Kid Icarus

Howe also took Bournemouth from the bottom of League Two on minus 17 points to mid-table of the Premier League. Very different situations. He's also now proven what he can do, whereas Iriola hasn't. What he's done at every club win % wise is nigh on identical.

Basically identical approach 4231 aside tbh

His win percentage is shite. Another flavour of the month where the assumption is does well with low budget = will automatically do miles better with a bigger budget

Just been reliably informed that Peter Beardsley is currently in Gosforth Asda talking to people about Howe (supportively).

I'm sure I watched a video last year saying that Stiller isn't rated and not on club's radars purely because of how he looks. Just absolutely shan if true and absolutely shan if not true.

Van Hecke has Chelsea written all over him you'd think.

These things have become cynical attempts to turn it into that form of outrage content imo.

All nighter with the bairn? I'm just about finished my shift for the night.

It might be the most important one for your argument, but it's not the most important one for the debate because its not the only outcome of the money that's been spent in that time, every outcome is important.

Anyway, am gan to bed.

Why are you choosing the spend for 5 years, but only choosing the position we're in now and not all of the achievements in between? You can't have it both ways.

It's also not even true ffs https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/einnahmenausgaben/wettbewerb/GB1/plus/0?ids=a&sa=&saison_id=2022&saison_id_bis=2025&nat=&pos=&altersklasse=&w_s=&leihe=&intern=0 Change the dates and sort by outgoings or balance, we're 7th and 8th.

You'll never ever move me away from that. A club that's at the bottom of the league with a poor squad and no saleable assets, that wants to get to the top is going to have to spend money to accelerate the process, the other clubs are already there with no/less need to spend. Being 5th in net spend over 5 years means very little if you're starting from the bottom, the teams on that list aren't created equal and you can't quantify what that should mean if, for example, the team in 10th has a squad that cost three times what yours did but they already bought it before you started spending. It's why squad cost, or better still wage list is generally more accepted way to measure where you are vs that list. On that basis this is the first time in Howe's time here that we've underperformed (if we finish lower than 8th) and in fact the first time we haven't massively overperformed.

You joined in a message chain where someone else brought up Man City. Either way, doesn't matter. Of course their net spend is lower, as I say they start at the 80m line in a 100m race every season. When PIF came here Man City already had one of the best and most expensive squads in the world. No overhaul was needed. They've had years of unlimited spending to hoover up the talent for their academy and squad, which they can then sell on. Meanwhile when PIF came in we were at the 0m line, one of the worst squads in the league, no saleable assets, no profitable academy, and a huge gap to make up. Adjusted for inflation what we've spent is crumbs compared to their first few years following their takeover.

You've lost me? I know they're not our direct competition, that's my point. It's why... Is a fair response to

I know 6 that have and/or while already starting at the 80m line in a 100m race. Man City spent £500m just last January alone. You can't remove that context, it dwarfs our spending and that's without even bringing pulling power, wages, and agent fees into it.

The mentality is dictated by the realistic alternatives, the realistic alternatives are dictated by our artificially imposed financial restrictions.

Suit yourself...chicken.

I think for the first time I'm now more on the side of thinking Spurs will go down.

Spurs are in the big 6 for a reason, they have the financial clout to win the league, they just haven't. That's why they should be included and I've said they need to be a PL team when it happens. I'll go one better, if he goes to Spurs, he also has to get CL for the bet to count.

Okay, if I agree that Spurs have to already be a PL team when it happens. If not no bet, he'd get them up to that level imo so they're just as relevant.

You did say never tbf. Spurs need to be included as well because imo at that point he'd have them up there challenging. Include Spurs and I'll agree to the next 3 jobs thing.

Leeds have managed this incredibly poorly like. Christ.

£50 seems fine then. By the time one of us is proved right it'll be like a tenner with inflation.