Erikse

I think we had the same last year.

"You don't just suddenly heal" - Ødegaard when pulling out from Norway, right before starting twice a week for Arsenal

I don't really know myself, but look at the last discussion in the NUFC specific FFP/PSR discussion thread. It's apparently about amortization from old transfers and wages being about even with our income, and that we would be relying on selling if we got Guehi in the summer. Also there were some talk of us actually bidding less for Guehi than what was reported. Didn't someone inside the club state that? Don't remember tbh. Not sure how much of this is true.

And apparfently we will still have problems in january, seemingly having to sell if we buy.

True, but Howe isn't known to rotate all that much either. He often prefers to stick with the same team. A bad performance could ofcourse change it.

My use of "currently" was meant to mean right now. I guess next weekend will be quite telling. He might make changes after a performance like that.

Howe currently prefers Willock, Joelinton, Bruno and Longstaff over him in midfield. Him getting 30 minutes each game is indicates that it was a bad singing. It can still change, but it's hard to not lose patience. Judging by price and wages he's supposed to be a key player.

You're pretending to not get my point. Ofcourse his skill level matters to some degree, but do you think paying £55m + £200k per week for our 5th choice midfielder is great business? Because in your post you made it sound like a fantastic signing, which atm just looks silly.

I also thought that Tonali was a brilliant signing at the time, even though I didn't know much about him. His actual skill level doesn't really matter though, as long as he's basically being used as a £55m squad player, rumoured to be on like £200.000 per week. I don't doubt that he's our highest paid player, most definelty in the top 3. He's our 4th (or even 5th) choice in the midfield atm.

The idea last summer was to get us ready for CL, but it didn't work that way because of all the injuries. In hindsight it's fair to argue that it might have been short sighted to buy expensive players for squad depth, but we were ofcourse very unlucky with Barnes and Tonali. With our current situation those signings doesn't look that great anymore. Maybe there was a bigger picture to be seen last summer.

With PSR very few clubs can spend £150m per year though. So it is a lot in this day and age. And obviously that has had a huge impact for us, both on this years and the next few windows spending power.

Not that it means that much, but transfermarkt has our squad value at 7th, despite having an ageing squad. The thing is our weakness, accoring to many atleast, was supposed to be squad depth. We have some very good key players that most other teams don't have. We're not in Europe, and we don't have that many injuries currently. So this is supposed to suit us perfectly, as we can field most of our key players each week without suffering too much from fatigue or having to use too many mediocre backups.

I'm a bit surprised about it myself. I thought he was great going forward at the start of last season (from the right), but haven't seen that much of it since he got back in to play regularly this year. He's a completely different player than Trippier, seems almost like the polar opposite atm.

Looks weird this way, on this graph it looks like we started the season very well performance wise, and then dropped off. But since it's a 10 game average, then the first few games of this season are hugely impacted by the final games of last season. So the reality of this season is the other way around from what the graph is showing.

I don't think Trippier will be the same at all, which is no surprise given that he's 34. It's just that the last couples of season prove how much we used to rely on Trippier.

Trippier was literally atleast half of our attacking play when we were at our best. Probably more like 75% tbh, like our play revolved around him. I think that's the biggest factor of them all in terms of not being able to reach the same heights. It makes you wonder what we would've been without him in our best times since the takeover.

I think giving Gordon a long run in the team looks disastrous atm, but he's still starting. I wish we gave Tonali the same chance, but I thinw we don't simply because he's a new guy. We don't give many second chances to newer players.

I think he helped us change the game against Wolves (I think it was) and Forest after he came on. We were poor in those first halves, and were playing very well in the second. Even when he does well from the bench he's just seen as someone who does well against tired legs.. Not easy to change the game when you come on, you can't do much more when you're not starting.

That's what I'm wondering aswell. I mean, he was in the starting 11 at the start of last season, but he got dropped after a while since he wasn't performing. Imo it's now a case as to whether he should be starting him, or whether he shouldn't have pushed for us to sign him in the first place. He might be feeling like he got that signing wrong atm (even when ignoring the ban). That said, I think he might start against Palace

I've already made these points in a different thread, but every indication points to Howe wanting him. Him saying that they spent so much on him because he himself watched him at Milan and loved what he saw, starting him from day one, us generally going after players he liked, and so on.

Next one going to be a huge one.. If we bounce back with a win then we're still doing fine. Another bad performance against Palace would be really concerning (actively avoiding the word "worrying" for obvious reasons).

Just the idea that we would have the board sign a £55m player that Howe didn't want himself, and to then think that Howe would still start him nearly every game right after, even when he was from a different league, when he wasn't even a Howe signing. All of that while having a fully fit squad. Howe himself saying that we signed him because he himself loved the way he plays comes on top of all of that, but that doesn't mean anything either. That's some next level brain gymnastics, I'm kind of impressed.

Allright, stay ignorant then. I'll leave the quote a second time, just in case. “We pursued him for a long, long time, paid a big fee for him because I fell in love watching him play the game last year."

I also think he should start, so maybe you are misunderstanding me. I was saying that Howe wanted him badly enough for us to pay £55m for him. So therefore either he should start him, or in the case where he doesn't fit into our system etc, then that's also on him as he was the one who wanted him.

You don't even believe yourself that it wasn't a Howe signing at this point. You're arguing just for the sake of arguing now, so this is pointless.