Eddie Howe

[simonsays]

1 hour ago, Holmesy said:

I think he's earned the right to have one poor season, so we have to give him the chance to overhaul and go again next season.

And I have no doubt that without European football to contend with, we'd have another great campaign (assuming we don't get a European place). But that raises another question - is he capable of leading us to success in the PL while balancing the additional fixtures that CL or EL football brings? This is the second time our league form has suffered when we've been in the CL. 

Howe's success seems to depend strongly on his ability to have a good amount of training time to prepare for a specific opponent.  Whenever we have quick turnarounds of games the results seem to suffer, and at this stage of the season in particular it looks like a preparation rather than a fatigue issue - our champions league games definitely seem to be taking priority over league at the moment.

[andycap]

One thing I wish we signed walker-Peters on a free this year.

would of been very useful playing on either fullback position. 

[Holmesy]

32 minutes ago, simonsays said:

Howe's success seems to depend strongly on his ability to have a good amount of training time to prepare for a specific opponent.  Whenever we have quick turnarounds of games the results seem to suffer, and at this stage of the season in particular it looks like a preparation rather than a fatigue issue - our champions league games definitely seem to be taking priority over league at the moment.

Which is a weakness he has to address, otherwise this cycle just repeats. When people get their backs up about negative Eddie comments, this has to be taken into account. He's a fantastic PL manager but the above could be his downfall - we get into Europe and we have to prioritise either the PL or Europe because his meticulous methods don't allow us to be competitive in both simultaneously (at the moment). Hopefully he can learn how to manage both, but to-date our CL involvement has derailed our PL campaigns and if it doesn't change and he doesn't learn, the writing is probably on the wall long term.

[kingxlnc]

17 minutes ago, andycap said:

One thing I wish we signed walker-Peters on a free this year.

would of been very useful playing on either fullback position. 

I would have said Mbuemo but Walker-Peters is alright

whatever floats your boat

[AyeDubbleYoo]

25 minutes ago, Holmesy said:

Which is a weakness he has to address, otherwise this cycle just repeats. When people get their backs up about negative Eddie comments, this has to be taken into account. He's a fantastic PL manager but the above could be his downfall - we get into Europe and we have to prioritise either the PL or Europe because his meticulous methods don't allow us to be competitive in both simultaneously (at the moment). Hopefully he can learn how to manage both, but to-date our CL involvement has derailed our PL campaigns and if it doesn't change and he doesn't learn, the writing is probably on the wall long term.

I’m not saying you’re wrong but isn’t the ultimate solution to that a better squad with more quality players? 
 

What is it about his methods that don’t ‘allow’ us to compete? 

[black_n_white]

I’ve had a few days to dwell on this, we are in the quater final of the league cup (defending champions btw) , 6th place in the Champions league. We’ll find a way to improve in the league. Lots to be excited by.

[Holmesy]

7 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

I’m not saying you’re wrong but isn’t the ultimate solution to that a better squad with more quality players? 
 

What is it about his methods that don’t ‘allow’ us to compete? 

Hopefully but I don't think it's as simple as that. My point was in agreement and response to the above post about us being at our best when Eddie has time to meticulously plan for games, which having two simultaneous campaign running doesn't seem to allow him to do. There is a comment elsewhere attributed to Eddie that we're hardly training at the moment, focussing on recovery instead. That's likely to be a direct result of the injury debacle from the last duel campaign. So, even if we have a bigger squad, it doesn't seem like it would make that much difference because the issue isn't player resource-related, it's preparation and coaching time. Unless he's prepared to relinquish some control and coaching duties to others, which doesn't seem to be his MO, how do get around this problem? 

[The College Dropout]

3 hours ago, Bellis80 said:

We don’t know what he’ll do now but I never bought into the thinking he was easing Hall in the first season we had him. He just preferred Burn there and i’m not convinced that has changed.

I'm not against this theory.

 

What i know is when Burn is available Burn plays. Someone has to sacrifice and it hasn't been Burn. Howe will sacrifice his 433 before leaving out Burn.

[The College Dropout]

53 minutes ago, kingxlnc said:

I would have said Mbuemo but Walker-Peters is alright

whatever floats your boat

We seem against bringing in a cheap body.

 

A £35m body - sure. But a free elder player to fill in? It's like we have our quota and that is that.

[ExiledGeordie]

If Howe genuinely believes that Burn is better at LB than a fully fit Hall moving forwards then we’ve got issues. I just can’t really see that though. 

[Loki679]

16 hours ago, Novocastrian said:

I’ve doubted Howe previously but he always solves the puzzle and gets us back on track.

 

I ope so and he's got all the time in the world for me but we've been moving away from the high intensity, high press system and the plan seems to have been to just do the same thing but with less intensity and a weaker press.

 

It's not working (unsurprisingly) and he needs to come up with something else.

[madras]

14 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I'm not against this theory.

 

What i know is when Burn is available Burn plays. Someone has to sacrifice and it hasn't been Burn. Howe will sacrifice his 433 before leaving out Burn.

Is that skewed a little by, for a large part of the time since Hall has seemed ready, either he or Botman or Schar have been injured. On many occasions could it be Burn played because he was available ?

[Ronaldo]

4 hours ago, Shadow Puppets said:

 

You obviously haven't read the comments sections on X, YouTube and Facebook. I fucking hate a huge number of our fans, like.

Yeah, sky sports, talksport, and IRL a fair few fans, die hards even, are even starting to say he’s taken us as far as he can. The Elanga signing, poor form of those constantly selected inc Joelinton are the things most cited.
 

It’s sadly only going to get worse this. He’s strong enough to take no notice, obvs.

