Eddie Howe

[Dr Jinx]

30 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

Interestingly, I think I heard that Man City have played more direct balls than any other team this season (unless I dreamt it).
The different between Pep and every other manager is he continually iterates, evolves and adapts. All build around possession-based football but never standing still and becoming stale.
This Man City team are a far cry from his vintage Barca tika-taka team but still ruthlessly efficient. Every time he sees teams starting to find ways to combat his tactics, he changes it up eg. by going more direct.

 

Asking Eddie to change isn't something the club should ever do, but expecting him to continually improve and evolve should be. It should be a requisite of any manager we hire.
 

 

The problem is that he won't, evolve that is. He's still trying the same thing from 2 seasons ago when it's quite obvious even to us dopes that teams have figured it out.

[Holmesy]

31 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said:

 

The problem is that he won't, evolve that is. He's still trying the same thing from 2 seasons ago when it's quite obvious even to us dopes that teams have figured it out.

I'm with you. 100%

There was a guy on the radio this morning talking about Ange, saying he has one plan and when that doesn't work it's more of the same. No plan B at all.
I'm so surprised Eddie fits into that category as well - when he came it was all about how he's a student of the game and spent time learning from other managers, and now we're stuck in this cycle of rinse and repeat. 

[Coffee_Johnny]

Eddie & Co. record for PL games with us. Overall, since first transfer window (more 'his' team), by calendar year, and by season. Pretty grim that we managed 2.00 points per game for 2022 (36 games in calendar year) and 1.54 points per game for 2024 (28 games thus far). 

 

[The College Dropout]

2 hours ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

Are the people saying possession based football not being Howes style just people that never watched his Bournemouth side? Or just haven't listened to him talking about wanting to implement more possession based football since he first arrived. He went on about it loads when he first joined, but that they were all working with what we had.

 

Im guessing some of it is just lack of awareness, some of it is disingenuous. Whether it's working as intended or not ATM is a different question.

Based on the profile of player he has purchased for quarter of a billi. 

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

11 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Based on the profile of player he has purchased for quarter of a billi. 

What, because we didn't sign Ross Barkley?

[STM]

1 hour ago, Dr Jinx said:

 

The problem is that he won't, evolve that is. He's still trying the same thing from 2 seasons ago when it's quite obvious even to us dopes that teams have figured it out.

 

When you say evolve, exactly what do you want him to evolve into and what are your expectations for this current squad?

 

It's sounds like "evolve" is becoming a buzzword for people that don't actually know what the means or requires at times.

 

For me Eddie Howe turned water into wine in his first 18 months and it's absolutely no surprise we've hit something of a brick wall.

[STM]

Just for example, I don't want Howe to "evolve", I want him to change the shape of the midfield 3. It's too flat and it neither offers anything in support of the striker nor does it protect the back 4.

 

Try Tonali as a more traditional DM or try Bruno and Tonali as 2 slightly more sitting midfielders with either a number 10 or even a second striker.... especially at home.

 

None of the above means we need to be more possession based. We kept the ball perfectly well against Brighton, we did a decent job of it against Chelsea.

 

There's 2 other problems which can only be fixed with transfers:

 

1. Pace at CB

2. A RW option who offers real class

 

[hakka]

1 minute ago, STM said:

Just for example, I don't want Howe to "evolve", I want him to change the shape of the midfield 3. It's too flat and it neither offers anything in support of the striker nor does it protect the back 4.

 

Try Tonali as a more traditional DM or try Bruno and Tonali as 2 slightly more sitting midfielders with either a number 10 or even a second striker.... especially at home.

 

None of the above means we need to be more possession based. We kept the ball perfectly well against Brighton, we did a decent job of it against Chelsea.

 

There's 2 other problems which can only be fixed with transfers:

 

1. Pace at CB

2. A RW option who offers real class

 

 

Fully agree. Bruno is wasted as DM, I thought Tonali was meant to be more Gattuso than Pirlo, so surely his energy and tenacity makes him a an option of a ball playing DM? Or perhaps Tonali and Bruno should both player higher up and we invest in a proper athletic DM to protect the back 4. 

 

I don't mind what we try, but it can't be more of the same. The middle 3 are essential for unlocking opposition defence, keeping possession or protecting our defence. They've become good at none of these things and it's like we are almost playing 4 - 0 - 3 given how absent they are.

[PauloGeordio]

7 minutes ago, STM said:

Just for example, I don't want Howe to "evolve", I want him to change the shape of the midfield 3. It's too flat and it neither offers anything in support of the striker nor does it protect the back 4.

 

Try Tonali as a more traditional DM or try Bruno and Tonali as 2 slightly more sitting midfielders with either a number 10 or even a second striker.... especially at home.

