Eddie Howe

[Theregulars]

15 minutes ago, HaydnNUFC said:

Eddie Howe can be criticised for in game decisions that he makes as well as team performances without it meaning that people want him out or don't think that he's good enough. I haven't read much of the last few pages but I think criticism of a performance or setup or substitution gets conflated with being against him or wanting him gone or not thinking he's up to it for whatever reason. 

 

He's been absolutely phenomenal and done a job so fantastic it's pretty much unprecedented. I've always been a fan of him, remember calling for him even pre takeover (as if he'd even have came then, but you kna), was fully behind him in the stickier early days when we had 1 win in 21 or something and still am fully behind him now. He's took us into the CL for the first time in my conscious Newcastle supporting life immediately following a season which we started with Stephen Roger in the dugout and battling against relegation. Unbelievable. On top of that he's made us into one of the best teams in the country playing a high tempo, nice on the eye style of football. I love him and he's made me as proud as I've ever been of being a Newcastle supporter, Saudi baggage aside.

 

But Sunday was poor. A goal and a man up after 25 minutes and we not only end up not winning the match but losing it, it was canny shit. Against a team we finished above of last season and a few expect us to be mixing it with this season. You'd hope that he'll learn from that. Disappointment will also always come from that in spite of the bigger picture. I still am now and probably will be until 5:29pm on Saturday. That's part of being a football fan and that's fine.

 

This x a million.

[KaKa]

2 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

You have no idea what my expectations are - you've never asked me about them and we've never had a conversation about them! You've literally decided what they are after extrapolating them from one comment or opinion. It's actually - sincerely, genuinely - how children view the world. 

 

My expectations for that game in the situation were that we would see a lead out with 15 minutes against 10 men. I don't see anything unreasonable in there. 

 

Right, of course. I'm just a child. Perfect.

[Theregulars]

3 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Right, of course. I'm just a child. Perfect.

Genuinely - are you? It would explain so, so much.

[Kid Icarus]

I would highly recommend against taking the views of fans on social media as representative of anything.  Surely this is a lesson that should have been learned a long time ago? The Twitter football fan (NUFC or other) isn't a fan in the traditional sense, they're stereotypically entitled, whiny dickheads who prefer the 'winning' of spending money in the transfer market and the 'winning' of goading other fans over the traditional notion of winning where you enjoy watching your team win football matches. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[KaKa]

2 hours ago, Theregulars said:

 

When you watch us regularly and in detail, you see a team with no fear who outrun, outmuscle, outduel etc others. My question is, therefore, why does that disappear (in whole or in part) in some high-pressure matches / matches against the better sides? Clearly, against squads which are more expensive than ours and longer in the tooth as established teams than ours, we can perform this way (Manchester United at home, Spurs home and away, Manchester City home last year) - so what I don't understand is twhy, in certain matches, that identity / culture / ethos etc goes missing. In my opinion, it went missing in the last two matches under instruction from the manager to some extent (we were so reserved and timid in both games). It went missing in the cup final because, in my view, the occasion was too big for the manage and squad. 

 

So you say you don't understand why we look different against better teams in big matches, because in your view we should just go out there with the same approach we had against Villa yeah? Is that realistic and reasonable to you?

 

In fact you then go as far as to say we actually look reserved and timid against these teams, and in the case of the final the occasion was too big for the manager and players (None of this is true by the way). Is that a fair reflection of our performances or an over reaction and over exaggeration?

 

In my opinion you have completely lost sight of where we actually are as a team in comparison to the teams you are referring to and have also lost sight of how well the team has performed under this manager, including periods in the very matches you are referring to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by KaKa

[KaKa]

10 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

Genuinely - are you? It would explain so, so much.

 

Yes, I am.

[Maineblue]

59 minutes ago, 80 said:

This is the guy everyone was hammering and calling a troll because he said there was pressure on Howe to get a result against Liverpool, isn't it? Made ourselves look like dicks here, haven't we?

