DC Magpie

I like optimism. What would you say is the main difference you see between Isak and Woltemade that might prevent Nick from excelling in Eddie's 4-3-3? Lack of ability to press, perhaps a lack of striker's "shoot first" mentality? What was it (if anything) that allowed Isak to thrive in Year 2 and can we replicate it? Or am I missing the point altogether? WRT to the shooting thing, it's odd because if you look at his 2024-25 goals at Stuttgart, quite a few were from distance and they looked effortlessly struck. Nick's mental space needs a successful summer here in the States.

It would take a very good (ridiculous) offer for me to sell Barnes. He has great instincts and runs so well into space that if we stick with a 4-2-3-1, I would love him running off Woltemade all year. But if the plan is to go back to a full time 4-3-3, then sell Ramsey, Barnes and Woltemade, then play Elanga and Bruno in those spots, as it won't matter.

I wasn't sure where to put this and I've never been to Hull, but this made me laugh.

You realize you’re on a NUFC forum, right? Emotional masochism.

I think I read somewhere that he said in an interview afterwards he thought he'd overkicked it too high when it first left his foot. Heh. Course the next time he tried to roof the PK he hit the bar.

I'm not sure if you meant that as a joke, but I thought the same thing about Bayern when they whiffed on Gordon. They are clearly not at all the same player, but they were interested in him last year. I'd have to think Nick would be thrilled at that prospect, but there's no way they'd pay what we need them to in order to make it feasible, plus there's the whole Kane thing.

I'm hoping this is where we are headed, but not sure Eddie can bring himself to do it. With a more manageable schedule and the imperative that he wins early and often to avoid the dreaded November sacking, I'm guessing he'll stick with his tried and true. BUT... I know it was a sample size of 1, but the front three midfield against WHU of Ramsey, Woltemade, and Barnes was poetry. No clue why he buggered up the lineup for Fulham, but a default, consistent lineup with those three and Bruno and someone similar (if Tonali leaves) in a double pivot type of role would be my dream. Could Miley play CM consistently (barring injury)? I feel like he could but you'd definitely need a Plan B with him.

Friend of mine (West Ham fan, bless his heart) is hearing rumors of Summerville to Tyneside. He wants out of WHU and fee would be ~25-35M. Take it with a grain of salt.

I'd have been happy to bilk Liverpool again.

I think we agree, but this is why I don't trust Eddie to be the one to steer the offseason. "Hey, what we need is more players who can't play a possession-based style. Get me Usain Bolt on Line 1." That's the evolution that needs to happen, or at least begin to happen. It won't happen so long as Eddie is here.

Not completely sure but FWIW, Transfermarkt has him at 35M. Summerville (who I also like) is 30M. There are some decent players to consider on the relegated teams.

I suppose there is a chance Gordon could have a stellar WC, but there is an equally decent chance he gets overshadowed by Rashford all tournament. Get the farking deal done, sign Bowen for half the money and let's get on with it.

Cheers. That's fair. I concede that the team is not deep enough to endure the rigors of a 58 game season. But you're also kinda proving my point. With the demands of a 58 game schedule on the visible horizon, why on earth would you play exclusively a high press where all our players do is run around in circles at full speed? It's not as though Eddie didn't know we were in Europe this year. I've said before, his style may be better suited for a 38 game schedule, but when you lack depth as we do (never mind our age) the players don't hold up over time in that system under an expanded schedule. And Eddie's repetitive team selection (no matter the game or competition) added to the fatigue and injuries. The second tie of Qarabag is the most egregious example of this, but he did it all year. I don't think anyone would argue we do much better in the high press when we have fewer games - hence the up again, down again nature of our recent final results. But that also makes me think Eddie sticks with the 4-3-3, and supports the point I was trying to make, which is it's better to move on from Nick now. He has no position. I'd argue our habit of conceding late isn't something that came only late in the season due to fatigue, but I'd have to go back and look.

I agree, assuming Eddie is going to continue with the 4-3-3 (which I suspect he will). The agonizing thing for me is that we saw such a glimpse of what might be possible in a new formation with a lineup that many of us have been screaming to see all season (only to have him revert to form with Willock and Murphy the next week). That 4-2-3-1 has to be the approach going forward, but I don't think it will be. And if it's the same old tired 4-3-3 again, then Nick has no natural home and we should get what we can for him and move on - best for all involved (especially him I suspect). But I don't expect much from Nick in the WC tbh. His form for us was so bad with all the positional experimenting he must have fallen to at least second, perhaps third choice for Germany. But it goes deeper than that. Bruno literally quit against Fulham, Gordon and perhaps Tonali are gone. Barnes has to be asking himself what he's done to constantly be benched in favor of do-nothings. Ramsey must also feel he has been benched for Eddie's favorites too often this year. Lewis too at the end - might have cost him a WC spot to boot. But if we alienate and/or lose all our gifted players and Eddie is out at Christmas, where are we then? I think we need to bite the bullet and just address the managerial situation now. A manager who can't (or won't) adapt his tactics to play to the strengths of his best (not his favorite) players will only take you so far. I suspect we've seen the extent of how far that is. Not discounting what he's accomplished here, but I don't see how it gets any better.

