Eddie Howe

[Interpolic]

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

[Weezertron]

22 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

 

Congratulations on the longevity. I've also had some ups and downs in my 20 year relationship and we've seen through the good times and bad times.

 

And what we can both demonstrate by our relationships is that there's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

So the Howe-outs need to see that sticking with what you've got isn't always bad.

And the Howe-ins need to see that changing for something new isn't always bad.

 

And everyone needs to calm the fuck down and be nice to each other and stop calling each other names for having different opinions.

 

 

 

 

 

I’d vote for you 

[gbandit]

1 minute ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

Interpolic delivers again, interested to see what sort of responses this elicits though

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

18 hours ago, midds said:

Must admit I'm a bit baffled why this is even being posted in tbh. 

Sure it’s become clear now like. 

[Weezertron]

2 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Interpolic delivers again, interested to see what sort of responses this elicits though

TLDR. Can you sum it up?

[Nucasol]

4 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

It was 2 out of those 3.

 

But I never got caught, strictly speaking.

Oh Robert.

[Pilko]

12 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

 

This is really interesting and I agree that the 'subs on X minute again' thing is totally overblown. Rafa used to do it mind, I remember someone looked at how he'd always swap the striker on 78 mins exactly or something, it was spooky. 

 

If there's a criticism I'd sometimes have about Eddie and subs it's that there are a fair few times we look leggy or under pressure and crying out for some fresh legs in midfield or there's an obvious area of concern (example: Burn away at Brentford when Outtarra was terrorising him) and he'll wait too long despite the warning signs, we'll concede, then suddenly 2 or 3 subs are stripped and waiting to come on straight after. This isn't every game, but certainly last season it felt like it happened a fair few times.

 

People also say "subs pre-planned before the game" when he brings them on, of which I don't know how they can verify that or where they get that from  I'd like to think he has an idea pre-game of what he might do but unless it's someone who can only play 60-70 due to fitness reasons he doesn't earmark who's coming off or on before the game.

 

I also think that because we had a pretty poor season last year it's much easier to say "the subs were shit". If you're winning games and bring on a sub who does nowt, or someone who's having a stinker stays on, it sort of doesn't matter and gets far less attention.

 

Not sure what my conclusion is here tbh.He gets it right sometimes, gets it wrong sometimes with regards to timing of subs, it just felt like last season there was more wrong than right, but it fits the pattern of the season which was rough in the main. If/when we have a more positive season this year it'll be good to dig into the subs thing again and see if it correlates.

[Kid Icarus]

31 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

It's every conceiveable argument that can be grabbed from the argument buffet in my experience, regardless of how relevant it is (more often than not it screams of a grass-is-always-greener outlook or not watching other teams imo)

 

The one I do think has legs though is the argument is that the subs are reactive (eg after we've conceded or when we need a goal and it hasn't happened but there's only 10 minutes left) as opposed to being done earlier to not get to that point.

 

 

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[Optimistic Nut]

28 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

 

This and lack of rotation when the numbers definitely say otherwise.

[Kid Icarus]

5 hours ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

This and lack of rotation when the numbers definitely say otherwise.

He's obsessed with/only wants British/PL/Bournemouth players.

 

He 'got what he wanted' summer 2025.

 

He's spent £750m and this is where we are, ie laser focusing on 2025/26 and not any other season, trophy, achievement, sale, or event.

 

He falls out with Directors of Football.

 

His/our signings have been terrible.

 

He's in a romantic relationship with Dan Burn.

 

He wants nepo baby Andy Howe to be the supreme commanding officer of Newcastle United.

 

There's definitely more but they're the big myths.

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Kid Icarus

[gbandit]

I don’t think anyone’s trying to gaslight fans into believing we played really well last season or that it was a success. I think the discussion is about why that was and where responsibility lies, as well as what that suggests about the future.

 

I think the main problems I’ve had with the discussion has been that it’s not been a discussion. There often hasnt been an attempt to understand the complex reasons for failures and it’s just descended into an abyss of complaining repetitively without actually offering any useful insights about tactics, personnel etc

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

Its also some people are just relentless fucking bores. 

