Kid Icarus

This has been known for a while, but it did nothing unfortunately.

I can't stand Edwards but there's a kernel of truth in part of what he's said there. Some of our fans have ragebaited themselves when it comes to Howe imo and I've watched it happen and been exasperated by it in real time. We'll never ever be successful if every single setback is widely perceived as a failing of the manager. Thankfully it still seems that that view is only held by a noisy minority.

I get the impression that he realised he wasn't getting what he was giving from some of our other players

What did you get?

It does, but we also had a chairman that could spend what he wanted

Mention 95/96 to any non-Man United fan that experienced it and they'll talk about that Newcastle side before nigh on anything else. I knew people who didn't even like football at all who watched our matches. You couldn't get Odeon tickets to watch us, let alone match tickets. That's not a cope or anything, I'd rather we won the league and it's not a brag either, you hear it time and again, with no Newcastle influence involved at all. BUT, being real, when i watch it back, although I think Keegan's football comparitive to the era it was in wins, if you just look at it 1 v 1, Howe's football is better like.

If Freddie Fletcher was still alive I reckon he'd be humble about it but point to the revenue streams he produced. That's not underplaying Keegan's role in us being the hot ticket etc, I just mean it was a joint thing, we had a straight shoot at it as well. The competitiveness that I remember was pure spectacle at the start of the season imo, even as a kid I knew it was Man United and then everyone else. It was us, Blackburn, Liverpool competing imo, I never thought Arsenal or Villa, or Leeds, or Boro would win the league, regardless of what they spent. Whereas now those top few are set in stone and even when it isn't, the top dogs can spend and fail and spend and fail again and again.

Keegan's a pure wildcard though. He claims that seeing Gerry Francis's face after we beat them 7-1 is what made him quit...which is mental. The more realistic reason is maybe a combination of the stock exchange thing, the ticket bond fuck up, and the realisation that he'd have to rebuild again. With Howe it just seems like he's massively overworked and underappreciated.

Every season's points for positions are obviously different and other team's points factor in. 5th this year could need anything from 55 to 70 points because of how mental it is. Villa weren't even at their lowest point at this point last year and were in a much less assailable position than ours. The big difference tbf though, is that they went big in January and we did nothing.

Just to add as well, that a lot of this has made me realise that if the internet was a thing in the early to mid '90s, there'd have been a fair few people loudly questioning Keegan at the start of 93/94, the end of 94/95 and the start of 96/97, and our shocking performances in the cups.

Us under Keegan were years I remember vividly and I love the man for what he did, but I'm under no illusion about the advantages he had compared to now. We were massive spenders once we got to the Premier League and the competition at the very top was basically 'beat Man United and you win the league'. The circumstances we had under Keegan not only don't exist but aren't financially possible now. Howe did something in much more difficult circumstances that no Newcastle manager pre-moon landing has achieved. Keegan was the architect of the blueprint for the club, but Howe is it's most successful and triumph-over-adversity engineer of that blueprint by a mile.

I think I'd say it's more cutting the most successful Newcastle manager in our lifetimes some slack when there are obvious mitigating circumstances, outside of those circumstances he's been nothing but overwhelmingly successful, and the proposed alternative is empty, reading-tea-leaves level "well someone out there must be better" rhetoric, with not a single example given of that happening that is worth anyone hanging their hat on.

Not a weird example at all. Villa were in our position this time last year and recovered, they spent and loaned big in January, then went on a mad run from March to May. The only thing it really proves is that you can be in a terrible position and recover (Villa were 12th at the end of February), that you can buy yourself out of a hole with signings and that being in those situations doesn't necessarily mean that the manager is to blame.

Because I was responding to a post from someone who said they were "sick of hearing about PSR" as if it's not an issue when it is. Let's say PSR doesn't restrict us from doing better right now, if the ultimate aim is to get to the very top, and we've spent it all on getting better, how do you then also go again to get to the very top? That's the dichotomy, and that dichotomy only exists for the likes of us because of PSR and doesn't apply to the teams that are already at the top who can spend and spend again. Honestly man.

I tend not to lean on blaming PSR, but if you're comparing him with the best managers out there, who also don't have any real PSR restraints to speak of, it becomes incredibly relevant. Guardiola was given £500m worth of new players this year and still complains that he doesn't have enough. Meanwhile we've spent £400m ish in 5 years absolutely maxing out our PSR limit. The playing field isn't anywhere near level and in those circumstances it's fair enough to blame it in part for why we're not firing on all cylinders.

He's a legend, it's hard seeing him fading when you know what he was capable of.

Wish you'd followed this up with "by playing Neave and Shahar"

Hi It's all still in the post.

And then took most of the criticism for it, which is what pisses me off the most. He should have got nothing but praise for stepping in when needed imo, but he hasn't even had the luxury of being cut any slack.

We have absolutely no idea how good Andrews or his like actually are. We have very limited evidence often in extremely favourable circumstances, that often pale in comparison to Howe's achievements. The whole Glasner thing perfectly sums it up imo. An obviously very good manager, now managing in difficult circumstances and the results have suffered - suddenly no one's mentioning him. It doesn't mean it's a reflection on him and his ability, it just happens, same as it did for 80% of Villa’s season under Emery last year, same as it is for us now.

Absolutely no chance Haydn, Arsenal fans were baying for Arteta's blood at the end of 21/22, I remember it vividly. It's subjective. The circumstances have shown that we're incapable of managing/balancing multiple games a week regularly. What you choose to attribute the blame to for that is the subjective part. You've chosen Howe and I haven't.

He didn't start playing CF full time until 2 seasons ago and a lot of his appearances overall are as sub. His 'per 90' stats are around 1 in 2, with last season being 1 in 1.5.

...Howe at Newcastle? Half of them are flavours of the week and Arsenal fans all wanted Arteta out after his first 3 seasons of 8th, 8th, 5th, before it finally clicked. You've made my point for me about patience there tbh.

Pre injury (around 1 in 2) Sorry, thought that was obvious considering that was the point I was making.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I totally agree that people shouldn't be expected to name players when someone says "who should we get then?", but that it absolutely applies to managers. Of the managers I've seen suggested they've either shown or proved nothing more than Howe has, and/or they're fantastical.