Jump to content

Do you still back Eddie Howe?  

735 members have voted

  1. 1. ?

    • Yes
      117
    • No
      92


Recommended Posts

Thought of wor Eddie yesterday after reading a quote from Kvaratskhelia "At PSG, if you don’t run, you are on the bench”.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

Net spend is the best indication of how much the owners are prepared to invest in the squad. It's what we used to slate Mike Ashley for. Balance sheet champions and all that. Our average league position since the takeover is 6th/7th and there's is 7th/8th and we've won a trophy and played 2 seasons of Champions League in that time.

 

Never understood why people use Villa as a stick to beat us with for some reason.

 

We are fighting to be top half because we wasted £250m on rubbish last summer.

 

 

 

It’s not. It’s a poor indicator compared to squad cost and wages. 
 

Even Mike Ashley paid midtable salaries for the PL. Which is why we spent more seasons in the PL than not, and comfortably most of the time even with managers like Bruce and Pardew. Players like Shelvey and Wilson would have had offers from other PL clubs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

It’s not. It’s a poor indicator compared to squad cost and wages. 
 

Even Mike Ashley paid midtable salaries for the PL. Which is why we spent more seasons in the PL than not, and comfortably most of the time even with managers like Bruce and Pardew. Players like Shelvey and Wilson would have had offers from other PL clubs. 

 

Our wage bill is pretty much on a par with Villa's but Villa are constantly needing to cut theirs as it's too high in comparison to their turnover. They were charging £97 for standard tickets for their CL games last season.

 

Not sure which other clubs were in for Shelvey and Wilson before we signed them.

 

I still wouldn't swap our last 4.5 years for what Villa have had.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Yeh we had great leaders for 2/2.5 years. They built that team and staff but they've long gone. Another 2 years of poor leadership and decisions is in large part why we are fighting to be top half.

 

Net spend is rubbish. Villa's squad cost is similar to our own (think ours is higher) but their wage bill has been bigger.

 

Most importantly, their owners have done everything in their power to make Villa competitive. That is a major reason why Villa will have had sustained success. Ours have not.

Net spend is hardly rubbish; we could’ve chosen to do what Villa did and blown them out of the water.  We chose to spend our money on fees and not escalating wages.  Transfer spend and wages come out of the same pot

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Net spend is hardly rubbish; we could’ve chosen to do what Villa did and blown them out of the water.  We chose to spend our money on fees and not escalating wages.  Transfer spend and wages come out of the same pot

Exactly. Both clubs have maxed out their investment on players - just in different ways. 
 

We have a bigger net spend in recent years than Real Madrid or its close.  Is the investment in players the same? No, Real invest far more into players hence the 4x wage bill. 
 

Squad cost and wages combined paint a much bigger picture than net spend. Net spend is a fairly useless metric.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Exactly. Both clubs have maxed out their investment on players - just in different ways. 
 

We have a bigger net spend in recent years than Real Madrid or its close.  Is the investment in players the same? No, Real invest far more into players hence the 4x wage bill. 
 

Squad cost and wages combined paint a much bigger picture than net spend. Net spend is a fairly useless metric.  

 

It really isn't. That's just your narrative. Net spend is a massive part of the picture when it comes to squad investment. Ours over the past 4.5 years is huge and is the main reason we went from relegation fodder to Champions League and ultimately winning a trophy. The other major factors were the manager and the fact that certainly in the first 3 years we bought the right profile of player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is net spend more important than overall squad cost and wages?

 

Como have double the net spend of the second highest in Serie A but they're 6th. Is that a major underachievement? No their total squad cost and wages will be closer to 6th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Net spend is actually harder for us in a way isn’t it, because we will have to spend the same or more on worse players because we can’t attract the players who demand the bigger wages?

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Net spend is actually harder for us in a way isn’t it, because we will have to spend the same or more on worse players because we can’t attract the players who demand the bigger wages?

We've been poor sellers.

And we've been going bigger on fees and a little lower on wages.


Net spend isn't a great metric

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I feel a bit weird not being a reactionary cunt but I’d stick with Howe.

 

This season has been shit to the extent it’s got me questioning if we’ve got an imposter in a mask but he deserves the chance to redeem himself, plus I dread to think of the search for a replacement that this club hierarchy is capable of. 
 

The thought of him spending money on shit like last summer has me terrified however.

 

 

Edited by Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really disrespectful question from Dominic Surr (Geordie Journos) today at the press conference, that Eddie briefly took offence to.

 

Words to the effect of, "with you previously saying that you wouldn't play anyone who wasn't fully committed, if you actually are a man of your word, will you play Anthony Gordon?"

 

The implication being that he was calling out Eddie for not being a man of his word. Prick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

Really disrespectful question from Dominic Surr (Geordie Journos) today at the press conference, that Eddie briefly took offence to.

 

Words to the effect of, "with you previously saying that you wouldn't play anyone who wasn't fully committed, if you actually are a man of your word, will you play Anthony Gordon?"

 

The implication being that he was calling out Eddie for not being a man of his word. Prick.

 

What Eddie say?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Fak said:

 

What Eddie say?


He sounded a bit taken aback and firslty replied... "If I'm not a man of my word??!!"

Then said his comments a few weeks ago (about 100% commitment or not selected) weren't directed at Anthony Gordon or any player in particular.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

Really disrespectful question from Dominic Surr (Geordie Journos) today at the press conference, that Eddie briefly took offence to.

 

Words to the effect of, "with you previously saying that you wouldn't play anyone who wasn't fully committed, if you actually are a man of your word, will you play Anthony Gordon?"

 

The implication being that he was calling out Eddie for not being a man of his word. Prick.

What an insufferable prick. A Poundland Craig Hope trying to make a name for himself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Shadow Puppets said:

Really disrespectful question from Dominic Surr (Geordie Journos) today at the press conference, that Eddie briefly took offence to.

 

Words to the effect of, "with you previously saying that you wouldn't play anyone who wasn't fully committed, if you actually are a man of your word, will you play Anthony Gordon?"

 

The implication being that he was calling out Eddie for not being a man of his word. Prick.

 

 

Really clumsy way of wording it. It would have been a reasonable question if he'd left the bolded bit out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, EH isn't going to publicly answer it any other way, and he's certainly not going to throw Gordon under the bus in a presser, regardless of how he may be going on behind the scenes.

I think Gordon will be on the bench again for the last 3 games, only used unless needed (injury), and if we can keep getting results, then that will be EH's excuse for it... sticking with/starting players getting results.

But personally, I think Gordon has pretty much checked out... firstly with the WC looming, and now a potential move away, too. But if they were publicly saying he was injured, and he wasn't even available to be selected for us, then gets picked for England and is fine, then questions would definitely be asked.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the framing of that Q is really poor and unnecessarily personal. Gordon (imo) is our best wide player, but I wouldn't be overly bothered if he didn't start the last few fixtures. I understand the press-pack want to get answers on certain topics, but it risks fuelling more discontent for little reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Gallowgate Toon said:

Liam Kennedy's arrogance rubbing off on Scurr now as well then? 

 

The other lad in the trio is canny, at least. Well, doesn't evidently love the sound of his own voice.

 

 

He doesn't come across as arrogant tbh, I think it was probably just clumsy wording. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...