[gjohnson]

1 hour ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

Its obvious to us as we generally watch most of our games, but tend to only see other teams twice a season

[Andy]

I think with things like the subs, it's just a case of frustrated fans trying to put their finger on why it isn't working. Or why we're seemingly unable to change anything to hold on to a lead when it looks clear as day that we're going to concede. Or why we're unable to regain momentum once we've lost it. 

 

While the numbers are the same for most managers in terms of when they use subs, the circumstances aren't the same in terms of how their games are playing out. There were definitely a lot of occasions last season where we were watching the match unfold and everyone in here could see the opposition were going to score, it happened way too often and that's why people immediately jump to the subs thing. 

 

Eddie takes a lot of flak for it because it seems to bite us on the arse a lot in ways that feel predictable, basically. 

[Turnbull2000]

3 minutes ago, Andy said:

I think with things like the subs, it's just a case of frustrated fans trying to put their finger on why it isn't working. Or why we're seemingly unable to change anything to hold on to a lead when it looks clear as day that we're going to concede. Or why we're unable to regain momentum once we've lost it. 

 

While the numbers are the same for most managers in terms of when they use subs, the circumstances aren't the same in terms of how their games are playing out. There were definitely a lot of occasions last season where we were watching the match unfold and everyone in here could see the opposition were going to score, it happened way too often and that's why people immediately jump to the subs thing. 

 

Eddie takes a lot of flak for it because it seems to bite us on the arse a lot in ways that feel predictable, basically. 

 

Sunderland at home. Didn't even really curse when they scored. Felt like I had 25 minutes to prepare for an inevitability.

[James]

I am convinced that the majority of the anti-Howe brigade on social media are AI bots

[Wallsendmag]

5 hours ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

 

Bit of a pointless graphic tbh unless it takes into account the how the games are actually going.

 

For example if you're chasing a game or a game is going away from you then you'd likely make more substitutions and make them earlier compared to if you're winning and then it's more a case of later substations and trying to disrupt the game to see it out.

 

As we were the team who lost control of games most in after HT I'd expect us to be the team who needed to makes changes first and hope the subs could arrest the decline in performance.

 

Whatever method we were using in the 2nd half, whether that's, tactically or mentally it completely failed. Miserably.

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Wallsendmag

[Rod]

4 hours ago, Interpolic said:

Some of the criticisms levelled at Howe seem to be spoken into existence through sheer repetition, essentially the by-product of watching his teams 60 times a season as was the case last year.  Familiarity breeding contempt in other words.

 

One of these things is substitution timings - this gets repeated again and again as a criticism of him but I'm personally failing to see what he's doing differently to most other managers.

 

The data for this is scarce at first glance but there was this in a NY Times article from April, where he looks to be slap bang in the middle of PL managers in terms of when he makes his first sub:

 

And this from a different article in the same paper saying he gives more minutes to subs than 14 other teams in the league:

 

 

Seriously what am I missing here?  The issue with his subs doesn't appear to be that he's making them later than other sides, or giving less minutes to subs.

 

So is it that he often makes the subs at similar times each game?  That he doesn't change the system entirely when doing so? 

 

Do you watch enough of other sides to know they are chopping and changing with more variation and more drastically than Howe is?

It's basically the haters of Eddie Howe talking bollocks. You're bang on. Eddie doesn't do much different to other managers regarding substitutions. If he made tactical changes in the 1st half the haters would hammer him. If he made no substitutions at all the haters would go berserk. Do you know what I'm saying here?

[Rod]

1 hour ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

Bit of a pointless graphic tbh unless it takes into account the how the games are actually going.

 

For example if you're chasing a game or a game is going away from you then you'd likely make more substations and make them earlier compared to if you're winning and then it's more a case of later substations and trying to disrupt the game to see it out.

 

As we were the team who lost control of games most in after HT I'd expect us to be the team who needed to makes changes first and hope the subs could arrest the decline in performance.

 

Whatever method we were using in the 2nd half, whether that's, tactically or mentally it completely failed. Miserably.

