Jump to content

Eddie Howe


InspectorCoarse

Recommended Posts

Guest HTT II

de la Pena was the man…

 

We were linked with both him and Pep. 
 

Pep was massively underrated, such a cool player, but not a great player IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Italy have a good history of turning top players into managers, Ancelotti, Capello, Mancini.

 

No conversation about great players and top managers is complete without Cruyff. He basically set the template for a lot of future managers, Guardiola a prime example.

 

I wonder if there's something we can learn as a country as our record of top players to good managers isn't great in comparison to others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
10 minutes ago, Conjo said:

 

Keegan was a great manager for us, but it's difficult to argue he was a great manager since he didn't really accomplish much outside of his first management job with us. Listening to the Howey interview that was posted on here recently I was laughing when he was answering questions about how Keegan was in training and during team talks ahead of games. My impression was that they mostly played 5/7/11 a side games during training and pre-game preparations were basically him picking a team and telling them to go out and excite the fans. Doesn't exactly scream high level coaching :lol:

Keegan when he become our manager, was a one off in that he did absolutely everything, a throw back to decades before where the manager was the manager, trainer, scout, physician, everything. That team of ours under him too, we were pressing from the front in the second division and played with high up the pitch full-backs, with no defensive midfielder and a centre-back (Albert) who would basically be an extra midfielder for us that’s how high he often played. We played a style not seen before and took both leagues by storm and with it Europe when we battered Antwerp and Bilbao before losing on away goals. LFC used to press from the front when he played for them well before it become a modern thing (its not and never has been). KK adopted everything he could from his time as a youngster, his time at LFC and with England and with Hamburg. He was a pioneer at the time, a one off, he lacked the trophies, but his teams, how they played and his recruitment, man management and ethos was a breath of fresh air to the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, HTT II said:

Keegan when he become our manager, was a one off in that he did absolutely everything, a throw back to decades before where the manager was the manager, trainer, scout, physician, everything. That team of ours under him too, we were pressing from the front in the second division and played with high up the pitch full-backs, with no defensive midfielder and a centre-back (Albert) who would basically be an extra midfielder for us that’s how high he often played. We played a style not seen before and took both leagues by storm and with it Europe when we battered Antwerp and Bilbao before losing on away goals. LFC used to press from the front when he played for them well before it become a modern thing (its not and never has been). KK adopted everything he could from his time as a youngster, his time at LFC and with England and with Hamburg. He was a pioneer at the time, a one off, he lacked the trophies, but his teams, how they played and his recruitment, man management and ethos was a breath of fresh air to the game.

I agree with what you're saying but I wonder how big a role Arthur Cox played on the training ground under Keegan? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II

KK - You defend from the front, if they don’t have the ball they can’t score, if we do, how many can we get? Score more than the opposition and you win the game. It sounds simple and it is really, but to play how we did, the players he bought and improved, takes skill and he understood football in its purist sense more than most, like a Cruyff. He didn’t need modern (today) elements. He signed good players, man managed them expertly, created a great team spirit, and had a simple philosophy which is the core principles of the game.

 

 

Edited by HTT II

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
3 minutes ago, macphisto said:

I agree with what you're saying but I wonder how big a role Arthur Cox played on the training ground under Keegan? 

From my understanding our training consisted of small 5-a-side games, lots of keep ball, shooting and crossing drills and that’s about it. Which KK basically controlled and even played in. Cox and co were more there to give him an ear to talk to, for their wisdom and experience, bear in mind he was a rookie. He dictated every aspect of NUFC and was probably too stubborn in the end. Lawrenson come in as a defensive coach to placate the media, but has been on record saying he basically did fuck all at NUFC as KK took charge of everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II

KK even massaged players when on the treatment table and gave them his own personal dietary info from his Hamburg days, he also scouted mostly every player we signed personally and was in on most of the contract/signing negotiations, from Cole to Shearer and even Darren Huckerby. When he first took over, the club couldn’t afford Terry Mac’s wages so he paid for him out his own pocket and even told SJH if the club went down, he’d buy his shares, become the owner and IIRC Cox would become our manager in division three. When he managed England’s under 21s he told the board, get me Robbie Fowler, we tried, but LFC said fuck off. He wasn’t after Shearer, the board come to him and said would you fancy Shearer and he obviously said aye, anyone who is a top player I want. And we were in the market for any and every top player available, some who obviously were not even. He also wanted Macmanaman from LFC!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest HTT II
Just now, Conjo said:

Feel like I've read these posts from you a thousand times before HTT :lol: I agree he was a great manager - for us.

