The College Dropout

Howe’s overall body of work is excellent for us. I don’t think anyone would agree that. But do we think we’ll finish 4th this season? Why? Our performances and form over the last 12 months suggest we won’t be that consistent. We often look vulnerable defensively and incoherent in attack. With repeated issues over the last year.

I’m one of the least knee jerk people on here. I don’t hero worship Eddie in the good times and he’s not a villain to me at the low times.

We were a bad injury/season for Minteh away from having to sell a crown jewel. We were lucky. Risk to reward is out of whack because we won’t attempt to do that again (hopefully).

You realise Villa hired Steven Gerrard during this era? They hired Emery & Monchi and now they are flying. If PIF invest properly and wisely outside the first team. We’ll eventually strike gold. Stadium, academy, hires etc.

I can understand this perspective. Amanda was very Newcastle United. Bold. Confident. She talked big talk. We like that and engage with that. Like as far as a Tory businesswoman can be she was a great figurehead that connected with the base. As a club we have always had characters as leaders in my lifetime. Eales won’t connect with us - he comes across too corporate. I dont agree with that line. But I get it.

Agreed. Eddie has the most credit in the bank out of the 3 we talk about. But I suppprt Newcastle United, not Eddie Howe.

I’d disagree with this premise. We don’t look well coached at all. Players don’t look like they know what they are meant to do. Again I’ll use Spurs. They look well coached in open play. There’s a clear identity. The players look like they know what the coach has asked them to do. But it’s fairly straight forward for opposition managers to attack the weaknesses in their approach. I don’t think Ange makes enough adjustments. We dont have a coherent identity. Players don’t look like they know what to do. Where to be.

It says something that after 1 defeat people are talking about Howe’s job.

Aye but they might not think it’s possible to make it work with each other.

Is that what actually happens in real life? I suspect the vision is imposed by PIF. Eales and everyone else does their best to align. I don’t think any of them have PIF support implicitly. Generally Managers have 3 - 15 months to hit short term goals. Allowed a few bad results, maybe a bad season. DOFs have 1-2.5 years to start hitting medium term goals. Allowed a dud manager if they’re lucky and maybe a couple dud windows which might take time to reveal. Whoever is in charge on the ground (Eales I guess) would have 2-3 years to show meaningful progress. We can speculate as to the contributory factors. But there’s a view that Staveley and co. had one bad year running the ship which facilitated their exit. If I’m Eales, Mitchell or Howe I’m thinking I need short term success in my world to secure my job.

I agree with this. But also we don’t play with thr authority of a top team. A bit opposite to Ange. Spurs get on the ball like a really good side. But they ain’t.

Didn’t Eales start it? Perhaps unintentionally which is poor.

Aye it’s not the end of world. But we’ve been consistently poor for 5 games imo.

That’s something Rafa would do. Rafa wouldn’t mind shaking things up if it meant he got more power at the end. By doing what Howe did - the club then had to come out publicly and state Howe’s position of authority unambiguously. Reaffirming authority and power is important. I don’t think he got 100% what he wanted. Which yes has meant the vibe isn’t at its best.

You need some continuity to do that though. You can’t chop and change leadership and expect to execute a 5-year plan. They will have their own plans. In this new world we don’t know who is really who. At Chelsea it was Roman calling the big shots. Marina, Cech and a few other lieutenants did the day to day stuff. At Spurs you know it’s mostly Levy making key decisions. He’s not even majority shareholder. Edu and one of the owners sons seem to run Arsenal. We don’t know who is who and to what degree with us yet. That Monchi setup with Emery and the other dude seems brilliantly aligned. Man U are now trying to align. And I guess so are we but in a bit by bit way. And not sure who is coordinating it. At Man U it’s deffo Ratcliffe. Don’t know who is our shot caller and who really sets the vision and executes it.

Aye much less scrutiny over there. there’s reasons to join England - granted. Avoiding ppl trying to interfere isn’t one of them.

Howe has a bit of the political nature of Rafa. Doesnt mind playing internal club politics in the media if he thinks the results will be favourable.

Btw a proper DoF should be able to execute a 5-year plan. Has Mitchell done a job for 5 years?

I think we need to forget Staveley and her 5 year plan in year 0. Different leadership. Sounds like we are heading towards some type of project reset.

Early subs are good in that clearly Howe is hating our performances.

I don’t mind Hall rotating with Kelly based on the opponent. But Livra at RB for me. Trippier in for tactical reasons or training or whatever but Livra shirt to lose. Trippier has gone back to being weak defensively and the back line is too slow with him added. What’s not great from Howe is that some players can have multiple bad games and still start while others don’t.

Trippier and Hall is too weak defensively imo. And those are defenders. We don’t have the quality on the ball in midfield and attack in possession. You don’t get the best out of Willock Joelinton Longstaff Barnes Gordon Tonali Murphy Almiron like that imo. The squad is built to run and transition. Fulham are better setup personnel wise for that.

To sound like a broken record. We don’t have the players for that. When we signed Tonali, we committed to rock and roll football. Confirmed it with Joelintons new contract.

I think good strong boys can keep that up. I look at Arsenal and they have that mentality now. They lose the ball they all burst back into shape. They win the physical battle then the quality will shine. On paper we aren’t that much better than Fulham or most of the league. But we’ve lost that mental edge. We lose the ball and the lads amble back. The press is laboured. That does lie on Howe. Lads don’t look motivated. Don’t look physically fit. And he has the same tactical/setup weaknesses we’ve had for a long time. That bit of tactical stubbornness or limitation I’ve charged it to the game and it’s almost forgivable. But the lack of work rate and physicality and ability in transition isn’t. That’s Howe’s USP for me. That’s the point of a team with Joelinton, Willock, Longstaff, Barnes, Gordon, Isak, Tonali, Murphy, Livramento. It’s meant to outrun other teams and we haven’t don’t that once this season.

Looks a nothing player to me. Ok defensively. Ok on the ball. Ok in the air. Ok going forward. Passive as. Not to say he’s bad. Just not sure what high qualities he’s meant to have beyond versatility.