Eddie's tactics were spot on in the cup final though. 😉

[Mills and Boon]

5 hours ago, bobbydazzla said:

I went out with a lass for a few years. 

 

We had some great times. We were an ideal couple. Two peas in a pod.

 

But eventually, we ran out of enthusiasm for each other. It was the same old, same old.

We inevitably grew apart and even though she wanted to stay together, I decided we needed to split up. 

It was amicable. We had no kids or pets, just shared memories and some soft furnishings.

 

I ended up getting a new lass. A lass no-one would have said I was able to land. A lass who was able to take me forward in life in the way my ex-lass never could.

 

We've been happily together for two decades. Best thing I ever did in my entire life was ditching my ex-lass, even though we'd had those great times.

 

Cogito ergo sum, change isn't always a bad thing. Even if it feels painful at the time. And change, if it's neccessary, doesn't have to be nasty. 

 

Saying that, I did want to stay friends with my ex-lass and was never mean about her. But when she found out who my new lass was she refused to speak to me ever again and told everyone I'd ruined her life.

 

However, that's a whole other story.

 

 

 

 

That's a rather long winded way to say you're deeply, deeply closeted 

[BottledDog]

20 minutes ago, Rod said:

It's basically the haters of Eddie Howe talking bollocks. You're bang on. Eddie doesn't do much different to other managers regarding substitutions. If he made tactical changes in the 1st half the haters would hammer him. If he made no substitutions at all the haters would go berserk. Do you know what I'm saying here?

 

Rod, I'm unable to say much openly, but I know exactly what you're saying here.

[Dr Venkman]

I’ve always assumed that the timing of subs is largely dependent on the science of fatigue and that they split the games into thirds to manage workload. The result being they usually withdraw players after 2/3 of the game. Am I completely missing the point? Feels like that’s why most teams do it? You don’t have to watch much football to see the pattern TBH. It always seemed like a weird stick to beat him with as everyone does it. 
 

In that sense they are predetermined. I think some people presume that subs are always made to change the game when in fact it’s more about managing workload/fitness. Am I wrong?

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Dr Venkman

[ffs]

5 minutes ago, Dr Venkman said:

I’ve always assumed that the timing of subs is largely dependent on the science of fatigue and that they split the games into thirds to manage workload. The result being they usually withdraw players after 2/3 of the game. Am I completely missing the point? Feels like that’s why most teams do it? You don’t have to watch much football to see the pattern TBH. It always seemed like a weird stick to beat him with as everyone does it. 
 

In that sense they are predetermined. I think some people presume that subs are always made to change the game when in fact it’s more about managing workload/fitness. Am I wrong?

 

 

 

but what if, say, Dan Burn is getting just absolutely destroyed vs brentford and is already on a yellow, and everyone - literally every single person - can see this is an accident waiting to happen. what then? (and you know this isn't hindsight, it was super obvious in real time and we were all saying it, very possibly including your good self). it's things like that. Eddie gawd luv im can sometimes seem a bit unreactive

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by ffs
to change the word "liv" to the word "luv"

[Joe1984]

1 minute ago, ffs said:

but what if, say, Dan Burn is getting just absolutely destroyed vs brentford and is already on a yellow, and everyone - literally every single person - can see this is an accident waiting to happen. what then? (and you know this isn't hindsight, it was super obvious in real time and we were all saying it, very possibly including your good self). it's things like that. Eddie gawd luv im can sometimes seem a bit unreactive

 

 

 

Taking him off before he's sent off would be proactive.

 

Which Eddie rarely is.

[Dr Venkman]

24 minutes ago, ffs said:

but what if, say, Dan Burn is getting just absolutely destroyed vs brentford and is already on a yellow, and everyone - literally every single person - can see this is an accident waiting to happen. what then? (and you know this isn't hindsight, it was super obvious in real time and we were all saying it, very possibly including your good self). it's things like that. Eddie gawd luv im can sometimes seem a bit unreactive

 

 

 

I’m not going to argue with you but that’s not what I was talking about, it’s the criticism of the repetitive timing of the subs. The Dan Burn example is a different thing.