Eddie Howe

[bobbydazzla]

9 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Eh? It's absolutely a Glazers/PIF debate. Who's financially backing the managers? Fairies at the bottom of the garden?

 

Since Ten Hag took over we've had over £1b in revenue, and he's got £400m. Since Howe took over you've had £350m in revenue, and Howe has got £400m.

 

Not sure how you don't see this as huge financial backing given that the amount you can spend directly correlates with how much revenue you make and how much money your owners put in to offset the loss. 

 

 

I agree in a way. You absolutely have way more resources than we do, you're just not allowed to use them. Yet. 

 

 

Before Howe took over we were a commercial void, a rotting carcass with free Shite Direct adverts plastered all over our stinking bones and our bargain basement players were having ice baths in wheely bins

 

We've had to spend £400m just to buy some players of top flight quality

 

Whereas you've got players worth hundreds of millions and earning hundreds of thousands a week stinking out your club. You've had your money and pissed it up the wall on shite. 

 

If I was the Glazers I'd be saying you can start getting some more cash when you prove you've got the brains to spend it wisely.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by bobbydazzla

[Froggy]

Just now, bobbydazzla said:

Whereas you've got players worth hundreds of millions and earning hundreds of thousands a week stinking out your club. You've pissed money up the wall on shite. 

 

Fully agree. Which is why you shouldn't use the existing squad against Ten Hag. Most of it was utter shite. Let him get rid of it all and build his own team. 

[bobbydazzla]

11 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Fully agree. Which is why you shouldn't use the existing squad against Ten Hag. Most of it was utter shite. Let him get rid of it all and build his own team. 

 

You're still vastly overpaying for shite even with Baldylocks in charge 

 

Who's he signed that's been any good relative to the size of their transfer fee ? And who from the squad he inherited has he coached to become loads better than they were ?

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by bobbydazzla

[timeEd32]

6 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Eh? It's absolutely a Glazers/PIF debate. Who's financially backing the managers? Fairies at the bottom of the garden?

 

Since Ten Hag took over we've had over £1b in revenue, and he's got £400m. Since Howe took over you've had £350m in revenue, and Howe has got £400m.

 

Not sure how you don't see this as huge financial backing given that the amount you can spend directly correlates with how much revenue you make and how much money your owners put in to offset the loss. 

 

 

I agree in a way. You absolutely have way more resources than we do, you're just not allowed to use them. Yet. 

 

Once again you're entirely skipping over wages, which is where there is a massive disparity. There's an entire group of players in world football that are simply unavailable to Newcastle due to their total cost. You have at least a handful of them.

 

You've moved the goalposts to the owners, but the original debate was about Ten Hag and also this factually incorrect line: "Newcastle is a ... club with way more resources." The idea that Newcastle has more resources is based on a theoretical pile of money that 1) we don't know how much they'd spend and, more importantly, 2) they aren't allowed to spend. In terms of actual resources that have been spent on the playing squad and everything else there is no comparison. Based on spend, Manchester United should be cemented in the top 4 and potentially challenging for titles. If you want to say Ten Hag needs more time so that money is invested in the players he wants then that's totally fair. But don't act like Eddie Howe and Newcastle are on equal footing with a club spending 2x the wages.

 

[nufc123]

2 hours ago, Froggy said:

 

I'm just saying that nothing that Goldbridge has said there is false. 

Its sort of is. When we cant afford 300k pw in wages we dont have more resources do we?

 

And one thing he doesnt mention is we sometime play half our team with Ashley signings. Your lot had Fernades, Bisska, Shaw, Maguire, Rashford before splashing. He also doesnt mention Howe took over a team on its way to CS.

[madras]

12 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Fully agree. Which is why you shouldn't use the existing squad against Ten Hag. Most of it was utter shite. Let him get rid of it all and build his own team. 

Eddie's was shite as well. He made something decent out of it.

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

Who's he signed that's been any good ? 

 

Hojlund, Eriksen, Casemiro, Amrabat and Malacia all good signings. Casemiro could turn into a poor signing if his legs have gone already but he was very important last year despite his discipline issues 

 

Martinez looks to be a great signing, but injuries are unfortunate again. 

 

Antony is a poor signing. He's huffs and puffs but extremely underwhelming for the money paid, but he was available for half that and our board fucked it up. 