 

None of the above means we need to be more possession based. We kept the ball perfectly well against Brighton, we did a decent job of it against Chelsea.

 

There's 2 other problems which can only be fixed with transfers:

 

1. Pace at CB

2. A RW option who offers real class

 

Amazing that he can’t see it, won’t see it or can’t fix it. We’ve been seeing it for a few years now. Same with the set penis! 

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by PauloGeordio

[JEToon]

This isn’t just Eddie exclusive, more to do with the general excuse making being made. I would like us to have a manager who can coach, manage and adapt to what is in the here and now rather than waiting on transfer windows, because to me, that’s not sustainable, and I think Eddie does do a lot of that, he is a good coach, but this constant return to a rigid style which isn't really working, I am not sold on that part. 

 

The best coaches do evolve, Pep for instance, while having excellent players, and that is important, has also often lost some of those excellent players during the course of the season and adapted and evolved his tactical approach to account for that, it hasn’t stayed rigid. He has had to change to account for what he has, and then get the best from that, that is tactical evolution. 

 

City could in theory have just flogged their side into the ground in recent years and whinged till the next window, but they have changed approach and got the best out of what has always been a quite small in numbers squad

 

I think it is a far point to say Eddie hasn’t really made much effort to alter much tactically or evolve from a quite rigid system

 

RW for instance, is a problem, yet the alterations and amendments made to account for that have always seemed pretty minimal.

 

The midfield hasn’t really functioned well for a while, yet little appears to have been done to adapt to and evolve that

 

If we sign a RW in January and they struggle, don’t settle well etc I don’t think, well wait till next summer and sign another is really going to work, a manager does need to adapt and evolve and account for what they have. 

 

 

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by JEToon

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

Based on the profile of player he has purchased for quarter of a billi. 

This is a loaded reply, so I'll just expand a bit because its irked me. 

Below is a list of players bought whilst Howe has been manager that any normal football fan would say would be extremely competent in a possession based set up. 

Trippier - 12m
Bruno - 40m
Botman - 35m
Isak -63m
Gordon - 45m
Tonali - 55m
Hall - 28m

Which is 278m. Ive left out Barnes even though I'm very confident he'd play well in a possession based team playing well, but as he's the boo boys' persona no grata I'll leave him out, just for a quiet life, basically. 

 

So who'd you say doesn't "have the profile" for playing in a possession based side who we've wasted all that cash on.

Pope - 10m
Barnes - 38m
Tino - 35m
Wood - 25m
Burn - 13m

Thats a very generous 121m. Of which we got 15m back for Wood plus the loan fee. Pope clearly sits in that list, but picking up that kind of goalkeeper especially when you're desperate for a goalkeeper and there's a bargain to be had on an international would be clutching at straws to criticise given the timing of it. I wouldnt put Barnes and Tino in that list myself but theyre in there to satisfy the people that are desperate for a stick. Even Burn is harsh.

All that said that's not a quarter of a billi wasted on players of the wrong profile that would prove Howe's teams aren't inherently able to play possession based football. To look at the list of transfers made whilst Howe has been in charge and say it suggests he doesn't have the ability to get a team playing possession based football is wholly unserious and not rooted in considered thinking. 

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by Super Duper Branko Strupar

[Interpolic]

1 minute ago, PauloGeordio said:

Amazing that he can’t see it, won’t see it or can’t fix it. We’ve been seeing it for a few years now. Same as the set penis! 

 

You've been saying a combination of  and   for a few years, as far as I can see.  Turned a couple of weeks ago and now it's all negative

[STM]

I don't think either Bruno or Tonali are old school DMs and that's what we are missing right now but out of the two of them, Tonali has the pace to get back into position, Bruno doesn't.

 

Tonali can press the opposition and then retreat into his shape, Bruno looks like he's running through treacle when back tracking.

 

Not only do we have 2 CBs who have no pace, we have nobody sitting in front of them either.

 

I'm fairly certain a small change in midfield will pay dividends.

[PauloGeordio]

7 minutes ago, STM said:

I don't think either Bruno or Tonali are old school DMs and that's what we are missing right now but out of the two of them, Tonali has the pace to get back into position, Bruno doesn't.

 

Tonali can press the opposition and then retreat into his shape, Bruno looks like he's running through treacle when back tracking.

 

Not only do we have 2 CBs who have no pace, we have nobody sitting in front of them either.

 

I'm fairly certain a small change in midfield will pay dividends.

Can Wor flags get on to this 

 

Others are seeing the obvious too! 