[The College Dropout]

4 minutes ago, madras said:

Is that skewed a little by, for a large part of the time since Hall has seemed ready, either he or Botman or Schar have been injured. On many occasions could it be Burn played because he was available ?

Yeh sure.  But the few times they’ve all been fit - Burn starts.  
 

It can be argued Botman wasn’t always fully fit when he was benched. Or shall wasn’t fully fit on Sunday.  But I don’t think it’s happenstance that Burn always starts. He rarely gets subbed either.  Even when he’s having a mare. It took Botman, Lascelles and another fullback to get injured for Hall to get his run at the backend of his first season. 

[madras]

Fwiw if it hadn't been for the Isak shit at the start of the season (let's say he left amicably and we'd got Wissa and Nick earlier) Id still have been after another 9 rather than a LB or RB if things had to be done e in order. Burn at LB is 3rd choice when all fit. We have Osula and Nick after Wissa and neither are capable in the 9 role as we need it.

 

Going forward to the Summer even if we keep who we'd like (Hall and Tino) an RB is a minimum as Trips will likely be away. RB being more important than LB given Tino ability to switch which I dont think Hall has.

 

 

Edited November 12, 2025 by madras

[The College Dropout]

I also think Burn offers intangibles and must start tbh. But it’s at CB. Rotate him with Botman to keep Budn fresh enough. 

[Erikse]

6 minutes ago, madras said:

Is that skewed a little by, for a large part of the time since Hall has seemed ready, either he or Botman or Schar have been injured. On many occasions could it be Burn played because he was available ?

 

I think the most obvious example is from early 2024 where he went straight in at left back for Livra after his injury. We were pretty happy with how Livra had played during Burns time out. After that Burn was getting bullied through a run of games with Livra on the bench, and some people were desperate to try to explain why Burn at LB was a net positive. Wouldn't be surprised if some of the same folks are now talking about how much of a handicap it is having to play Burn there now due to injuries.

[kingxlnc]

It's clear we have young first choice then veteran back up. 

First choice - all early to mid 20's
Livramento, Thiaw, Botman, Hall

Second choice - all 33 or above 
Trippier, Schar, Burn, (Targett)

The issue is actually letting Targett or not having a back up LB. 

We don't have any youngsters coming through that are trusted enough either. 

Either Burn is the back up LB, meaning that Lascelles is the backup CB, or Burn only covers CB, and we need to get someone for LB in Jan (or recall Targett even). 

He would have been better than having Burn there tbh. 

[The College Dropout]

1 minute ago, kingxlnc said:

It's clear we have young first choice then veteran back up. 

First choice - all early to mid 20's
Livramento, Thiaw, Botman, Hall

Second choice - all 33 or above 
Trippier, Schar, Burn, (Targett)

The issue is actually letting Targett or not having a back up LB. 

We don't have any youngsters coming through that are trusted enough either. 

Either Burn is the back up LB, meaning that Lascelles is the backup CB, or Burn only covers CB, and we need to get someone for LB in Jan (or recall Targett even). 

He would have been better than having Burn there tbh. 

This is in your mind.

 

As of today - Dan Burn would start a final tomorrow if everyone was fit.

[kingxlnc]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

This is in your mind.

 

As of today - Dan Burn would start a final tomorrow if everyone was fit.

Agreed - this is how it should be is what I meant

[Kanj]

Heading defense: Burn > Botman

Heading attacks: Burn > Botman

Pace: Burn > Botman (not by much but it's pretty noticeable) 

Ball Playing short & long:  Botman > Burn

Tackling: Botman > Burn (Burn is a better backs to wall tackler/defender though) 

High Line defending: Botman > Burn 

 

I'd personally rotate Burn and Botman with emphasis on getting Hall back into the team at LB. Hall was nearly a lights out 1 v 1 defender prior to his injury and really only had issues with generational Mo Salah last season. His ball playing and line breaking passes were crucial to us in our uptick in form last season. I think Botman still has much to improve in his aerial defending - if its a standing jump he's toast. 

[Mike]

2 hours ago, andycap said:

One thing I wish we signed walker-Peters on a free this year.

would of been very useful playing on either fullback position. 

I was gasping for us to sign him man.

[madras]

45 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

I think the most obvious example is from early 2024 where he went straight in at left back for Livra after his injury. We were pretty happy with how Livra had played during Burns time out. After that Burn was getting bullied through a run of games with Livra on the bench, and some people were desperate to try to explain why Burn at LB was a net positive. Wouldn't be surprised if some of the same folks are now talking about how much of a handicap it is having to play Burn there now due to injuries.

Didnt that come when Miley had a run of games and switched from right to left. I think his run on the right coincided with Trips bad run. Its possible Howe might have wanted more experience with Miley in mind.

[JT24]

How are we still talking about Kyle Walker-Peters?

 

He's trash. We should have signed somebody, but not him.

[The College Dropout]

56 minutes ago, madras said:

Fwiw if it hadn't been for the Isak shit at the start of the season (let's say he left amicably and I'd got Wissa and Nick earlier) Id still have been after another 9 rather than a LB or RB if things had to be done e in order. Burn at LB is 3rd choice when all fit. We have Osula and Nick after Wissa and neither are capable in the 9 role as we need it.

 

Going forward to the Summer even if we keep who we'd like (Hall and Tino) an RB is a minimum as Trips will likely be away. RB being more important than LB given Tino ability to switch which I dont think Hall has.

 

 

 

We have 3 genuine first choice fullbacks. That isn’t enough and was an obvious weak spot imo.  It required Tino being fit all season to work.  As soon as Tino gets a medium term injury like he has - we are suddenly wafer thin at FB. If anyone else gets injured - like we have - we are stuffed.  
 

 

We are light at FB and CM still.  
 

Lack quality on the wings.