Is Trafford out of the picture for us?

Fair points all. Cheers. I'll go back and find your prior post(s) on the matter. However, "choosing success" seems a pretty fundamental motivator. Chasing money is also understandable (to a lesser extent once you're already filthy rich), but who among us hasn't left a job where we felt incapable of success? One hopes to leave on good terms and having done the right and honorable things, but staying in a situation where you can never hope to be successful (however you define it) is counter to millions of years of evolution. Never underestimate any individual's capacity to act in their own self-interest, and you'll never go far wrong.

He literally laid down and quit. I think it speaks volumes about Eddie having lost the confidence of the players. Bruno, Woltemade, Tonali, Gordon, Barnes, Lewis, Ramsey - they all have room for complaint of Eddie not putting them in the best situation to be successful this season. Couple that with no Europe next year - why would they not all be on the phone with their agents telling them to find a better situation for them? I realize it's not that simplistic, but that's the state of the club right now.

After letting the disappointment of Sunday's shitshow percolate for a day, I am still Eddie Out. And here's why: 1) Injuries played a part this season to be sure, especially with Bruno, but if your only answer is "hey, let's play the 6'7" guy there", then your roster is ill constructed or (my hunch) you are so blindly wedded to your 4-3-3 that you can't adjust your scheme to the players you have available. Even after all the excuses were gone ("we have too many games, no time on the practice pitch, etc, etc, etc"), he came out with the same shit that hadn't been working all year. He didn't adjust until the last few games, and we saw one flash of brilliance v WHam and then reverted to crap against Fulham (where his team selection was once again maddening), which raises my second concern with Eddie: 2) The lack of effort against Fulham reinforces for me that Eddie has very much lost the team. Bruno literally laid down and quit. There comes a point when even a great coach's message gets stale if the message and tactics never change even after those tactics stop working. And once you've lost confidence, you can't get it back. He had a chance to implement a change after the international break, but didn't until the very end. Which leads to my next concern: 3) I'd argue nobody who fancies themselves a technically gifted player wants to play exclusively in a 4-3-3 high press. The 4-3-3 has its place, but I'm not confident Eddie has it in him to truly embrace the change in approach we need to attract those players, who will look elsewhere if they have options. It would be malpractice for an agent to turn a gifted player into a track athlete running around in circles like Usain Bolt. In my view, this is why we whiffed on our top six striker targets last summer, many of whom chose to be backups elsewhere. This leads to my doomsday scenario: 4) If we allow Eddie to have a voice in constructing the roster this summer and he is then out by Christmas, we are rightly, completely and truly fucked. Better to move on now and let a new manager construct a strategy around the key players we have (assuming they all aren't already on the phone with their agents to get them the hell out of here), and to add / subtract from the roster in furtherance of that strategy. Erect a statue for Eddie next to Shearer's if you like, but if we aspire to be consistently more than we are today, we cannot be afraid to change. Fin.

Completely agree. It is nonsense and nobody here will be watching it either. Come on - Granny Madonna??? Poor Canada got nothing in the show for hosting, and although most Americans will firmly tell you Shakira is Mexican (because everyone from south of here is, you know) the Mexicans got shut out too. Also, the grass is going to get torn to shit by all the equipment they haul on and off. The vast majority of American stadiums have artificial turf (including MetLife) so it'll be a temporary grass field that will already be knackered by the end of the tournament even before the tonnes (heh) of crap is piled on it. Halftime shows in college (American) football here are great fun, however, and I will die on the hill defending the most American of all game day traditions - the flyover.

It probably also stands to reason we should try to refrain from shitting all over our new players if they are slow to adjust and acclimate - especially those new to the rigor and challenges of EPL. It's not always easy I know. I wonder if many (or any) players read these boards.

That fluidity was beautiful to see. I hope we play it the same against Fulham to see if it works as well against (slightly) better competition.

Some of these longer strikes look pretty effortlessly well struck. No idea why he doesn't pull the trigger more from distance. Maybe next year he'll be in more of a comfort zone and a little more selfish.

Trust me I'm no Wissa apologist, but he thrived in primarily at 4-2-3-1 at Brentford. Seems a much friendlier formation for 9s than ours.

Nick started 17 of 38 league games up front I believe. We can argue what "most" means, but playing up there didn't much work for Gordon or anyone else until Osula got hot (though I'd argue we haven't been in the 4-3-3 for much of that hot streak). On that note, we'll see if Osula can be that 9, but his hot streak as the main striker is a bit reminiscent of Nick's hot start, no? I'm afraid defenses have our 4-3-3 figured out and will soon figure Osula out, as they likely did NW in that formation. We need to adapt. i want the same lineup to go vs Fulham. Let's see what we have, make up our minds what the future looks like and if it's the same old 4-3-3, then get what we can for Woltemade and move on. He has no home in that formation.

I'd add to that mix the sheer number of games you're asking those aging players to play that high intensity press. To Mills & Boon's point, the 4-3-3 has worked for us in years past, but maybe most effectively during years we weren't in Europe. It may also be part of the reason we can't qualify for Europe in consecutive years - unless you have incredible depth (narrator's voice: "we don't"), it appears to be better suited to a 38 game season, not to a 58 game season.