Eddie Howe

[Kid Icarus]

There have been so many times over the last couple of years that Howe has put out a left field team that had everyone scratching their heads, only for it to work perfectly.

 

Back 5 and Bruno are the only certain starters with everyone available. 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[Interpolic]

1 minute ago, Yorkie said:

 

Trying to find the peak issue then. I think it's:

 

Given, Babayaro, Moore, Emre, N'Zogbia, Luque, Owen, Ameobi

 

... in late Jan '07. We still had Solano, Dyer and Martins to see us through. Likes of Milner and Parker too. 

 

and the game is just different now. Almost every team in the league has most of their players running around, pressing like nutcases. You need a squad to manage it. Every single other side in the league would suffer badly if they had 11 fit first team level players for over a month. Man City, Arsenal, Liverpool - the lot. 

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Trying to find the peak issue then. I think it's:

 

Given, Babayaro, Moore, Emre, N'Zogbia, Luque, Owen, Ameobi

 

... in late Jan '07. We still had Solano, Dyer and Martins to see us through. Likes of Milner and Parker too. 

Yeah, it was when we were playing Huntington, Patterson, Ramage. Ironically Dyer was available

 

IIRC the injuries weren't anywhere near as long lasting as the ones we've had with Barnes, Murphy, Pope, Burn, Willock, Botman, and then Wilson, Isak, Joelinton, Longstaff being in and out. It's crazy.

[Fezzle]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

Yeah, it was when we were playing Huntington, Patterson, Ramage. Ironically Dyer was available

 

IIRC the injuries weren't anywhere near as long lasting as the ones we've had with Barnes, Murphy, Pope, Burn, Willock, Botman, and then Wilson, Isak, Joelinton, Longstaff being in and out. It's crazy.

That 4-1 derby day team was rank ha

[Collage]

1 minute ago, Interpolic said:

 

and the game is just different now. Almost every team in the league has most of their players running around, pressing like nutcases. You need a squad to manage it. Every single other side in the league would suffer badly if they had 11 fit first team level players for over a month. Man City, Arsenal, Liverpool - the lot. 

but maybe the injuries are partly an effect of not rotating the squad enough while playing an intense pressing game. And a small(ish) squad.

[jack j]

1 minute ago, Fezzle said:

That 4-1 derby day team was rank ha

Amdy Faye and an OAP Lee Clark Centre midfield

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, Fezzle said:

That 4-1 derby day team was rank ha

05/06 but aye it was awful. 

[Interpolic]

8 minutes ago, Collage said:

but maybe the injuries are partly an effect of not rotating the squad enough while playing an intense pressing game. And a small(ish) squad.

 

I don't see any evidence of that. He was rotating the squad fine before rotating the squad meant giving Matt Ritchie minutes. 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by Interpolic

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, Interpolic said:

 

I don't see any evidence of that. He was rotating the squad fine before the rotating the squad meant giving Matt Ritchie minutes. 

Ritchie should’ve been starting league cup games tbf

[Jonas]

31 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

This is an incredible thing to say like. We've had like 11 players out, most with serious injuries like broken bones. Of course it's bad luck and of course it has stretched his ability to manage the squad to beyond breaking point. 

 

All these posts saying Howe has fucked up the management of the squad and this can't go on in future seasons - he presumably won't have to contend with a whole team out in future seasons and will have a deeper squad. It won't be an issue. 

 

It's got nowt to do with how he's managed the squad and everything to do with a lot of people not being able to handle the downturn in form and wanting to make this into something it isn't. And the way Howe has performed before having to navigate these ridiculous circumstances, you'd expect a bit more leeway tbh. 

 

 

 

A lot of people say we lost the title in 1996 because Gillespie got injured for a few month and they're probably not wrong given it would only have took a few more points that we'd likely have gotten just off his presence/balance alone. Howe's been without ten Gillespies and some are condemning him.

[The College Dropout]

27 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

There have been so many times over the last couple of years that Howe has put out a left field team that had everyone scratching their heads, only for it to work perfectly.

 

Back 5 and Bruno are the only certain starters with everyone available. 

 

 

 

As in… playing what he thinks is his strongest team again and again?

[Collage]

5 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

I don't see any evidence of that. He was rotating the squad fine before rotating the squad meant giving Matt Ritchie minutes. 

 

 

 

Full backs, mainly (Trips and Burn)

It’s also about substitutions, he tends to make late ones. For me it’s just natural to think that we’ve suffered due to the amount of games, playing the way we do. 

[Jonas]

1 hour ago, huss9 said:

Scrape past sunderland.

have a bit of a break.

really go for the fa cup even if it means finishing 17th and get us back into europe.

Dalglishian

[Memphis]

I would be interested to read the inevitable report that will be commissioned about the relationship between our style of play/training and the injury level. I support Howe completely in the way he leads and the way he represents the club, he seems like a genuinely good person. I also think his style may be leading to our injuries and his loyalty to middling players may be exaggerating our depth issues. 

 

It's far more complex than a lot of our fans care to admit. But you can hold both of those opinions - that he's a good man and a good manager, and that his style may be problematic for us - at the same time.

