Milburn

That’s corporate speak for: “perform now or we decide in May.” “Not looking to make a change at the moment” isn’t backing, it’s buying time. The last seven games of this season is the review, whether they say it or not.

He could still stick with Woltemade, just not in this setup. Playing him as a lone striker without pace or aggressive runners around him is setting him up to fail. He needs a system built around his strengths, not isolation. But that’s the issue. Everything comes back to Howe’s rigid love for 4-3-3. There’s very little flexibility. You look at someone like Emery, who seems to have 200 different ways of setting a team up depending on the opponent. That kind of adaptability is what we’re missing.

There is reporting that Howe advocated for Wilson coming in (The Guardian I believe), which is interesting in itself. But there’s no evidence they have worked together before Wilson himself has talked about there likely being better value outside the Premier League, so it’ll be interesting to see if that actually translates into a different approach. Hopefully we’re done paying £100m+ for “PL-proven” players like Wissa and Elanga. Those transfers make me sick.

At places like Arsenal, City and Liverpool, the structure is still club-led. The recruitment model, profiling and long-term planning sit above the manager. “Final say” in practice usually means veto power, not that the manager drives the process or that the recruitment department/DoF chases players based on the manager’s command. The concern is when it tips into manager-led recruitment rather than a proper club strategy, but because that’s when you lose continuity the moment the manager changes. Newcastle are now in a position where the DoF was effectively appointed on Howe’s recommendation, and one of the heads of recruitment is his nephew. Make of that what you want...

Howe is known to be extremely detail-oriented and very hands-on in everything he does. That’s one of his strengths as a coach, but it can also blur the lines when it comes to other sides of the operation. And when you factor in that his nephew is head of recruitment, it does raise questions about how independent that side of the operation really is...

Most top clubs don’t give the manager final say, that’s the whole point of having a DoF. The club sets the strategy, the manager works within it. If the manager has the final call, it stops being truly collaborative and becomes manager-led recruitment. And that’s exactly where the issues tend to start. I truly believe Howe just wants a DoF who brings him options, but ultimately acts on the manager’s command, and that’s not how a modern structure should work. It’s quite telling, in my view, that Ross Wilson was appointed on Howe’s strong recommendation. My expectations for that appointment are close to zero.

Of course the conditions play a role, but that’s exactly why you need a proper structure and philosophy. That was Paul Mitchell’s whole point when he said the transfer strategy wasn’t fit for purpose. PSR sets the budget, it doesn’t pick the players. The decisions and profiles are still on the club. Player recruitment has to be club-driven, not manager-driven. In a modern setup, that sits with the DoF and recruitment team, not the manager. And in my view, part of the issue is that Howe wants to be hands on and have the final say. A very control-heavy, old-school approach I for one strongly disagre with.

I get the PSR point, but you can’t have it both ways. You can’t talk about “not being able to recruit” and “tough conditions” when the club spent around £250m last summer. That’s not a lack of recruitment, that’s a choice of recruitment. And that’s the real issue. Those signings haven’t improved the team - if anything, they’ve made us weaker or at best stood still. You’ve got over £100m spent on forwards who are either sitting on the bench or being played out of position in midfield. That’s not bad luck, that’s extremly poor squad building. And meanwhile you’ve got clubs like Brentford, Everton, Fulham and Brighton ahead of us, operating with a fraction of the spend. So yes, the rules make things harder, but they don’t explain poor decision-making. Other clubs operate under the same constraints and still manage to strengthen. At some point, you have to look at the execution.

Fair point. For me, the line has to be clear: if we don’t qualify for Europe next season - even if it’s just Conference League - then it’s time to move on. We should be comparing ourselves to a club like Villa. They would not accept missing out on Europe, so why should we? If we do scrape into the Conference League, then fair enough - I’d give him the benefit of the doubt going into next season. But there has to be a clear standard. Otherwise it just drifts. Based on what the owners have said about ambition, it’ll be interesting to see how they react if we fall short. Nobody knows, really.

Since winning the cup last year.

It’s only “one bad season” if you ignore the patterns behind it. Same issues, same type of dropped points, same inconsistencies. That’s not random, that’s a trend.

If we finish bottom half after this level of investment - £5-600m across his tenure - that’s a serious underperformance, not just “one bad season”. And it’s not abstract either. We’re talking about two points combined from West Ham (a), Brentford (a), Spurs (h), Sunderland (a), Sunderland (h), Wolves (a), Brentford (h) and Everton (h). That’s where seasons are defined - not away at City or Barcelona.

Most likely, but things change very quickly in football. Stock is only high until it isn’t. I still remember when Brendan Rodgers at Leicester was being talked about as Pep’s successor at City. That doesn’t exactly get mentioned anymore.

Probably, but he’d better hit the ground running. That fanbase isn’t exactly known for patience.

Fair enough. I just think this is more about cycles than ability. Managers often have a shelf life at clubs, and after a few years things naturally plateau. That doesn’t mean Howe is a bad manager. Far from it. He could easily go somewhere else and be a huge success. Just look at Klopp. Things ran their course at Dortmund, but he went to Liverpool and built something special again. My point is simply that it might be the end of this cycle at Newcastle, not the end of Howe as a top manager.

If the owners and CEO actually mean all the ambition they’ve been talking about (and we don’t really know if it’s anything more than words), then there’s only one real option if we’re sitting bottom half of the table come May. That’s option 2. You don’t finish mid-table with this level of investment and respond by doubling down and giving the same manager even more control over squad building. That’s not how serious clubs operate. Option 1 only makes sense if the ambition isn’t as high as advertised.

That era is pretty much gone. Wenger and Ferguson were exceptions from a different time. Modern football just doesn’t work like that anymore. The game moves too fast, squads turn over quickly, and most managerial cycles peak and fade within 3–4 years. Even elite clubs don’t bet on 10–15 year projects now. They build structures that outlast the manager instead. Waiting for “the next Wenger” is more wishful thinking than a realistic strategy.

Just look at Ranieri at Leicester. He delivered the greatest achievement in Premier League and world football history and was still gone less than a year later when things started to slide.

The best manager we’ve had in modern times, no doubt. And a genuinely classy, professional man as well. But as some have already pointed out: he’s been here for over four years. Most managerial cycles naturally come to an end even before that point. Things stagnate, ideas lose their edge, and players stop responding the same way. That’s not a criticism unique to Howe, it’s just how modern football works. The question is whether we’re still evolving, or just repeating the same patterns and relying on the occasional late rally to get us out of trouble. I don't see him coming back from this. This is the end game.

I don’t know if that specific shortlist is true or not and I’m not claiming inside knowledge. I’m just applying a bit of logical reasoning. Based on Mitchell’s track record and his own public statements, it seems pretty unlikely he’d be pushing to overpay for a 30-year-old. His whole model has consistently been about identifying younger talent from abroad and building value that way.

It’s no secret Howe and Mitchell had very different views on recruitment. Howe won the power struggle and Mitchell walked. Officially it was because of Eales leaving… but let’s be honest, nobody actually believes that.

Mitchell left because he deemed a shortlist containing players such as Wissa ‘not fit for purpose’.

They should be arsed with the Club finding itself at 12th in the table. It’s unacceptable.

Disagree. Losing a home derby to the mackems in a season-defining game is the moment. These are the games that history looks back on and says “that’s where it turned.” If that doesn’t decide his fate, nothing will. No coming back from this.

Get out!