timeEd32

Tonali’s positioning makes no sense. Seems like he’s spent more time in the middle and on the left. Not surprising that Palmer keeps finding himself in acres of space down our right. Bruno and Joelinton keep pointing him to the right so does not appear to be tactical.

How you could possibly tell from that angle is beyond me. That was an outstanding team goal.

It’d be nice if Bruno could stop passing to blue shirts.

We’re so bad at tracking runners. It’s like we’re surprised someone is moving in behind.

Yikes

The final straw for you was how we traveled to our first CL game in 20 years?

Good results for us today. A win and we’re right back on track in terms of the table.

I'm assuming everyone saying we should have kept him is joking. Not even sure what to say if they aren't. But it's a very Newcastle thing that even the best outgoing business we've done in the last few years is looking bad at the moment.

We almost certainly should have spent less or we should have sold high on Wilson / Miggy (but I can completely understand why we didn't). There are many paths we could have taken and people will have different opinions about what would have been optimal, some of which are easier to see with hindsight, but the path we chose was flawed. It's why we had no money in January, why we had to panic sell in June and also take on additional costs in the process, it's why our budget this past summer was small, it's why we have mediocre options at RW, and it's why we have an imbalanced squad. This is why summer 2023 was ultimately a failure.

None of the summer 2023 signings were a mistake in a vacuum (bar maybe Tonali, but I have no interest in that debate), but our planning has been flawed since that summer. The kindest, most explainable version of events is that they were part of a longer term plan that went up in smoke when Ashworth left. But even that version relied on selling someone in June so ultimately there's no excuse for the financial mismanagement.

I don't think we're looking for a RW that just improves us. We're looking for a RW that's the same caliber as Bruno/Gordon/Isak/Olise, etc. You can disagree with that approach, but that seems to be what we were after.

The idea that summer 2023 was a bad window shouldn't even be contentious at this point. That does not mean the players we signed in that window are bad.

This is obviously not going to land well, but worth noting Hope's story mentions how neither side is particularly interested in discussions at the moment given that Isak is already one of the top earners and contracted for three more seasons after this one. I obviously don't want him to leave, but also pretty calm about a situation where the worst case scenario is selling a player for over £100m.

The one bit of tension in the January window that will be interesting to see is what we'll do if we're sitting in the 6th-9th range with a chance at Europe but also obviously needing some help. A couple young players from the continent are unlikely to make an instant impact, but I doubt we'll want to spend a bunch of money (and impact our summer) on an expensive PL player. This gets into the point @The College Dropout has been making about our stated aims of Europe and presumably the expectations of the manager not necessarily being aligned with the required recruitment strategy in our position. There's probably a needle to thread here if we can find a legitimately high quality player in Europe in the £25-40m bracket (a la Bruno), but a tall order.

Unless Mitchell isn't actually changing anything about our recruitment then I would be shocked if the players we are after are: 1) currently successful PL players (unless very young and thus cheaper with huge value gain potential e.g. Dibling) 2) known to anyone in the media

The goal against Forest in the cup also involves Tonali in a way that Longstaff just can't offer. As soon as we turn over the ball, Tonali starts moving into space at speed, one touch to Miggy, who first times it to Isak and we're away. Watching that back I am almost certain that Longstaff would have received the ball and played it out wide to a wide open Trippier. It would have been fine, safer even, but almost certainly not a goal. No doubt Tonali needs to show a bit more to be worth what we paid and the year off, but his first time passes are something we sorely need to create chances. His tracking back and defending in transition drives me nuts though.

They are probably closer to 50x more famous than 50%.

I can understand why people are frustrated by the pace of things and I am too on both sponsorships and the training ground. But to be concerned to the level of panic or even borderline conspiracy some of you are getting to you'd have to, among other things, believe that: - Our stadium and/or training ground plans have changed considerably since May when we hired Brad Miller as COO - Mitchell was interested in joining a club going nowhere fast or we lied to him - We added a new board member with ties to the Reuben's and with expertise in commercial, hotel, and retail properties for no real reason

Good to know Gordon has more positivity about the team and the manager than much of this board.

City and Madrid linked, but sure.

Randomly looking at various stats and I noticed that we're the only club in the league that hasn't scored in the first 30 minutes of a game. We're also the only club in the league with an xG below 1.00 in minutes 1-15 and 16-30. Bournemouth hasn't scored in the first 15 minutes and Brighton is the other noticeable slow starter based on xG, but they've created and scored more than us early. I agree the Brighton game likely goes differently had Isak put that chance away, but unfortunately not scoring early and not playing with the lead are par for the course this season. Only Ipswich and Palace have played less minutes with a lead (and Man United the same as us). We've played 88.1% of our games either level or losing (634 of 720 minutes, not counting time added) and have only scored first twice -- Southampton and Spurs.

Is the 2025 sticker book out yet? My son loves it but it's an absolute pain and fortune to get it in the US.

I was just highlighting the root of the problem; I wasn't suggesting any sort of solution. I don't think there will ever be one unless something like the Super League happens, which would fix this particular problem for a select number of clubs, destroy the others, and ruin the sport entirely. Manchester United made more money last season than 31 of 32 NFL teams (the Dallas Cowboys being the only one higher) and lost over £100m. The Cowboys made over $500m. The basic financials of football are utterly fucked and it's why the governing bodies feel the need to oversee spending, which led to certain owners using that as an opportunity to try to protect their standing/revenue.

The already very rich owners? No, don't really care about them. But a fundamental problem with football is that clubs struggle to make money or break even, even when their revenue becomes significant. All 32 NFL teams made a profit last year; only four PL teams did in the latest accounts. Part of that is the NFL generates more money, but football's main issue is a spending problem. It's a never-ending cycle because if you lower your spending then you are likely going to be less successful and success is directly tied to revenue (PL status, Europe, etc.). Add in player sales and 50% or more of every larger club's revenue is unpredictable. And that is why the entire sport is fueled by the mega rich and debt, which is directly related to both the good and the bad of the financial restrictions.