Ha ha aye, I get carried away when it comes to KK, I just love the man and I feel right now we have a similar bloke in charge of us. Not quite as charismatic, but like KK a workaholic and who knows the simple principles of the game, hard work, good players, good training, good character and fun. Howe brings with him the modernity of the game, however, and that will be the difference for us going forward. KK was stubborn, played one way only, we go all out to win and that’s the best way to win which it was back in the day, we lost the title by a few points, conceding 4 goals more than the then 1-0 to Man Utd lot. I do genuinely believe, however, in Howe, he deeply shares KK’s core principles and philosophy but KK 2.0?

Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Conjo said:

 

Keegan was a great manager for us, but it's difficult to argue he was a great manager since he didn't really accomplish much outside of his first management job with us. Listening to the Howey interview that was posted on here recently I was laughing when he was answering questions about how Keegan was in training and during team talks ahead of games. My impression was that they mostly played 5/7/11 a side games during training and pre-game preparations were basically him picking a team and telling them to go out and excite the fans. Doesn't exactly scream high level coaching :lol:

Depends what you equate with high level/top quality coaching and leadership? Getting lost in techniques and tactics does not necessarily equate to being a quality coach/leader. Keegan was a high performing manager at the top two English divisions and England manager. He pitched what he did out of the Shankly book more than the Paisley or modern technobabble coaching manuals, and he was fucking great at it in my opinion. He knew people, let them play, and they (by and large…) would run through walls for him. I think he felt he fell short, at the highest level, but I don’t agree with him. If all the England players had the work effort, fitness, desire to win, and plain old ability he had. His team would have flourished. He didn’t have them enough/the strength of relationship to lead in the way he was great at leading. In my opinion, obvs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the whole managerial front I'm taking the view that trying to compare managers from one era to those of another is like trying to mix oil and water - it's a waste of time.

The ethics of management up to a point, and the period 1992 - 1995 is where things started to change - were a whole lot different to those since.

 

The 'old' style, was as people have stated, pick the best 11, go out there and play interesting football - doesn't matter about the result.

But since the initial SKY era, things are now much more competitive, as in there is much more to loose, this being £'s and millions of them.

 

There has been much more of a focus on style, as in how to the opposition play, and how can we 'beat them', hence all of the formation switching, player rotation etc etc.

 

Yes, KK was a good manager, and Yes, Eddie is a good manager, but you can't compare the two - water and oil - as I see it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when Eddie came in, there was a certain section of the media stating we'd regret not going for Gerrard? 

 

Not only have they been proven unbelievably wrong, but just even thinking about the idea makes me laugh. Howe has got us 6 points above Villa having both come in during the same week, despite them having a 6 point headstart, that's with Villa having a better and more fit squad of players, we'd be in Everton's position with him in charge. 

 

Recruitment would have been a laugh too, can you pictures Gerrard doing the hard hours and becoming the defacto DoF like Howe has, the difference between the two is utterly stark.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 54 said:

Remember when Eddie came in, there was a certain section of the media stating we'd regret not going for Gerrard

 

Not only have they been proven unbelievably wrong, but just even thinking about the idea makes me laugh. Howe has got us 6 points above Villa having both come in during the same week, despite them having a 6 point headstart, that's with Villa having a better and more fit squad of players, we'd be in Everton's position with him in charge. 

 

Recruitment would have been a laugh too, can you pictures Gerrard doing the hard hours and becoming the defacto DoF like Howe has, the difference between the two is utterly stark.

Lampard too. No mention of it since, funnily enough - it's almost like they know nothing, print shite and then pretend they didn't

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Conjo said:

 

Keegan was a great manager for us, but it's difficult to argue he was a great manager since he didn't really accomplish much outside of his first management job with us. Listening to the Howey interview that was posted on here recently I was laughing when he was answering questions about how Keegan was in training and during team talks ahead of games. My impression was that they mostly played 5/7/11 a side games during training and pre-game preparations were basically him picking a team and telling them to go out and excite the fans. Doesn't exactly scream high level coaching :lol:

 

Pretty harsh. He managed two other clubs and delivered exactly what was expected with both (promotions). He got City to 9th in the PL - their highest finish in ten years - right after winning Division One title having outscored the rest of the league by 30-40 goals. 