 

P.S. I don't really agree with you here. We had about as much of the game as Liverpool did against us - we just didn't put away our chances while they did. Your celebrations at the end of the game told their own story, it wasn't a comfortable night.

 

 

 

Fair enough @80 I respect and thanks for the reply.

[Jaqen]

We sat off City more than other sides as they want to bait you into the press so they can play around it you or launch a long ball to Haaland who's isolated against one CB. They absolutely destroyed Arsenal doing that when they tried to play their usual game last season. 

 

In the end we lost to a wonder goal against the best side in Europe. The main dissapointment with that game was how sloppy we were when we had the ball. Lots of poor touches and passes, but you can't point the finger at Eddie for that. 

[Theregulars]

18 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

So you say you don't understand why we look different against better teams in big matches, because in your view we should just go out there with the same approach we had against Villa yeah? Is that realistic and reasonable to you?

 

In fact you then go as far as to say we actually look reserved and timid against these teams, and in the case of the final the occasion was too big for the manager and players (None of this is true by the way). Is that a fair reflection of our performances or an over reaction and over exaggeration?

 

In my opinion you have completely lost sight of where we actually are as a team in comparison to the teams you are referring to and have also lost sight of how well the team has performed under this manager, including periods in the very matches you are referring to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, and at no point have I advocated for that (i.e. repeat the formula against Aston Villa). Yet again, it's a conclusion you've drawn on my behalf to try and suit a flimsy and over-generalised argument. 

 

I'll try and explain again - essentially, I have two questions / criticisms: 

• If we have seen visual evidence that we are able to impose ourselves on and overwhelm bigger teams in some matches, why have we not been able to do the same, or do to so to the same extent, in other matches? 
• Leading on from question 1, might it be a flaw in how the manager approaches those games? 

The answer to the second question may very well be your answer: the better teams negated us on the day, worked us out etc. I just think, in all the circumstances, it's reasonable to ask whether there is room for improvement when it comes to his strategy / attitude etc against bigger teams and on playing in big occasions? In my view, there is now a big enough sample size (it's still a small sample size) to ask that question. Why does that entitle you to dismiss that opinion as legitimate or entitled? In my view you dismiss it because you are, for whatever reason, unable or reluctant to engage in the topic with any real nuance or detail. It comes across that everything must be A or B, black or white etc, for you (which, again, is childlike).

 

I haven't lost sight of where we are: we overachieved last year and don't have a top 4 squad on paper (and certainly didn't last year). Nonetheless, we have overachieved, and the product of said overachievement is that we are now in our present circumstances with a new context, or at least a developed context. Against that background, I ask again: might the manager have approached those games differently? Might he have been overawed by the occasion? My opinion is that, yes, there is a plausible argument in favour of both ideas. 

 

 

[Abacus]

2 hours ago, Maineblue said:

Good post except for one thing “City weren’t hanging on in the end and Pep wasn’t worried”  you guys had one tame effort shot on target in the whole game, you’re a bloody good side but you didn’t turn up at the Etihad.

 

And fair enough, I probably over-egged the hanging on part a bit there. I did feel that we'd played ourselves back into the game towards the end even if our efforts were a bit powder - puff in the end.

 

I think most teams go to the Emirates expecting a hiding especially us coming from where we've started from, and I agree that we showed too much respect rather than going for it, certainly in the first half. No question that you deserved to win it. I suppose my point is that this doesn't represent any fundamental problem with Howe, just something to take on the chin and learn from.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Abacus

[Chapo]

These limitations are to be expected from a Steve Bruce recommended manager. 

[Weezertron]

Eddie's coaching probably improves us 20-25%? Whenever we have poor game, it's probably the truest reflection of what our team's level is on paper, without the Eddie Factor.

 

We might lose more games this year due to our defence not being as water tight, but hopefully we end up winning more than we did last year, resulting in a higher points total (I hope).

 

 

 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Sempiternal said:

Robson’s time was up, but the replacement fucked us. 

 

Chelsea got Mourinho, Liverpool got Benitez, we got Souness.