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by PauloGeordio

[80]

17 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

You've been saying a combination of  and   for a few years, as far as I can see.  Turned a couple of weeks ago and now it's all negative

The  has been deliciously subversive for about 6 months now, mind.

[Lush Vlad]

14 minutes ago, PauloGeordio said:

Can Wor flags get on to this 

 

Others are seeing the obvious too! 

 

 

 

 

Terrible passage of play to use, mind.  Wasn't that when Isak managed to fuck up a flick and then his 2nd touch, as well.  Meaning we lost the ball when on the attack, so players would naturally be a bit out of position and they hit us on the break.  If our CB's are supposed to engage players aggressively.  Than Schar was struck down with a terrible case of the Danny Simpsons.  On a yellow and all, which wouldn't have helped. 

 

But yes.  I'm sure you could probably use other times in this game and previous matches to highlight how flat and wide it often is.  I'm just being pedantic. 

 

 

Edited 20 hours ago by Lush Vlad

[The College Dropout]

20 minutes ago, Super Duper Branko Strupar said:

This is a loaded reply, so I'll just expand a bit because its irked me. 

Below is a list of players bought whilst Howe has been manager that any normal football fan would say would be extremely competent in a possession based set up. 

Trippier - 12m
Bruno - 40m
Botman - 35m
Isak -63m
Gordon - 45m
Tonali - 55m
Hall - 28m

Which is 278m. Ive left out Barnes even though I'm very confident he'd play well in a possession based team playing well, but as he's the boo boys' persona no grata I'll leave him out, just for a quiet life, basically. 

 

So who'd you say doesn't "have the profile" for playing in a possession based side who we've wasted all that cash on.

Pope - 10m
Barnes - 38m
Tino - 35m
Wood - 25m
Burn - 13m

Thats a very generous 121m. Of which we got 15m back for Wood plus the loan fee. Pope clearly sits in that list, but picking up that kind of goalkeeper especially when you're desperate for a goalkeeper and there's a bargain to be had on an international would be clutching at straws to criticise given the timing of it. I wouldnt put Barnes and Tino in that list myself but theyre in there to satisfy the people that are desperate for a stick. Even Burn is harsh.

All that said that's not a quarter of a billi wasted on players of the wrong profile that would prove Howe's teams aren't inherently able to play possession based football. To look at the list of transfers made whilst Howe has been in charge and say it suggests he doesn't have the ability to get a team playing possession based football is wholly unserious and not rooted in considered thinking. 

 

 

 

The crossed out are all better suited to transitional, athletic, vertical teams. They are the 3 most expensive signings too.

 

When we were calling out from a creative attacker to playmake - we signed a direct goal threat in Barnes. When we could've signed a more ball secure, technical CM we signed someone who is more physically gifted than technically gifted in Tonali.

 

It's a side built to press and run. That's fine, it's more of a Klopp side than Guardiola.

 

27 minutes ago, STM said:

I don't think either Bruno or Tonali are old school DMs and that's what we are missing right now but out of the two of them, Tonali has the pace to get back into position, Bruno doesn't.

 

Tonali can press the opposition and then retreat into his shape, Bruno looks like he's running through treacle when back tracking.

 

Not only do we have 2 CBs who have no pace, we have nobody sitting in front of them either.

 

I'm fairly certain a small change in midfield will pay dividends.

Bruno is a fairly classic 6/DLP in the European mould. Pirlo, Jorginho, latter day Kroos, Busquets. Initiate attacks from deep, press resistant etc.

 

53 minutes ago, STM said:

 

When you say evolve, exactly what do you want him to evolve into and what are your expectations for this current squad?

 

It's sounds like "evolve" is becoming a buzzword for people that don't actually know what the means or requires at times.

 

For me Eddie Howe turned water into wine in his first 18 months and it's absolutely no surprise we've hit something of a brick wall.

Close that gap between midfield and defence would show evolution. I've become "it is what it is" with that issue. Sometimes CBs are aggressive and clamp down that space other teams we just get abused there. I've stopped caring. But when people talk about Eddie the tactical mastermind, the coaches' coach, I just can't buy it.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

25 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

The crossed out are all better suited to transitional, athletic, vertical teams. They are the 3 most expensive signings too.

The Tonali one is complete nonsense, that's not the payer he's been before his time with us at all. And you're only saying that about Gordon and Isak because that's what they've so far done with us, because thats how we've played. To say they absolutely couldn't play well in a more possession based set up is narrative forming and IPs alarm is blaring. 