 

Obviously his methods in today's context would be totally outdated but he was a clearly a talented manager in his time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Pretty harsh. He managed two other clubs and delivered exactly what was expected with both (promotions). He got City to 9th in the PL - their highest finish in ten years - right after winning Division One title having outscored the rest of the league by 30-40 goals. 

 

Obviously his methods in today's context would be totally outdated but he was a clearly a talented manager in his time. 

 

It probably sounded harsher than intended. There's no doubt he did well other places as well, but I wouldn't say he did great (ref. for context earlier discussions above on good vs great). Fulham had just been taken over and he had a PL budget in division 2. Man City had just been relegated, retained most of their PL players bar Paul Dickov and added Pearce, Bernabia, Jihai Sun, Macken, Niclas Jensen, Berkovic and a few others and contrary to most relegated teams had a massive net spend. While the scoring record was amazing, automatic promotion was the minimum expectation. First season back to the PL they got Anelka, Schmeicel and Foe so in terms of their squad 9th isn't really that impressive. Good, not great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, 54 said:

Remember when Eddie came in, there was a certain section of the media stating we'd regret not going for Gerrard? 

 

Not only have they been proven unbelievably wrong, but just even thinking about the idea makes me laugh. Howe has got us 6 points above Villa having both come in during the same week, despite them having a 6 point headstart, that's with Villa having a better and more fit squad of players, we'd be in Everton's position with him in charge. 

 

Recruitment would have been a laugh too, can you pictures Gerrard doing the hard hours and becoming the defacto DoF like Howe has, the difference between the two is utterly stark.

 

The media bandwagoning for both Gerrard and Lampard is so dumb. Just because they were both good, high profile players doesn't give them a divine right to be good coaches. They've both been given jobs (Lampard especially) way beyond their ability based purely on their name value.

 

Imagine some average League 2 level midfielder retires, then the first job they're given is a Championship team aiming for promotion. They fail to achieve that goal, and so immediately get given the Chelsea job. They fail there as well, and proceed to be linked with every PL vacancy going, before it's decided they're the ones to save a team from relegation. That team goes on to actually get worse and drop further down the league, only for the media to blame the bloke that was there previously and absolve this unknown former League 2 midfielder of any blame at all. That sounds mental, yet replace 'former league 2 midfielder' with 'Frank Lampard' and its exactly what it playing out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no more than a couple dozen truly great players at any time so that metric is too high. But the likes of Guardiola, Simeone, Conte, Mancini, Enrique and Ancelotti were competing at the elite end of the game as players. National caps and tournaments, won multiple leagues, cups and continental competitions.  
 

England / Britain are rarely producing good managers at all so it’s difficult to talk. 
 

Moyes

Potter

Howe

Southgate

Hodgson

 

probably the top 5 (no order). 6-10 you’d really struggle and would want to include Big Sam as an active manager.  Brucey might even make top 10 due to the promotions.  Hughton certainly.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Hughton gets a lot of praise for the job he did here, but overall he's generally a pretty poor manager imo.

 

Looking at that West Ham team, there's no reason why we can't challenge them player for player next season to be honest.

 

 

Edited by Menace

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Menace said:

I know Hughton gets a lot of praise for the job he did here, but overall he's generally a pretty poor manager imo.

 

Looking at that West Ham team, there's no reason why we can't challenge them player for player next season to be honest.

 

 

 

 

I was flicking between the West Ham/Frankfurt and Leicester/Roma matches with interest last night. Watching the CL semi's is fun, but the Europa/Conference semis were interesting to watch as realistically we could pull pretty close to West Ham & Leicester with a good Summer window. Teams like City, Liverpool and Madrid are long-term aims that are likely still 5+ seasons away. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Menace said:

I know Hughton gets a lot of praise for the job he did here, but overall he's generally a pretty poor manager imo.

 

Looking at that West Ham team, there's no reason why we can't challenge them player for player next season to be honest.

 

 

 

 

 

3 PL promotions. Kept 2 of them up. The clubs he's managed have been his level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...