[KaKa]

3 minutes ago, Theregulars said:

No, and at no point have I advocated for that (i.e. repeat the formula against Aston Villa). Yet again, it's a conclusion you've drawn on my behalf to try and suit a flimsy and over-generalised argument. 

 

I'll try and explain again - essentially, I have two questions / criticisms: 

• If we have seen visual evidence that we are able to impose ourselves on and overwhelm bigger teams in some matches, why have we not been able to do the same, or do to so to the same extent, in other matches? 
• Leading on from question 1, might it be a flaw in how the manager approaches those games? 

The answer to the second question may very well be your answer: the better teams negated us on the day, worked us out etc. I just think, in all the circumstances, it's reasonable to ask whether there is room for improvement when it comes to his strategy / attitude etc against bigger teams and on playing in big occasions? In my view, there is now a big enough sample size (it's still a small sample size) to ask that question. Why does that entitle you to dismiss that opinion as legitimate or entitled? In my view you dismiss it because you are, for whatever reason, unable or reluctant to engage in the topic with any real nuance or detail. It comes across that everything must be A or B, black or white etc, for you (which, again, is childlike).

 

I haven't lost sight of where we are: we overachieved last year and don't have a top 4 squad on paper (and certainly didn't last year). Nonetheless, we have overachieved, and the product of said overachievement is that we are now in our present circumstances with a new context, or at least a developed context. Against that background, I ask again: might the manager have approached those games differently? Might he have been overawed by the occasion? My opinion is that, yes, there is a plausible argument in favour of both ideas. 

 

 

 

Why can't we just overwhelm them for periods in every game, because we managed it in a game before? Because that's not how football works. No teams in the league consistently overwhelms the top teams game to game. In my opinion we have had good moments in all of the games even if we didn't necessarily overwhelm at points in all of them. We had the better chances against Liverpool yesterday, and against Man City in the second half, with a bit more composure at key moments we could have punished them.

 

At this point in time I do not see it as some flaw in the manager, and think it is way too soon for this sort of talk. He hasn't been in the job long enough, is still putting his team together and does not have the depth of options available to him that these teams have. We've lost to two top teams back to back early in the season before we've really even had a chance to get going while integrating a number of new players into the team and squad.

 

I can't help but feel folks are getting ahead of themselves.

 

[jackyboy]

Perhaps the players he selected didn't perform or do as well as he expected and he was forced into making changes he didn't think he'd have to make,

I just love the guy and have the utmost respect for him. He'll have gone over the video of that game a hundred times and that makes him special 

[Menace]

He's earned plenty of credit, it would take a lot for me to personally turn on him. Have no idea how people can be so quick to question a guy who has given us some of the best moments since SBR days all within the span of 18 months. We still have Ritchie/Dummett in our 25 squad team btw. Bad day in the office and he'll learn from it. I honestly don't think many managers in world football would have achieved what he did last season.

[Vinny Green Balls]

3 hours ago, Theregulars said:

I categorically disagree that it's the most important context needed. The most important contexts, for my money, are the context of how the team plays and the significant investment in the playing squad. Despite you phrasing it as fact, it's an opinion, and we differ. 

 

When you watch us regularly and in detail, you see a team with no fear who outrun, outmuscle, outduel etc others. My question is, therefore, why does that disappear (in whole or in part) in some high-pressure matches / matches against the better sides? Clearly, against squads which are more expensive than ours and longer in the tooth as established teams than ours, we can perform this way (Manchester United at home, Spurs home and away, Manchester City home last year) - so what I don't understand is twhy, in certain matches, that identity / culture / ethos etc goes missing. In my opinion, it went missing in the last two matches under instruction from the manager to some extent (we were so reserved and timid in both games). It went missing in the cup final because, in my view, the occasion was too big for the manage and squad. 

 

So, politely, calling people "willfully obtuse" and context-ignorant because they disagree with you is cheap and lazy in my view. I don't think Eddie Howe is faultless. I think he has done an excellent job but, when he does something or presides over or has some degree of responsibility for a situation in which the outcome is so obviously undesirable, is it not fair to ask a question or make a criticism? You come across as quite didactic: "if you don't agree with me then you're ignorant", essentially. 

