with them and under Moyes already.
I think that while cost and the right contract is important for the club, Jack will also have to accept certain conditions for the deal to work. A big question for me is whether or not he has the aptitude to accept that he is now the wrong side of thirty. He's not going to be an automatic starter, both in terms of keeping him fit and fresh, and also in terms of integrating younger players into the starting eleven.
If the price is right, and his mindset is right, I do think that we will get two seasons' value out of Jack. If we do qualify for Europe, then being able to rotate players, especially our star players, to keep everyone fit, will be invaluable. The more star/quality players we have, the more the club will develop and progress. I don't want Europe meaning we stagnate in the league, as Forest, Palace and Spurs have. Just make sure though that other star players aren't pushed to one side.
One thing to keep in mid is that we don't upset what is the makings of a very decent squad. Dibbling, Armstrong, Rohl and Alcaraz will need to be nurtured and encouraged.