The College Dropout

Wilson previously at Bournemouth too. Wood was always a capable to very good PL striker, but he was a bad profile fit. And even Wood attempts to run in behind too. Signed Solanke too but that didn't work out initially. Not a big sample size still aye. It's the directness and transition more than the track record for me. Gyokeres would look good for us, we would hit him early and he would be there for early crosses and 1-2 shot finishes. In 433 Howe has never asked for a lot of link-up for his strikers. He wants them to stretch play and get us up the pitch.

I don’t think he plays like an Eddie Howe 9 needs too. We are a direct team that enjoy playing in transition. In all Eddie Howe teams he’s shad a striker looking to get in behind a fair amount. IMO as he is. He’s a supporting striker in an Eddie Howe team. He has to try and make runs in behind and make sure he’s in the 6 yard box for headers regularly to be a Howe striker. These are things Kane does despite similar limitations and often playing deep. In a more patient team he’s fine as he is.

He barely played so doubt it. Forest have got tremendous value from business with us. The Wood money was worth every penny. They'll double the Anderson money with ease maybe even 3x. Fleeced us for Vloch

Not really. Dan Burn competes for a higher number of headers (both offensively and defensively). I would assume it's the number of offensive headers against oppositions best defensive aerial headerers that drags his win % down. Dan Burn will be top 3 for overall headers won in pure numbers - the volume is so high. It's one reason I slyly prefer Burn at CB to Botman. I can't think of many goals we've conceded with Burn losing an aerial battle directly leading to a goal in recent times. I've seen it happen to Botman a few times. Xhaka I assume is winning headers against other midfielders in general play. Which is less volume, easier to win and easier to direct to general play. Dan Burn is trying to win offensive headers for flick-ons and such.

I fully believe in time he'll get close or get more G/A than Murphy if Howe persists with him and everyone knuckles down. I think he can do it. It's just that Murphy is still a limited player overall. And Elanga has many of the same fundamental limitations that limit our ceiling as a team. Elanga's fundamentals are Murphy level.

I do think bigger groups and only 1 leg would make the games more fun and competitive even if the results are the same. Home and away is more fair mine. The CL format works because the coefficient is accurate to each team pretty much.

It’s not a shared view

I’m not criticising Eddie. It shouldn’t be his job to identify transfer targets. I’ve been a Hall supporter the entire time. I didn’t think he would nail a starting place straight away and it might cost us and it did. But we’ve got a great player now. That’s the trade off. Rather Hall than the same money for Anthony’s Robinson.

At least on the football transfer context - over the last 3 windows does it look like we are a well-oiled machine? I wouldn't say amateur but we haven't looked a well-oiled machine at all. Who is the leadership team? The leadership team that built that team that achieved everything has left bar the manager - no? Amanda, Ghouddassi & Ashworth have all gone and they were 3 key members no? On the football side. I know other people were involved but it was Stavely and co. driving the appointments of Ashworth, Eales and Howe and led the club day-to-day. Only Howe remains. I've enjoyed the football and our successes. But i've acknowledged that has been despite a leadership vacuum and poor appointments over the last 16 months. If we have a downturn in performance it will be because the lack of off-field direction is now impacting.

I've not said that. But I am saying we should avoid those transfers in the main. And they do have upside. Having Barnes and giving Joelinton that new contract is a major reason we are cup winners and are in the CL. But having Anderson over Joelinton and maybe a Minteh over a Barnes is better for the medium/long-term. Of course things aren't as simple as that but I hope the point lands. And more than anything this summer doubling-down on that approach is going to cost us. We needed to be smarter. INstead - lack of leadership has messed us up.

Wissa is never going to be worth more than £55m. Elanga is never going to be worth more than £55m. Maybe Ramsey has a higher ceiling than £40m tbf to him. But Barnes we knew, we were buying at peak value. Again - i'm not calling anyone shit. I'm saying buying players of this profile - close to peak value - at the increased rate that we have - is going to cause more problems than solutions. I like Wissa a lot and think he can turn our season around. But the signing is very short-termist. Which is fine but giving Joelinton that new contract was short-medium term play that is becoming an issue. Signing Elanga was meant to have immediate short-term benefits, hasn't happened and the long-term value of the transfer looks shakey etc. As a one-off these are fine transfers. But we are increasing the tick on them when we need to decrease.