 

Jury's still out on Onana, but he's not even played half a season. Same with Mount who's struggled with injuries. 

 

7 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

And who from the squad he inherited has he coached to become loads better than they were ?

 

Most of the team last year. 

 

1 minute ago, madras said:

Eddie's was shite as well. He made something decent out of it.

 

I'm not comparing Howe and Ten Hag, but people seem really keen to. I'll say it once again, I think Ten Hag did a really good job last season. Howe did a brilliant job. 

[TheBrownBottle]

5 hours ago, Whitley mag said:

I think with the latest injury news Thursday, Sunday football is the last thing we needed this season. I’ve got no qualms about going for it and risking it all on last 16, the prize was sufficient to warrant going for broke.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think what’s getting lost on this one is that it wasn’t a display of all-out attacking football; it was just unintelligent football.  Schar and Burn were repeatedly further forward than Bruno and Joelinton.  Who is more likely to cause damage?  Schar gets caught upfield - but our completely disjointed midfield were behind him and had opportunities to stop the attack.  
 

We didn’t concede because of some heroic display of Keegan-style attacking football.  We conceded because we were stupid and naive.  Howe’s comments, for once, were not impressive on this one.  

[Menace]

Jury is completely out on Hojlund like. Still no prem goals and approaching January. Casemiro is a coin toss, he has huge wages and if you essentially got a good season out of him for north of £60m I don't think its a good signing.

[The Prophet]

This isn't the Eddie Howe thread.

[TRon]

42 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I think what’s getting lost on this one is that it wasn’t a display of all-out attacking football; it was just unintelligent football.  Schar and Burn were repeatedly further forward than Bruno and Joelinton.  Who is more likely to cause damage?  Schar gets caught upfield - but our completely disjointed midfield were behind him and had opportunities to stop the attack.  
 

We didn’t concede because of some heroic display of Keegan-style attacking football.  We conceded because we were stupid and naive.  Howe’s comments, for once, were not impressive on this one.  

 

 

well I agree with you that we were a bit brainless and naive, already said in the match thread on the day that if you have a fatigued team, it's not going to help bombing up and down the pitch. We just don't have the resources or the legs at the moment.

 

That said, I heard Howe saying that this is how we play and he doesn't want to change his philosophy on the basis of what might happen and I'm not going to argue. He's trying to drill an indentity in the players and he doesn't want them second guessing themselves.

[duo]

9 hours ago, 54 said:

In today's absolutely wild tweet:

 

 

[WideopenMag]

56 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I think what’s getting lost on this one is that it wasn’t a display of all-out attacking football; it was just unintelligent football.  Schar and Burn were repeatedly further forward than Bruno and Joelinton.  Who is more likely to cause damage?  Schar gets caught upfield - but our completely disjointed midfield were behind him and had opportunities to stop the attack.  
 

We didn’t concede because of some heroic display of Keegan-style attacking football.  We conceded because we were stupid and naive.  Howe’s comments, for once, were not impressive on this one.  

Yeah I agree with this tbh, we want to watch good football but we also want to win. We need to adapt and play smart when necessary if we want to win against top teams in finals etc

[Checko]

Just now, WideopenMag said:

Yeah I agree with this tbh, we want to watch good football but we also want to win. We need to adapt and play smart when necessary if we want to win against top teams in finals etc

Seriously? With your username?

[Whitley mag]

1 hour ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I think what’s getting lost on this one is that it wasn’t a display of all-out attacking football; it was just unintelligent football.  Schar and Burn were repeatedly further forward than Bruno and Joelinton.  Who is more likely to cause damage?  Schar gets caught upfield - but our completely disjointed midfield were behind him and had opportunities to stop the attack.  
 

We didn’t concede because of some heroic display of Keegan-style attacking football.  We conceded because we were stupid and naive.  Howe’s comments, for once, were not impressive on this one.  

I think we’ve been pretty well drilled for the most part under Howe’s regime defensively, but agree we’ve looked ragged in recent weeks.

 

The 2 homes against Dortmund and Milan we looked quite exposed at the back, not sure if it’s naivety or just a lack of quality to be honest, what’s stood out for me in 5 of the CL games is that we look short of real technical players, which in turn meant we starting forcing things and making errors.