It's not lazy. Your argument is flimsy and yet you are relentlessly going on about it. A few on here put it much better than I did, and until now, you absolutely ignored it. Until he has a squad on their level, it's ridiculous to criticize his mixed record against them. 

 

And I've said this many times before, but I find it particularly irritating when someone's defense is essentially, "It's a forum. We are allowed to have different opinions."  I find that it is often a sign that they have a pretty weak argument when they bust out the being oppressed card.

 

And I may come across as didactic, but you are coming across as if chatGPT just developed a shred of quasi-sentience.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2023 by Vinny Green Balls

[Matt1892]

I see it the opposite way in that there are some on here who see Howe and the club above criticism, it was only a week ago people were getting laid in to for having the audacity to say the transfer window hasn’t been 10/10.

 

As a manager he was given a huge amount of credit for the good work he has done since taking over the club; however the shambles that was the Liverpool result is on him.

 

 

[Vinny Green Balls]

2 hours ago, gbandit said:

While I agree with anyone calling out people who are being critical of Howe generally, I think in-game specifics are obviously fine to highlight. I think Howe himself would set us up differently against ten men if we were to replay the game as we did get complacent. Is Howe an amazing manager, yes, has he improved every player in the squad, yes. Will we win something with him if he’s here in two years, yes.

 

Kaka, I think you have too much of a tendency to generalise, “you lot” doesn’t really capture the fact that most of us on here have the same opinion that he’s amazing 

Thankfully, the lot he is referring to is something like 3 people right now, which is not too bad at all.  Making them out to be a significant number discredits the forum in my opinion.

[Vinny Green Balls]

6 minutes ago, Matt1892 said:

I see it the opposite way in that there are some on here who see Howe and the club above criticism, it was only a week ago people were getting laid in to for having the audacity to say the transfer window hasn’t been 10/10.

 

As a manager he was given a huge amount of credit for the good work he has done since taking over the club; however the shambles that was the Liverpool result is on him.

 

 

Many if not most of us have criticized him for the Liverpool match. I said that he fucked up about five time now. It's the fact two people have implied that we need a better manager, and the third is complaining about his mixed results against the very top teams. This is why we are excoriating them. I find it confounding that a few on here miss that and criticize us for worshipping Howe.

[andyc35i]

If Barnes makes the simple pass to Wilson for 2-0, the tactics and substitutions are a master stroke and Eddie is hailed as a king again. We obviously got some things tactically wrong in the game that cost us, but I know that players and staff we’ve now got at our club will learn from this and will go again 

[Matt1892]

12 minutes ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

Many if not most of us have criticized him for the Liverpool match. I said that he fucked up about five time now. It's the fact two people have implied that we need a better manager, and the third is complaining about his mixed results against the very top teams. This is why we are excoriating them. I find it confounding that a few on here miss that and criticize us for worshipping Howe.

I haven’t read through the whole thread but there are extremes on both sides.

 

Most sane people sit in the middle ground where he rightly gets both praise for doing well and criticism when he makes mistakes.

 

He is not infallible and time will tell if he has the ability to match where the owner’s ambitions are.

[Vinny Green Balls]

1 minute ago, Matt1892 said:

I haven’t read through the whole thread but there are extremes on both sides.

 

Most sane people sit in the middle ground where he rightly gets both praise for doing well and criticism when he makes mistakes.

 

He is not infallible and time will tell if he has the ability to match where the owner’s ambitions are.

Most of your "extremes" on the other side admitted that he fucked up

[Matt1892]

1 minute ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

Most of your "extremes" on the other side admitted that he fucked up

Most suggests a small minority don’t, which is on par with those saying he needs to be replaced.

 

For the majority in the middle it will be how he responds to this setback and learns from it going forward. That we will find out in time.

[The Prophet]

I have no doubt he'll learn a lot from yesterday, but he didn't really do loads wrong or "fuck up".  Granted there were tactical tweaks he could have made to disrupt Liverpool's shape.