The first line: Great signings all 3 but the first 2 we are moving beyond that level of signing in the main. And all 3 were signed for less than £13m due to age and circumstance. I'm ok with that. That's nothing like spending £100m on Wissa and Ramsey. Tino & Hall (and Gordon) we paid a premium to bring in what we thought were top class young players. Again happy with that. Tino aside (and he only had 1 season) - none of them were PL proven. Even Tino we signed without evidence he would be the same player post-ACL. I'm specifically talking about signing already fully established PL players at the peak of their performance and value for a premium. I like Barnes as a player and he has been a good signing no doubt. Yet, I don't think we are going to turn a meaningful profit on him we sell him. And we have to sell him next summer to even get that or break-even. He's a good player too, no potential to be a great one and we knew that when we signed him at some expense. Which is fine as a one-off. But we've now added several more players of that ilk and it's a problem. I don't think in black and white terms. I'm not saying "signing PL proven is shite" as a blanket statement. But the specific profile of not-so-high ceiling, premium price, close to max potential/value that's the problem. There's issues with the Tino, Gordon & Hall model, that it means resale isn't as profitable as it could be and they will need time to develop which will cost us points. The foreign market has a higher failure rate too. But they have higher upsides than the Ramsey, Wissa & Barns model. We need to take gambles on high ceiling players earlier than the top 6 or other elite clubs. All of our best signings were known players nearly all linked to big clubs. But we took the gamble. This can be from the PL (Hall, Tino) or abroad. Slightly younger, less proven. Where we can we take the best of PL at a good fee with potential to increase.

Like Elanga, Wissa, Barnes, Ramsey Similar combined fee for the 4. The gap in value for money is crazy. Going after young talent in England other teams won't gamble on is a better bet like Gordon, Tino & Hall. All came at an English potential premium but still better value for money.

Why? Best thing is they lose and play meaningless friendlies. I however, would love to see DRC at the World Cup.

It became apparent in July that he can't

what does this mean? We've had 2 shitshow summers consecutively. because we haven't had a proper recruitment team in place. That's the fault of the Owners.

They’ve had it wrong 2 summers in a row because they haven’t put in an effective leadership structure.

English pundits love love love Foden

We could finish 10th and I would be backing Eddie tbf

Who appoints the Directors? Weve not had a proper leadership structure in place for the transfer with Dow 2 years in a row. Who is responsible for that?

Biggest thing holding us back is the acumen of our owners and their care towards the club

Net sales is a useless stat. What’s Real Madrids over the last 5 years? Maybe less than ours. Our overall squad cost and wage bill is 7th and 8th and the lowest we’ve finished under Howe is 7th. He’s been overachieving.

It’s not to say that big bunch aren’t good players btw. And can’t contribute to a successful side in the right system manager and star players. But they aren’t the difference. Take an Isak away. Reduce their prep and rest time relative to the comp. Increase their game time relative to the competition. Any advantage we have is minimal. Especially when the system needs to change.

No Ashworth went on gardening leave about February. Eddie shouldn’t have so much influence over transfers I agree. Yes - as I’ve said you can’t name me the well run clubs where the manager signs who they want. Yes I’m blaming the club for not having a proper leadership structure to lead on transfers with Howe being a component not the conductor. Clubs like Man U of yesteryear did that. Thats how they ended up with Onana and Antony from Ajax (via Inter) instead of Kudus and Timber. Amorim wanted Martinez, but they signed Lammens instead better age and wage profile. It’s not 2002 anymore. Managers shouldn’t be the transfer guru. This squad has 2 top class players. 3 or 4 others really great. But a big bunch of our squad could play for Palace or Fulham and a top 6 club wouldn’t come and get them. We lost a top quality player optimised for our style of play. Haven’t replaced him (or his replacement hasn’t started) and we haven’t supplemented him with players of that level yet.

What well operated club lets the manager decide 100% who they sign and who they sell? Cant be many. No club with a proper leadership structure would sanction £55m for Elanga. Thats Man U-esque. I’m not blaming Eddie for that. He’s the manager. He should have influence on transfers but he needs a committee to say no in that situation. Dan Ashworth doesn’t sanction that deal. Again Dan Ashworth forces us to sell Joelinton. We need a proper DOF and other major factors involved. We need to strike a balance.