[Interpolic]

24 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Ritchie should’ve been starting league cup games tbf

 

Man City was much changed without needing to use Ritchie, he did start at Old Trafford, and he was on for nearly a half at Stamford Bridge. The latter was a quarter final which most agreed was a priority. 

[Jonas]

3 hours ago, Holmesy said:

I don’t think anyone expects us to be Man City, but we don’t expect to get shat on by Forest at home and comfortably outplayed by Luton. The manager is rightly being criticised for certain things that are within his control 

 

 

 

I didn't say everyone to be fair just that some folks expecations are Man City levels of straight trajectory because I've read it.

You don't just get beat off the teams that are above you. Keegan's team got deservedly beaten off Luton too and only scraped a draw at home. Either side of that we were well beaten at Wimbledon.

We won 13 straight league games under Keegan and got beat at home off Grimsby to end it. Its not too relevant but it is football.

 

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by Jonas

[Interpolic]

17 minutes ago, Collage said:

Full backs, mainly (Trips and Burn)

It’s also about substitutions, he tends to make late ones. For me it’s just natural to think that we’ve suffered due to the amount of games, playing the way we do. 

 

Full backs - Burn broke his back ffs and Trippier hasn't been injured, so that can't be put down as a contributing factor with a straight face. Subs fine you have your preferences, but absolutely nothing Howe has done could have been foreseen to lead to double digit serious injuries. Maybe a handful, which could have been managed. 

[The College Dropout]

Just now, Interpolic said:

 

Man City was much changed without needing to use Ritchie, he did start at Old Trafford, and he was on for nearly a half at Stamford Bridge. The latter was a quarter final which most agreed was a priority. 

Played Pope, Schar, Almiron, Gordon and Bruno. 
The only purples to sit it out entirely were Trippier and Botman. 

[TheBrownBottle]

33 minutes ago, Jonas said:

A lot of people say we lost the title in 1996 because Gillespie got injured for a few month and they're probably not wrong given it would only have took a few more points that we'd likely have gotten just off his presence/balance alone. Howe's been without ten Gillespies and some are condemning him.

Completely different era in fairness.  KK doesn’t sell Ruel Fox the previous summer if he’s allowed more than a three man bench with one sub.  No-one thought of squad rotation in 1995 other than Ferguson, who first started doing it in the League Cup the year before.

[TheBrownBottle]

11 minutes ago, Memphis said:

I would be interested to read the inevitable report that will be commissioned about the relationship between our style of play/training and the injury level. I support Howe completely in the way he leads and the way he represents the club, he seems like a genuinely good person. I also think his style may be leading to our injuries and his loyalty to middling players may be exaggerating our depth issues. 

 

It's far more complex than a lot of our fans care to admit. But you can hold both of those opinions - that he's a good man and a good manager, and that his style may be problematic for us - at the same time.

100%.  That’s where I am with this.  

[Interpolic]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Played Pope, Schar, Almiron, Gordon and Bruno. 
The only purples to sit it out entirely were Trippier and Botman. 

 

Which game are you on about? Because if it's Chelsea it's completely irrelevant to the discussion we're having, that Howe can be accused of causing the injury crisis due to lack of rotation earlier in the season. If it's Man City you're wrong, if it's Man Utd Ritchie played. 

[TheBrownBottle]

Howe has said himself that he doesn’t like changing a team which won the game before.  Then Benitez is the other end of the scale, and never saw a team he couldn’t change the week after.

 

I think Howe’s too smart not to have learned from this experience.  I don’t think he’ll go down the Benitez path, but I think once we have the majority of players back we’ll start seeing starting players shuffled around a bit more week by week

[The College Dropout]

10 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

Which game are you on about? Because if it's Chelsea it's completely irrelevant to the discussion we're having, that Howe can be accused of causing the injury crisis due to lack of rotation earlier in the season. If it's Man City you're wrong, if it's Man Utd Ritchie played. 

I’m not wrong. They all played Man City.  Not all started but they played. 
 

Man City with a squad more prepared to challenge on 4 fronts didn’t play Rodri, Haaland, Ederson. 

[Orphanage]

51 minutes ago, Jonas said:

A lot of people say we lost the title in 1996 because Gillespie got injured for a few month and they're probably not wrong given it would only have took a few more points that we'd likely have gotten just off his presence/balance alone. Howe's been without ten Gillespies and some are condemning him.

Shoulda replaced him with Huckerby 

[Jonas]

22 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Completely different era in fairness.  KK doesn’t sell Ruel Fox the previous summer if he’s allowed more than a three man bench with one sub.  No-one thought of squad rotation in 1995 other than Ferguson, who first started doing it in the League Cup the year before.

That's fair enough mate, I should have stated that but felt there's a point in there somewhere about seemingly little things make a bigger difference than some give credit for. For a team like that to get derailed by one injury etc. etc.

Fucking hell though, you forget some things and if we kept Ruel were home and dry. Sellars even. Sods law we sell both and Gillespie gets crocked. KK really had nothing like the blank cheque book some imagine.

KK was tinkering too to be fair by then - Guppy's and Brayson's only games were in the LC. Man City in 94 (Mike Jeffrey etc) was needs must tbf. Ferguson started at Brighton in 92, giving the devil his due, they won the league for the first time in 20odd years that season, may have made all the difference.

 

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by Jonas