 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by Whitley mag

[Pilko]

I think with the Dortmund & Milan home games, they felt like a bit like the Man U cup final in that we faced teams with more Champions League experience and nous than us. (or "final" experience in the Man U case, same kind of thing though).

 

That said, we didn't really look like scoring in the cup final whereas in the two CL home defeats we were a lot closer - hit the crossbar twice & Wilson missed a sitter he usual buries Vs Dortmund, the Miggy chance & Bruno shot saved onto the crossbar which puts us in the driving seat hugely Vs Milan. They were much finer margins and that's a good sign of progress - next time in the CL we go with that much more experience, plus whatever else we've brought in by then.

 

Howe will definitely have learned from the experiences and I bet we see that next time around when we look back on this CL campaign.

 

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by Pilko

[The College Dropout]

We had some big moments against Dortmund at home but we were well worth the defeat.  Our general play was better in the league cup final but we never looked like scoring.  

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, The Prophet said:

This isn't the Eddie Howe thread.

 

[Cronky]

Whenever a team loses, it's tempting to come up with some overall explanation, and 'naive' has been coming up a lot. In reality, in a close game, luck will play a big part. We were fully committed to the win and were throwing people forward, and of course that comes with risk. And throwing defenders forward is part of the tactic of going for it. If the pass to Schar had been more accurate, it would probably have been a different story.

 

It really boils down to whether we should have been prepared to settle for the draw. Personally, I think Eddie called it right, in putting the correct value on a place in the Europa League. You can say he was wrong, but not 'naive'.

 

[Cronky]

Sorry, me again. Eddie isn't that experienced when it comes to the very top level, and so maybe it's inevitable that his supposed inexperience gets cited when something apparently goes wrong.

 

But I've just checked - in the two years he's been here, we've beaten Man U three times, Chelsea, Spurs and Arsenal twice and Man City once. Liverpool are the only team that's escaped. Results that would once have been exceptional have now become regular. 

 

But when we're beaten, he's 'naive' and been put in his place. It's bollocks. Eddie is at least the equal of any manager out there.

[WideopenMag]

57 minutes ago, Cronky said:

Whenever a team loses, it's tempting to come up with some overall explanation, and 'naive' has been coming up a lot. In reality, in a close game, luck will play a big part. We were fully committed to the win and were throwing people forward, and of course that comes with risk. And throwing defenders forward is part of the tactic of going for it. If the pass to Schar had been more accurate, it would probably have been a different story.

 

It really boils down to whether we should have been prepared to settle for the draw. Personally, I think Eddie called it right, in putting the correct value on a place in the Europa League. You can say he was wrong, but not 'naive'.

 

The team was naive and didn't manage the situation at all I think its a fair assessment. Of course we wanted to win but still had time to do so, Milan were the ones going out and were going to have go for it, being that open and expansive committing defenders forward out of position and playing like we were getting beat was daft. We need to look at that in big games, cup finals, European games etc or we can get used to loosing. 

[TheBrownBottle]

14 hours ago, Checko said:

Seriously? With your username?

I always assumed WideopenMag was from Wideopen  

[christ]

2 minutes ago, WideopenMag said:

The team was naive and didn't manage the situation at all I think its a fair assessment. Of course we wanted to win but still had time to do so, Milan were the ones going out and were going to have go for it, being that open and expansive committing defenders forward out of position and playing like we were getting beat was daft. We need to look at that in big games, cup finals, European games etc or we can get used to loosing. 

Win or bust mentality in the context of Wednesday makes perfect sense though. There’s no part of me that thinks the club really wanted to drop into the Europa League when you consider how badly the CL fucked us. We could do with one game a week again for the next few months.

[Checko]

9 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I always assumed WideopenMag was from Wideopen  

Hey, don't ruin a perfectly good pun.

[WideopenMag]

1 hour ago, christ said:

Win or bust mentality in the context of Wednesday makes perfect sense though. There’s no part of me that thinks the club really wanted to drop into the Europa League when you consider how badly the CL fucked us. We could do with one game a week again for the next few months.

Yet the team who didn't go for that mentality had far more chances and won the game? I didn't get it tbh, you can still go for the win whilst still keeping things a bit more tight and organised at the back. Our solid defence was the base for our success last season. What are we playing for this season then if we don't want European football?

 

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by WideopenMag