But more importantly the overall point you're trying to make is flawed. Its a criticism of Howe and the signings made because they apparently don't have the profile for how we're trying to play now (not a fair criticism but we'll run with it), as some kind of proof he's not capable of coaching a side to play this way. But we're not going to have bought players for how we want to play in 3 years time, are we? No one does that. You gradually try and build a team to evolve a way of playing over time. We've gone from a very well organised, pretty much low-mid block, conceding the fewest goals side, to a high tempo pressing side, to now looking to control the game more. We needed players that could play all those systems. If you play high intensity pressing football but are buying players that wont fit that system, but the one you plan on playing in 2 seasons, you're going to get the sack because you'll be shite. Its crowbarring criticism in where it's not relevant. 

 

 

Edited 19 hours ago by Super Duper Branko Strupar

[Lotus]

Tbf, Gordon and to a lesser extent Tonali don’t seem especially geared towards a possession style game. Especially Gordon. He’s not particularly great at picking out passes between the lines. His passing isn’t that incisive. He’s better when he’s running at someone and has isolated a defender.

Tonali is a very physical player for an Italian (massive generalisation). He’s got a good engine and is happy to cover ground. He’s not Bruno levels of technical though (if he was I doubt we could’ve afforded him).

[JigsawGoesToPieces]

Are we not better suited to a fast counter attacking, get the ball out to the wingers bit like Keegan used to play. Especially with pace of Gordon, Barnes, Isak and hopefully a new RW.

[TRon]

5 hours ago, Dr Jinx said:

 

You're asking the wrong question.

 

If other teams can win more than we do by putting in less effort on that front, then isn't the fundamental principal of what we're doing inefficient?

 

It's tactical. And unfortunately, it's what our whole style of play is based around.

 

Eddie Howe isn't going to have an epiphany and come up with something better. He's spent years developing something he feels is the right way and he'll die on that hill.

 

Not sure that's right. He tends to stick with what he knows, but after Bournemouth he did travel extensively to learn other methods when he got accused of being too dogmatic with the attacking style he likes. In general most of us are on board with it, far easier to watch than the stuff we've been fed for the decade or so before he arrived.

 

I think he does adapt, but he seems reluctant to change until he's forced to when it just stops working. He's not someone who can switch formations to suit different opponents, or maybe he just doesn't want to confuse his players. You rarely see him change shape even mid-game when we are losing, he just tends to swap like for like.

[PauloGeordio]

1 hour ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

Terrible passage of play to use, mind.  Wasn't that when Isak managed to fuck up a flick and then his 2nd touch, as well.  Meaning we lost the ball when on the attack, so players would naturally be a bit out of position and they hit us on the break.  If our CB's are supposed to engage players aggressively.  Than Schar was struck down with a terrible case of the Danny Simpsons.  On a yellow and all, which wouldn't have helped. 

 

But yes.  I'm sure you could probably use other times in this game and previous matches to highlight how flat and wide it often is.  I'm just being pedantic. 

 

 

 

I hadn’t looked into it in such detail 😆

[Jaqen]

4 hours ago, Dr Jinx said:

 

The problem is that he won't, evolve that is. He's still trying the same thing from 2 seasons ago when it's quite obvious even to us dopes that teams have figured it out.

 

I'm not sure about that. We've bought two out and out left wingers when we were originally playing the two Joe's on that left side. We've went from Burn (a CB playing LB) to a more traditional attacking left back. 

 

I'm actually surprised we moved away from the CB at fullback thing when a lot more of the top sides seem to be having success with it. 

 

On paper having two attacking fullbacks should make us have more of a threat but Tino and Hall combined don't offer as much as Trippier did. 

[Sibierski]

2 hours ago, Lush Vlad said:

 

Terrible passage of play to use, mind.  Wasn't that when Isak managed to fuck up a flick and then his 2nd touch, as well.  Meaning we lost the ball when on the attack, so players would naturally be a bit out of position and they hit us on the break.  If our CB's are supposed to engage players aggressively.  Than Schar was struck down with a terrible case of the Danny Simpsons.  On a yellow and all, which wouldn't have helped. 

 

 

Still though, why are all the midfielders looking to go beyond Isak? There’s not one regularly sitting there in case of the turnover. 

[timeEd32]

1 hour ago, The College Dropout said:

It's a side built to press and run. That's fine, it's more of a Klopp side than Guardiola.

 

The biggest issue to me is we seemed to be fully set on the Klopp mould and, for a time, we were awesome. But now we're not playing that way anymore, possibly wanting to transition styles, while also not having any money for a major overhaul. 

 

I can understand wanting to see more of the ball and I can understand why we can't do 90 minutes every week of a hell for leather style. But I don't get why we aren't doing a lot more targeted pressing, why we don't sometimes play that way, and why we've ended up in this sort of no man's land version of what we used to be and what we maybe want to become.